Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals erred in refusing to address the violation of the petitioner's 14th Amendment rights

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED — QUEST ID. Wo. 4, oo WUY ADD How DiD THE OS Coo’l of GPheats Caue7 roweee An Rebuse Te ADDLESS BE MaKe o ComPlede Rens ee ob VP ecoed . Feotawiw To THe vidiedion oF THA Pettiued® 147 amesdaedt PORT Te THE Constitute ch We UNiTeD sTaes, Pelid/owes Beat tiem ed THis claim a ietitioned? Peditiiod bol Ceteseme aoa cebeaeied Loe CS bose Filey G~1l14, glguy wet 76 Eycermivare wimdet ak wel Te Movte_ castewtss “Tet WE usas Peder szed Foe eveecisind MIS casStiHidiowel Dish. Dive Poor 255 nee QUE STOW, M0. 4s MOAY Gin How DIN HE u.s, courd of afGals caved Fail 7o Apotess THE Wiebation ob THIS Pelitiouel® THTH Ame ddment Qistt vvaee He — BAS. CaonSTive toa. Pewiikae aS aust StL# THeei@h weTidss Aub wat 7D Raue wic Past econ ,feaan iY tHe Subly a7 Zeal, Petittewel aise Costewos Aub Mmamiedns Te foc THE He was Dewien THe LIGHT Fo, fot fout7H a Defewee hu ViolaHon of HS TAAL orendetedd isi To Lenew SiLA+ ib A CoimiAL TEL. pve Peecess Clause. . QvEsTiGa, Wd, . Wey AWD HOw DD THE vs, CadeT of APPEALS Ovefloold THE er | ) : ; Lhe ; 4 : ery SeeSHiTO4 URL LIGHT Unpee THe SiH Ameddmal ta ® THEIR. SPEEDY TOIAL Close . “tye . | “Tike fC eats (coe CARBS, lo se. THe col esibatings Classeé,