Did the lower court condone systemic injustice against Petitioner?

Questions Presented for Review and Constitutional Provisions 1. Did the lower court condone systemic injustice against Petitioner (‘Azeez”), : a colored citizen, knowing that he was falsely arrested and indicted twice! by the same officer that used blatant and willful perjuries because he believed Azeez was “illegal in the country”? 2. Whether Azeez claim of actual innocence, as proven, was ignored by the lower court, as espoused in the precedence set in McQuiggins v. Perkins, 569 ' U.S. 383 (2018), in which this Court held with abundance of clarity that “actual innocence, if proven, is sufficient to circumvent the one-year? statute of ' limitations for petitioners to appeal their conviction enacted within the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)”. The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg (RIP) held: “Actual innocence, if proved, serves as a gateway through which a petitioner may pass whether the impediment is a procedural bar, such res judicata, collateral estoppel, as it was in Schlup v. Delo, 512 U. S. 298, and House v. Bell, 547 U. S.. 518, or expiration of the AEDPA statute of limitations, as in this case. Pp. 7-14”. The Court has applied ; . this “fundamental miscarriage of justice exception” to overcome various procedural defaults, including, res judicata, collateral estoppel, and as most relevant here, failure to observe state procedural rules, such as filing deadlines. . . ‘ One conviction (for Failure to Appear) was reversed by a federal district court recently, but the Respondent refused to compensate Azeez for Unjust Incarceration in a pro se Civil Rights suit. 2 Majority of the evidences (concealed through gross Prosecutorial and Police Misconduct) were discovered in between 5 to 13 yéars after conviction and expiration of the one-year statute of limitation under AEDPA. . 1 : 3. Did this case provide a classical example of ‘exceptional circumstances’ to invoke a review knowing that the petitioner, must register for life as a violent sexual offender under the1996 Megan laws, as a Level 2 offender that can never be downgraded, when such consequence did not exist in his 1987 conviction in violation on the U.S. Constitution Ex Post Facto laws? 4. Since this Court recently made changes in (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) regarding race-biased jury? and peremptory challenges, did the lower court ignore 2 newly-discovered evidences (Background Arrest record and Affidavit); which prove that the only black juror was kicked out based upon a . fraudulent statement (“Juror Johnson may have been arrested, we don’t know”) by the prosecutor that was conspiratorially not verified by the trial judge? Many more questions could be presented as a result of gross prosecutorial and police misconduct as seen in the 22 reversible errors listed below. See footnote below for one such questions. Opinions Below (a) “Memorandum Decision” denying an appeal on a Petition for Removal of Sexually Violent Offender designation under WV Code § 15-12-3a, issued on 6/25/2020. (