Whether the State of Texas violated the constitutional rights of a citizen awaiting trial by denying him prescribed ADHD medication, contributing to duress

No question identified. : LEGAL QUESTIONS 1. Can the state make medical care an area of diminished rights due to detainment? 2. Can the state deny a class of medication previously prescribed and still claim there is no chance of duress? 3. Can the state prove guilt without a trial and go as taking charge of medical decisions without a medical professional specifically gauging rather duress has occurred? 4. Can a court hired psychologist claim duress from general questions compiled from a general psych exam not specific to mental disabilities such as ADHD or Asperger’s? 5. How does a duress claim from a plea deal defer from a false confession after a long interrogation? ; 6. This country operates with intricate checks and balancing because of the possibility of human error so can a state lack sound logic by issuing any decision that do not factor in checks and balancing. 7. Is it okay for the state to use lower laws over the constitutional laws the supremacy clause of Article VI Clause 2 demand the lower laws serve? 8. Can the state have actions that suggest it intends citizens to give up their civil rights because employees of the state are overwhelmed? 9. Is it illegal for the state to not operate under the Supremacy Clause of Article 6 clause 2 of the constitution 10. Does the state have an increased burden of responsibility over a citizen which means failure to meet standards are more egregious? 11. Does a violation of due process represents an inexcusable error that meets the standards of a mistrial? 12. Do detainees being treated like those already convicted violate due process? 13. Is it reasonable to deduce that duress could be induced by a denial of 14th . amendment protected due process? 14. Can the Texas appeals court dismiss the decision of a lower court without having a constitutionally sound basis and also without giving any reasoning? 15. Is it reasonable to believe that a state that uses lower laws to effectively gain a temporary verdict that doesn't constitutionally hold up, damages a citizen? i