Is an Appellate Court duty bound to ensure that an Appellant - whether Represented or Pro Se - is afforded a full, fair, and meaningful appeal

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1) Is an Appellate Court duty bound to ensure that an or Pro Se—is Effaided 4 full, fair, & meaningful appeal, to inlcude: Initial briefing, Rehearing &/or En-Banc Reconsideration, e Suggested Answer: Within the bounds of the law, an Appellate Judge must fulfill this duty, until their jurisdiction expires. 2) When do the protections guranteed by the 5th Admendment (Due Process), on Direct Appeal, end: After Initial briefings, or after Rehearing &/or En-Banc Reconsideration. ¢ Suggested Answer: Until the Mandate is issued, or after Rehearing or En-Banc. 3) If, on Motion for Rehearing, a, now Pro Se, litigant/appellant raises issues his appellate Counsel should've raised, should the Appellate Court be mandated to hear & consider these issues. . ¢ Suggested Answer: To ensure the appellant is afforded a full & meaningful appeal, the Rrtehiet 7 Appellate Court should be mandated to hear these issues. 4) With the issue of deficient Appellate procedures known & proven (By this court), if rais: ed on Appeal, should the Appellate Court resolve this issue by reseting applicable time limits & order a Motion for New Trial be had, or pass on the issue altogether. e Suggested Answer: Because Jusitice demands meaningful procedures, the Appellate Court should unquestioningly reset the appellate timelimits. 5) If on Motion for Rehearing of a direct Appeal, a now Pro Se appellant raises the issue of his Appellate Counsel's deficient proformance denying him a meaninful Appeal, should the Appellate Court be mandated to hear this issue, to order brefing, & consider: it. e Suggested Answer: To avoid the appearence of the denial of Due Process, the: Court shou1d order briefings on the issue & consider it on the merits. 6) If it is clear that a defendant cannot obtain a Fair Trial in the original Venue, has the Trial Court abused his discretion by not changing the Venue on their own motion. ~ e@ Suggested Answer: Yes, the Trial Court abused it's discretion. 7) What is the,~or’ should the, standard be for a Trial Court to decide that a fair Trial Cannot be had in a given venue.: : ; e Suggested Answer: The size of the city/county, the coverage given,& the opinions: 6f the empaneled jurists should be considered, & the prejudicial value weighed. II Questions Cont'd 8) If, after a panel member—potential juror—is selected, said juror realizes that they Made an error & answered a voir dire question would've disqualified them for Kifas or imparitiality—yet they are forced to serve anyway, has the defendant been denied a fair & impartial trial among his peers. e Suggested answer: Yes, because said juror, with or without questioning, should've been disqaulified. 9) Was it Ineffective of counsel &/or an abuse of the Trial Court's discretion, to allow _multiple potential panel members, whom self admit bias/prejudices & impartialities, ta serve as jurors in a criminal proceding. * Suggested answer: Yes, becagse, once admitted, there can be no question as to whether said panel members would be fair & impartial. 10) Has the 6th Admendment Right to the Effective Assistance of counsel, on Direct Appeal, been realized/afforded when the procedural scheme preverits Appellate counsel from being effective &/or from presenting meritful issues. e Suggested Answer: Na, because if the Appellate Counsel is unable to represent his client in a meaningful way, the appointment is a farse. III