Is the refusal of state officials to afford a defendant existing postconviction remedies actionable under 42-U.S.C-§1983?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Is the refusal of state officials to afford a defendant existing postconviction remedies actionable under 42 U.S.C. §1983? Is 42 U.S.C. §1983 the proper remedy to challenge state officials who deprive a criminal defendant any mechanism whatsoever, including an appellate process, postconviction remedy, or collateral process, to challenge a constitutionally infirm conviction? If the answer to the aforementioned question is “no,” what is the proper procedure for a criminal defendant to seek redress for the denial of his constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial where the state authority refuses to implement any remedy for review? RELATED COURT PROCEEDINGS 1. US. District Court for the District of Delaware Weber v. Quinlan, et al. Civ. A. No. 18-637-LPS Opinion and Order June 11, 2018 2. US. District Court for the District of Delaware Weber v. Quinlan, et al. Civ. A. No. 18-637-LPS Opinion and Order July 11, 2018 3. US. District Court for the District of Delaware Weber v. Quinlan, et al. Civ. A. No. 18-637-LPS Opinion and Order July 24, 2018 4. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Weber v. Quinlan, et al. No. 18-2559 Opinion and Order March 12, 2019 & November 8, 2019 5. Third Circuit Court of Appeals Weber v. Quinlan, et al. No. 18-2559 Opinion and Order _ October 13, 2020