Question not identified

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED. 1 Was it a "Miscarriage of Justice” and a violation of the “Clean Hand(s) Doctrine" wnen Petitioner orally moved the Court to dismiss charge(s) against him when he had filed his "Notice of Availability" paper(s), administratively and with the charging county's Clerk of Court(s), and served served notice on that County's Prosecutor's Office” and trial court ignored? 2 Did trial court lack jurisdiction and thus prejudice Pet: itioner by placing him in “Double Jeopardy" when trial court dismissed Petitioner's oral motion without an ; evidentuary hearing, or finding(s) of fact(s), or conclusion(s) of law? 3 Did trial court violate Petitioner's rigat{s) to due process and equal treatment of law by not granting Petitioner's . oral motion an evidentuary nearing? 4 When Petitioner ordere’ his attorney to file a Motion To . Dismiss For Lack of Jurisdiction, under 0.R.C. 2941.401, and his attorney did not, wonen trial court recognised Petitioner and allowed him to address the Court, was Pet; itioner then, Co-Counsel, was his oral motion attempt to address 0.R.C. 2941.401, not just a dismissal of charge(s), put also a notification of trial court's “lack of jurisdiction", proper? . 5 Does the Court(s) speak through their record(s), and if so, when numerous "Constitutional violation(s)" are included in those record(s) does the Petitioner, an In Pro Se litigant, have the right to an "in person, oral evidentuary hearing, not case law brief(s) argument filing(s)" to demonstrate . 1 QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : and prove those "Constitutional violation(s) actually occured and prejudiced his right(s)? 6 .Woen during closing argument(s) the Prosecutor gives the jury an expLanation of a mental breakdown as to why a witness did not T.D. Petitioner as her attacker violate Petitioner's right(s) to due process and the "Compulsory, Confrontation Clause!"? , 7 When during the course of Petitioner's legal proceeding(s) and trial, was the following act(s) harmful cumulative error(s) that discriminated and prejudiced Petitioner's right(s) to due process and created a miscarriage of justice: : Not allowing evidentuary hearing on O0.R.C. 2941.401 Allowing prosecution witness(es) to sit in on trial and listen to eachother(s) testimonies Allowing prosecution witness to testify to jury about Petitioner eventhough that witness was warned before hand to exclude cer; tain testimony? g Is it an infringment upon the Petitioner's right(s) to due pro. cess and access to the Court(s) when Ohio Department of Correction(s) enters into a contract for good(s) and service(s), wire and wireless AVi-Fi, West Law, Lexis Nexis, and that service is continuosly faulty, is the Petitioner entitled to extention(s) and or equitable tolling on time sensitive litigation? , § When Petitioner promptly notifies prison official(s) about the wire and wireless system failure(s}, West Law and Lexis Nexis, does notification of problem(s) and prison official(s) failure . 2 QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ,-£ to enforce service correction(s), combined with prison offi-~ Oe cial{s) decision to remove the majority of federal and state case law in book form, when wire/wireless system was installed, violate the Petitioner's right to due process, "Access to the Court (s)''? 10 Whilevhoused at a security level 3 and 4 institution(s), movement by pass only, when Petitioner did not receive his . legal law library pass(es) that he signed up for; was refused legal law Library pass(es); had law library pass(es) continuously cancelled, thus denying Petitioner access to “legal service(s)", should Petitioner be granted extention(s) of time, ; or equitable tolling towards time sensitive legal response(s)? 11 Is it discrimination and a violation of due process against a group of inmate(s) that need access to the law library and it's service(s), when a Correctional Institution(s) continuously closes down the lay Library, for non security reason(s), but allow other area(s), service(s), yard, open? 12