Carlos Lopez-Vanegas v. Pennsylvania
Should the 'Speedy Process' globally regarded as a 'Miracle Appeal' be properly adjudicated?
QUESTIONS) PRESENTED — 1) Should be pursued ‘dn Spped Process bobally rerarded bo a Mireel Aopeat lee ° Properlywongelent jee) ues \e Mess ar ackos cea Ways eeh ees peestated bo Drake Lourks Oi cers te Properly address He aller aurd Pacts Vackual Mnistoer : Shlorte Appeal Process 7) Wou can a disguised d Qrocess of |, Ak ised due Process torkrary ko the lasslibubions CQvaray duce ces af Lats bias Qesecked ups pb fuss fashion es re seca NORGE TAKA 88 8SSurte Wiles Yaad \ury $0 Whos Serve fo decide as husuer at Las: \nnivendl, Golly as Charged : va) Cas a quiet ores r Salt £ oy . \ Cea ( fe We eyeewlion of lad ne silt oe etn tlie nal Neaseaases al esse Requesked Aasuer; \ \U \hat \G \ t veisdicki do We u \ rakes s Vither Adal wristiclios We whiie Wes ath webesk nee Spbe ut uteri al