HABEAS 28 USC $2264 ; CERT. OF APPEAL. 28 USC S2253 F.B.CIY.P.RULE 6O(b)(1-4)
PER GONZALEZ V. CROSBY 545 US 524, 125S.CT. 264) (2005) GAKUBAS F.R.CIN.-P RULE THIS WAS OBJECTIMELY UMAEASOHABLE, COMTRARY TO GONZALEZ. SEE ACCORO SPARRS V. DORETHY 2018 US APP LEXIS 32265 ** 1-3 (USCA7 1/9/2O18 )("MIXED"HA BEAS - CITES ROSE V.LUNDY 455 US 56 9 (1952); RHIWESV-WE0ER 544 U3 369 (2005).
1$T, 5H 14 AMEHOS. NIDLS. GARUBAS OHE - AMD CMLY - S 22SY HABEAS PETITIOH WAS NOT "FRIYOLOUS REHDERING THE USCAT'S THREAT TO FIME GARUBA AT LEAST $5OD AMD ORDER AU USDC CASES PEHEING IH THE USCARS JURIS DICTION RE: FAISE ARREST AMD 8THAMEHD VIOLATIONS OF IMPRISONMEMT TO BE DISMISSED PER AMDERSOMY-US 121 F.3312, 313-16 (7MI997 A I³T AMEMD. RETALIATIOH YIOLATIOH BY L. FEDL COURTS W/A HISTORY AF IRRATIOWALBIAS AMO PREJUDICE - BIGOTRY AGAINST GAKUBA.SEE 2OIB-IY GAKUBA APPEALS SANCTIOWS THREATEWED IN UMSUPPORTED $I5 TH 14 AMEMDS.VIOLS.
Whether the USDC-HDIL-ROCHFORD violated Gakuba's due process and equal protection rights by issuing a wholly conclusory denial of his habeas corpus petition