A. WHETHER THE THE COURTS SHOULD HAVE CONDUCTED A UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT ANALYSIS UNDER MBARKER VS WINGO"407 US 532,92 SCt.2182 ON THE "EIGHT YEAR "DELAY FOR CIVIL COMMITMENT HEARING PURSUANT TO THE ILLINOIS SEXUAL VIOLENT PERSONS ACT 725 ILCS 207/1 et seq.IN VIOLATION OF THE PETITIONER THOMAS POWERS SIXTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

B. WHETHER THE DISTRICT COURT RULED THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS WAS UNDER 28 USC 2254 WAS IN ERROR AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN UNDER 28 USC 2241, DUE TO THE PETITIONER THOMAS POWERS IS A "PRE-DETAINEE"PENDING OVER EIGHT YEARS AND SIX MONTHS,THEREFORE EXHAUSTING HIS REMEDIES UNDER 28 USC 2241.

1) .PETITIONER IS NOT CHALLENGING HIS CONVICTION IN THE MATTER OF PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS VS THOMAS POWERS 2000 CF 369 WINNEBAGO COUNTY ILLINOIS.

2) .BASED ON "NO MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT" FOR THE PETITIONER.'^ DIAGNOSIS OF OTHER SPECIFIED PARAPHILIC DISORDER "NONCONSENT " THIS EIGHT YEAR AND SIX MONTH DELAY IS. UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Whether the courts should have conducted a Barker-v-Wingo analysis on the 8-year delay for civil commitment hearing