Whether the appellant's constitutional rights under the 1st, 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendments were denied

Questions Presented: 1Would a reasonable Jurist find the Appellant Constitutional Rights under e.g. The 1%, 5", 6ths and 14'” Amendments had been denied? 2 Was the Appellant denied due process of law? 3 Did the judiciary and the Assistant Prosecutor, Postal Inspector and Probation Officers . contravene Appellant’s rights under the ADA Act 1990 by failing to apply the required adequate adjustments for hidden Learning Dyslexia disability during the 1983 proceedings to date save for . HHJ Peter L. Shaw, 9" Circuit Appeals Commissioner? 4 Did the 1985 DJ err when failing to comply with the rule 11 of Federal criminal procedure when allowing and accepting the Assistant prosecutor to describe the crime of mail fraud which supposedly appellant had committed? : , 5 Did the FPD’s failure to object to the 1985 DJ err allowing Prosecutor’s to describe said crime and when DJ accepted it? 6 Were all three FPDs in error when refusing to investigate the: (i) the elements of Appellant’s defences as argued in Sec 2255 e.g. The fraud charges was merit-less on grounds the U.S Prosecutor and Postal Inspector 7 concealed the defence evidence of Appellant’s (a) hand writing samples negating charge of false statement to banks and (b) the appellant’s clients relied upon the ; B of A bank ‘s representation to Appelilant’s that the trust account existed for clients money and; : (ii) There was no internet or scheme to commit fraud on grounds it was a misunderstanding caused by the debilitating effects of Appellant’s undiagnosed learning disability Dyslexia causing Appellant to subconsciously avoid written matter e.g. contract and rely upon verbal agreements with the B of A and; (iii) That appellant was in no mental state to enter a guilty plea on grounds he was at the time under doctor’s orders psychotherapy at the Mount Diablo Rehabilitation Centre which the of which was before DJ shortly after the plea proceeding filed in the subsequent bail jumping and; (iv) Learning of this FPD failed to apply to set aside plea conviction in a timely manner and; : (v) Was FPD negligent when not applying to set-aside pleas conviction when in receipt of new post-conviction official medical evidence concerning appellant’s debilitating HIDDEN effects of his at time of plea undiagnosed learning disability Dyslexia which removed the required element of intent to commit fraud ; confirming misunderstanding and; (vi) When they failed to apply to set aside the fraud conviction before the bail ; jumping charge was handed down and; (vii) | When they failed to object to the Prosecutor’s demand for plea proceeding before a pre-trial evidence hearing had occurred to determine if there was evidence supporting a trial or plea and; (viii) When failing to establish the defense of “Promissory” estoppel” on grounds of . Appellant and his clients reliance upon the B of A’s independent representation to said clients that the trust account existed on grounds Justice Blacks law : dictionary states “Promissory Estoppel at its widest is a misrepresenta