Whether the lower courts erred in denying the petitioner's Fourth Amendment claims regarding an allegedly unconstitutional search and seizure

ESTIONS PrESENTES 3c. “ Dee Miewae pletobs ploe| Ke To Vitees “This Hower adore Coo — eo) Attention lo Wwe becorded Hinetiiil & OF Ce Ans pawl — ner AN Said eyaatis Bet Aliccobion, Tete Mentioned) Ate Faeruar. Apn A ev AK i oe = TO § BASED nM , Se Leaf Te0 WE Se J Paesseyvizw 6 ify CASE LAW O”® LETT -@AT WW © RE =A — a ay oc z= = SEN Ovezn. = e ALT Zee fe sow Z “Te Maivertis SAztw pZVGl = eves VWaosatlreniyoatzoy OF The LA “Ret Wet IE eens Ziv My Cass Wat tean ti A Mrscénz ace OF | Aostzele\ ONLANT Conve Tz oN TN A Coons oF LAW Doe Te The Louen Gort DRevratzug Fue US Constriutzovwer \au Avy Onur Steties Sutin _ 1 Stott weoerroen ¢ AST Ai Ano Prue SLQEN = OF Concorzve JUILE f POO BNCE aL Ae pat Ain Eundamenty And Daheteti, welevent lo delilged --Sre Mine Sac Profi PA Thm. “TN ib Hi H a — _ Ny EVERY Tete 1 done ron to AVALIO Han , > Salus we b As OOF Pouy _ & Fi reps vest VA CK 3 ‘ ay} ea Xe ae lz Lou en rt{ Ho Lg a P) Ro tax Dzscoven A lomzeznn— tv ; ois lat Sazo Vonreszo Proven es Po cur Were Exegency To So... ppzawcn Ay Alo \Wz ec-nyo Ty Ow Hens Prov onvel PERSO) “ tzot. To VATO HOMNZeroj= SEARCY VARIAN ° Son —~ =e % Frrero-V/SWe pA © : TOV TT Ld] WEY Dre tie Lewin Coon | nce Jo EekNovieves Avy Avnecz ane TRATI Wav Vantevany OUT TED To ANy A AV Om WAKA TK “That Len’ a_aNVAL Ep Ape Vom zwe Airey Dwactry Wayne JB epee Si OEMs home ALSo A ONAN EARS SUMS OF MY Geesony, [ Aol I 0 = ateVAD MZ OLE Sete Me ; A Warteavtpossy Sa VIE 6 Perso) Avo Acso sable SEEZEQ_ ENE 03 cdi Karz Pars 2eq\) Ave OF Wren Wa ALJECAL a TOR REO MONT CIDE SEARCH IAUULVT Sa . ’ o> AL : : Ag . Ste (Pew On AERA AEARING™ Arten 3 pantrcotan . LJ FENOZVe OF FALSE Hoo, Cspae. RanatiLy ON WAYLICLA Q AW 2 =p = = OFF2 ae fy FE \WHY WAS 1 AGATN DENIED My 4 YH AmMENDMEV’ ut Zortrw le C+ VOLE . = An. wa ~ Jini = oh ALSFFE¢e np, Stare, raw VO, Ow Mas aw A Conn OF Law To Twenzwevaiz Avp Weonories Comzet Met) oo ” Pact