Does it tonsure (shear) due process & equal protection for the State (Florida) to summarily 'dismiss as unauthorized' a prison Petitioner's is State writ of habeas corpus (initially raising issues of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel)

No question identified. : AFFIRMATIVE CERTIORARI QUESTIONS I. Does it tonsure (shear) due process & equal protection for the State (Florida) to summarily “dismiss as unauthorized” a prison Petitioner's is State writ of habeas corpus (initially raising issues of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel) by asserting justification therefor on grounds of overwhelming workload created exclusively by_Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 us 335 (1963), espoused in Baker v. State, 878 so. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004); yet in express & direct conflict with Parker v. State, 904 so. 2d 370 (Fla. 2005) (explaining a PWHC is proper vehicle for challenging IAAC, and Petitioner's factual allegations must be accepted in absence of a hearing {904 so 2d 377})? II. Does it violate fundamental fairness for a State appellate court (Florida) to deny a prison inmate his right to seek belated collateral relief in habeas corpus mode via the doctrine of equitable tolling, when in conflict with State v. P.a.k., 240 so. 3d 885 (Fla. 1988); Machules v. Dept of Admin, 523 so. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1988); and Re Kratochvil, U.S. App. Ct. (May 18, 2015) Lexis 23393? | Ill. Does it tonsure due process for a State PC CT to deny a prisoner applicant for collateral relief (bringing error of a fundamentally unfair trial in privation of effective assistance of trial counsel & an unbiased, dispassionate jury) His requested, constitutionally & statutorily required appointment of counsel, when in conflict with Russo v. State, 724 so 2d 1152 (Fla. 1998); Mann v. State, 937 so. 2d 722 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Bloom y. IL, 391 us 194. See also section 924.051(9), F.S. (2005). -6