Whether a defendant who demonstrates that a prosecutor willfully injected into a plea colloquy a more serious and concealed criminal charge based on the same course of alleged conduct as the initial charge, and established a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness when the charge carries a high risk of deportation, has shown a violation of the safeguards of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

No question identified. : \) Tue Qoestion: PRESENTED STANDS FORTHE NKRPOW PROPOSITION THAT TN ASTATE CRIMINAL CASE A QEFENORNT WHO DEMONSTRATES THAT TROSECUTOR WILLFULLY INJECTED INTO THEPLEA COLLOQUY A INBRE SEROUS AND CONCEALED CUIMINAL CHARGE SED OA THE SANE CoURE OF ALLEcED Connotr AS THE \NITLAL CHARGE, MAD ESTHMLICHED 4 REAMSTC Uke Hood OF VINDCTIUENESS WHEN TRE CHARGE Aine CARDES A HIGH PSK OF DEPORTATION, AND THE PROSECUTOR VioLATES TNE SAFEGUARDS OF THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE oF TAE XI) ConSTHTUTONAL AMENDHENT, BY KNOWINGLY FRUSTURING THE AchQsEn MIGHT TO ASSISTANCE OF COONCELING AND THE URDEN RIGT To Have HIS TON DECIDED OY 4 PARTICULKE TRIDINAL, WOTHOUT REORRTEN ATTEMPTS TO CONVICT Hitt OF AN ALLEGED OFFENSE THE SURECTS HIM TO ENGARESSHENT, EXPENSE, AND THE ORDEAL TO WUE iN ACDNTINUING STATE OF ENXIETY AND INCECDRITY. THIS PROPO~ SITION IS FURTHER STRENGTHEN WHEN THE PROSECUTOR'S WILLFUL SUPDESHON. OF EXCULPATORY INFORFTION SHODLY BE TREATEN iN THE SANE. TANNER AS IF THERE HA PERN ASPECIFIC LEQUEST TO DISCLOSE An ITER OF OBVIOUS IMPORTANCE . DEQOEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT. is HEEEBY SUBMITPED. ~~