Whether the lower courts have properly used their 'physical force' when declaring certain conduct, such as 'drug introduction' and 'illicit sex acts' in the presence of women and children, as 'non-criminal'

No question identified. : po UE STI ONCS) PRESENTED Has thausaadcs\ot people been wrongfully __ renee nm convicted by Cauets of law, tac s Qrog ___ introduction _Cinto_correctional institutions) and “illicit sex_actis)" in the presence of | wamenand *childceninlight at the tact the lower Courts. has “deem” both alaresad | forms_ot_conduet tobe “non-criminal” ~ ( 1 )Ace the lower Coucts_prapecly using its. “physical tacce” » when it declares ¢ __. —— Drug introduc tion la toa_cotrectidaa{—_ _ sex actos), a _ | 3) Can_a_lower Courts ruling, that missapplied the coirect legal standatd ie, the cri ter a_—_ at atove_gves tions) deprive a_debendaat_at __ oo exculpatacy dekense, thereby becoming —Uadue__§ | Lntlwence “in the_guilty plea_entey: context ¢ __ LS Ok agrees — WA1_AlL parties appeatin_the caption of the case aa the cover page — LL All parties donot appeat.inthe caption ob the — case_on the cover page.=Atist otall_pacties ___| | _te_the proceeding in_the court whose Judgment _ | ls the subject af this petition ts as fallaws i 2 ue eeeuteir, _ , ~ : JURISDICTION? #2 tee ee ett POUT LaMaL AE STATOR B40 20-3 —