Does this court have jurisdiction & power to grant certiorari, excused limitation bar, correct fundamental miscarriage of justice, denial of COA by 5th CIR. Court of Appeals

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1 [QUESTION ONE]: DOES THIS COURT HAVE [JURISDICTION & POWER]TO GRANT CERTIORARI-EXCUSED LIMITION BAR AN CORRECT FUNDAMETAL MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE-DENIAL OF COA BY 5th CIR. COURT OF APPEA -LS-IN LIGHT OF Borden v-U.S.-WARNER IS ACTUALLY INNOCENCE OF ’ NOT BEING CONVICTED OF A DELONY AGGRAVATED ASSAULT-PRIOR CONVICT -ION-FALSELY USED BY ADA Ms.(PHouge)-AS A HABITUAL LIFE SENTE -NCE AS NEW PRESENTED, EVIDENCE SHOW THE PRIOR CONVICTION IS A 'MISDEMEANOR-AS WARNER CASE SHOULD BE AN EXCEPTION TO THE McQuig -gin/Bousley -LIMITATION BAR ? 2.(QUESTION TWO]: IN LIGHT OF THE DENIAL OF [FUNDAMENTAL MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE]-DENIAL OF CAO-DOSE THIS COURT HAVE~[JURISDICTION AND POWER]-TO GRANT CERTIORARI-RESOLVE SPLIT IN CIRCUIT COU -RTS: WHETHER "NEW PRESENTED RELIBLE EVIDENCE NOT PRESENTED AT TRIAL-"NEW EVIDENCE WRONGLY WITHHELD & DISCOVERED AFTER TRIALPRESENTED DURING HABEAS PROCEEDING-ALLOWS COURTS TO EXCUSED LIMITATION BAR ? 3.[ QUESTION THREE]: IN LIGHT OF THE MANDATE IN Hainer v.Kemer& THE DENIAL OF PRO SE PETITIONER'S REQUEST FOR A COA-DOES THIS COURT HAVE-[JURISDICTION AND POWER]-TO GRANT CERTIRARI-EXCUSED LIMITATION BAR-[LIBERALLY CONSTRUED]-WARNER'S ACTUALLY INNOCE -NCE OF NOT HAVING BEEN CONVICTED OF FELONY AGGRAVATED ASSAULT CONDUCT LIGHT OF Borden v.U.S.-ERRONEOUS _LY INCREASE IN MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCE-[ FUNDAMENTALLY MIS-CARRIAGE OF JUSTICE-EXCEPTION TO LIMITATION BAR-BOUSLEY ? ; ; 3