Did the court of appeals violate the petitioner's rights to a fair trial, due process, and discovery?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1.) DID THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT VIOLATE PETITIONER'S SUBSTANTIAL RIGHTS; TO INCLUDE HIS RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL, HIS RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW, AND HIS RIGHT TO DISCOVERYT UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 16 AND FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 702, 703, AND 705; . WHEN THE COURT ALLOWED A FEDERAL RULE OF ‘CRIMINAL PROCEDURE(16! VIOLATION TO GO UNCORRECTED AND DISMISSED THE CLAIM AS HARMLESS ERROR? 2.) DID THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT; WHEN DENYING PETITIONER'S CLAIM ON APPEAL, ENTER A DECISION IN CONFLICT WITH ITS OWN PRECEDENT, IN CONFLICT WITH ITS SISTER CIRCUITS, AND IN CONCLIFT WITH LAW; NAMELY FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 16 AND FEDERAL RULES OF EVIDENCE 702, 703, AND. 705? 3.) DID THE ELVENTH CIRCUIT'S RULING ABOVE SET A PRECEDENT; NOT ONLY AFFECTING DEFENDANTS IN ‘HE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, BUT ALSO POTENTIALLY INFECTIONG OTHER CIRCUITS; THAT WILL ALLOW\THE COURTS TO VIOLATE A DEFENDANT'S RIGHT TO A FAOR TRIAL, TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW, AND TO DISCOVERY IN VIOLATION OF LAW THAT:;REQUIRES THIS COURT'S INTERVENTION AND REVERSAL? i TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT Petitioner, John Stahlman, submits this Extraordinary Writ under Supreme Court Rule 20 seeking Habeas Corpus relief. Supreme Court Rule 20(4)(a). Petitoner explains that he did seek relief at the district court of the district where he is held and was denied; which is why he now seeks relief from this<Court on page 11.