Whether the lower courts erred in failing to review and hear the petitioner's claims regarding violations of due process, civil rights, and property rights under the U.S. Constitution

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . | man’s Honat ISIS Case” MoT Ion To ARREST Jucomsm ACJ TOL . AM NOT rt ! ; oe mM NOT AN ATtoéNe/, THuS | ARE SERVE ANY Ants ALL Kights Why Am 1 Suing This CowT 11S! Jusrices y ITS” CLERKS | Fe ee ea het lovek core obccioNS fa ! OR fmpNG TD REVIEW And HEAR LowGR CoukTS’ DECISIONS fen 2B Wsc 125451257. pm | PeRMANETY DyAoLED7 Yes, WAVE | meta nZd Foe Reframe 1F Counsel Rept Oba Rome Ae TO TY | Disapielris> 6 Yes, ALS Due TD w Pon LAL MER Sop ment KANO IDI GENCY ORC [291-03 ; Re,I20,06 , 2308.43 5 ADE , kre State of Oo Couats FAILING To feLow wil of [GAS Copfing Law Seh\e> Z125.0\-ZTL5, 23 86° Peoperiy? YES, wy? IN FART mats Goukt FAILING T REVIEW, exemA2S RowINSon v, OHID, 2°22 us. LES DI Ro@i ndon yet 2082 US. LOS Z47Z) RoBinsed v BAT, 2ot wi. Ley FIL, S$ Cots Weert |? “ZOupe Jusnce UNCER Lau, BECASE | AM Nov Er PERlENCI SG i? otu€es | HUET ARE Not EXPERIENCING IT, wi? Ss ypoacen vo weak A Jel UNiFehin T JF] TRALIYES| 15 14S oon irs DWN A VipLATIon OF CASE Law, Otho, kiD US. CoNSTHUTIONS? gy tulle TRIN MIPER WEFFECTIVE RSIS CET CLERAE | pip 1 ProviP® Casé UW, ol An? US. CopsT Mey yes, p> | MoTiens oR New TRIAL fer Re 2445/10 YES 1 Ree motion! FOR Letaty Camry proszeutol T? FRopuct HE Birr OY EVINENC aan Poe a Aymodr 1,000 Progs F Fornsci Pr, Wwehecnide psurancé) Judy treaERieG, | pR\GERL. WRY PSE SeO\SSué fe Scmy wiety Do WHY DENY DRE TT? wnat ATiN Ww why 1S IL bd. Cover o& APES foie To fobow Ai: 2501, 12 avd Sil 9.2 vty Donne THE CaMAS Ke Us TD UGE TE ELtfenic GUHA Pokal? Howton v EVA Jail (tovrnod VOT 7 wy AE My Rived ENSURED BY Minh v, Hantaser (B72) Rad HHL Ces, BEV oOLAced REPERTEYYE $8 u5 AGL, Sooity. NESLIMK (2006 othe M9, _ WIND BAN \h0050 -G167,, , Boos,