Whether Petitioner's in forma pauperis status from state court applies post removal to Federal Court

Issues Presented _ (1) Whether Petitioner’s in forma pauperis status from state court applies post removal to Federal Court. (2) Whether Petitioner’s appeal was in good faith (i.e., not frivolous) A. Whether Petitioner failed to state a federal civil rights claim, inter alia. I. Whether Texas Department of Public Safety’s DIC-24 statutory warning form, required for implied consent to breath or blood draw of subjects, is void of due ; process fair notice for non-compliance with Tex. Transp. Code §724.015(a)(6) & §724.015(a)(8); & warrant the proposed class action injunction & rectification. Il. Whether probable cause hearings in Harris County are irreparably & harmfully void of due process for these customs and practices on citizens: (1) denial of hearing rebuttal rights for the accused, (2) denial of counsel rights for the accused, and (8) denial of impartial magistrate & tribunal rights; and inter alia, warrant the proposed class action injunction and rectification. III]. Whether judicial and prosecutorial absolute immunity, a fallacyfundamental error since 1607, must be abolished, or rendered inapt in Petitioner’s federal civil rights claims: per Magna Carta Art(s). 39 & 40; Bowser v. Collins, 145 Eng. Rep. 97 (1482); Decl. of Ind.; U.S. Const. Amd. V & XIV; 42. USS.C. §1983; Randall v. Brigham, 74 U.S. 523 (1869); Bass v. Hoagland, 172 F.2d 205, 209 (5t Circ. 1949), Villages of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562 (2000); & Taylor v. Riojas, 141 S. Ct. 52 (2020). B. Whether Petitioner merited independent action, class action, & claims severance. ii