Does the Sixth Amendment require the Assistance of and from counsel be appointed?

Question(s) Presented Does the Sixth Amendment require the Assistance of and from counsel be appointed? A Federal and Constitutional matter effecting five trial(s). And seemingly would before this court’s extraordinary writ! Was counsel’s representation in each trial for its Federal review, the cause for their conviction? And where so, would such a scenario be for this court’s extraordinary writ? Do each trial for Federal review in opinioning the counsel representation exude a conclusion. Whereof a callousness of an indifference, for this court’s extraordinary writ? When the Clerk of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals, received a 28 U.S.C. 2254 and a 28 U.S.C. 2244 petition for their filing(s) and processing for Appellate rules with the 28 U.S.C. 2254, then intended to effect the petitioners custody: David Priester v. Daniel Senkowski and had not done so, though was appealed with its certificate of appealibility nor had the clerk answered inquiries, and time corrode its usefulness for custodial release. For a First and Fourteenth Amendment denial and its continuance, would be for this court extraordinary writ for this distinction for rule : 2 When the clerk of the U.S. Third Circuit Court of Appeal, received for appellate rule for processing a Motion for Rearguing the court’s decision or permission and adjudication of the Petitioner’s original writ: David Priester v. William H. Faver. The motion has not been filed. But gives a response to divert the filing and inquiry of such motions filing and for its First and Fourteenth Amendment impediment, would seem in barring access to the court, would be for this court's extraordinary writ to its impediment on the process and judicial functions for rule . When an attorney's representation influences a forfeiture of the Sixth Amendment right to be vindicated by a trial, with the aid of effective assistance, for its involuntariness, and would be the basis for Petitioner seeking New York’s First Department Appellate Court’s review and asking where its record support the representation similarities for pretrial, trial and arguably, appellate representation. Would its contention for its basis and similarities be for this court’s extraordinary writ? In David Priester, v. Mark Inch, Fla. Docs. Et 21.22-6133 ask through the prism of its pretrial representation for a Sixth Amendment denial or for its Fourteenth Amendment with standby counsel’s representation upon request for Faretta, the assistance established law, for its due process. Questions would it form this court’s extraordinary writ. Where the composition in representation is consistent? 3 David Priester v. Mark Inch, Sec’y Florida Department of Corrections, et al No. 22-6133 Procedural History The Petitioner was arrested on May 12, 2017, in the State of Florida, in the county of Seminole, for an offense reported to been committed in the municipal of Sanford, Florida. And was charged by prosecutorial information with grand theft, Stat. 812.014(2)(C), criminal use of personal information Stat. 817.568(2)(a), unauthorized use of driver’s license or identification card, Stat. 322.212(1); forgery of credit card, possession with intent to defraud, Stat. 817.60(6)(b); battery upon a law enforcement officer, Stat. 784.07(2)(b); resisting an officer without violence, Stat. 843.02 and detained at the John E. Polk detention center in Sanford, Florida. The Petitioner was arraigned before the Honorable Mark E. Herr and given a $7,500 bond. He was appointed public defender, Christopher Gorton. The State | appearance was with ADA Lori Rauch and ADA Sara Shumway and assigned to the Honorable Debra S. Nelson. It ?? for a bench trial, presided over the Petitioner's plea of innocence and insufficient evidence for the State’s burden to offer testimony or proof that corresponds to the language that make up the charging offense. Example: Robbery or Rape language mean the perpetrator if identified had communicated force or without permission arguing