Whether the trial court abused its authority when it departed from the appellate court mandate

No question identified. : ° , ‘ oo . . on oo : ba Me gle wm ees . } ” as : : : . . i . f . Pog . : : : 1 . . : : : es re . PBs : ; . ° . . t D 7 ™ . oe wh, . os fe toca boas Z Pataki ty . . : oa . Cs . nee J ANE ., ra ‘ vo . vo , ey | 5, eas 24 . : : woe Fe SO ty . . 2 ’ eb py ry : . : : : ‘ . Gots LN Ves: ; . oe = ~oe : : J a . QuésTzens PRESENTED I. whether THE TRiG! Court Abused its Authority When s+ Departed From the Appellate Courr Mandate. zn Chapynan 147 So 3A LI7o) ). whether THE Appellate Court Abused its Authori FY vohen i+ Reexamina its own decision, When Nothing changed in The Remed\d OF Chapman [G7 S0 28.1/70! % Whether The Appellate Court decision wAS Rinding in The priok Appeal,dnd must Be Followed in The. eAse.! Ly, Whether Chnpmmrw “8 BARed Under MIS Code Ann 99-395(2)" 5. whether An unsigned Letter Found WAS enough © yidente 70 Contradier Chapman Claims 7 £. whether Chapman w As entitled 7O-An Cvidenriary h earing-T0 have his claims Considered On The. Merits Aasea on the Lacated Recard-transer p+ 7 7) whether Chaeman have been Deprived OF js Fundamental Constiturional Ri ghTs ? 8. Whether Chapman 1S enT Tied To Anew tris) due TO The rncomPplete ReCorda-+Franscki pr?