If a state conditions satisfying Strickland's first prong, on the testimony of two privately funded expert witnesses against a indigent pro se prisoner, whom can't afford the experts opinion; has the state created a custom, statute, practice or other form of economic barrier

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED , 4 1.Q) If astate conditions satisfying Strickland’s first prong, on the testimony of 5 two privately funded expert witnesses against a indigent pro se prisoner, whom | 6 cant afford the experts opinion; has the state created a sustom, statute, practice 7 or other form of economic y 4 } | 9 3.Q) Does Minnesota common law which holds Bio se litigants to the same 10 standard as lawyers, when accessing theincourts (whether prosecuting a cause 11 ordefending against another’s cause) conflichwith the due processiprinciple of 12 ~liberally construing pro se maneuyefs)specifie ally mniigartegs, associated w/ 13 complaints regarding previous “a's ??? ‘>, <= > 14 . LISTORPARTIES “Qs ty Gf . | 15 All parties appear in the cqption of th e casein the coyer page. | 18 i: * ¢ RELATED CASES . 19 Minfigsota Court’@f, Appeals Case Number(s); Se : | 20 ° a? _ \ 21 United StategDistrict Court, District of Minnesota Case No. 17-cv-2790 (DWF) 2 4 | | 23 24 26 a : " | 1 IN THE 2 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 3 PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI | 4 Petitioner respectfully prays that a writ of certiorari issue to review the 5 judgment below. 6 7 OPINIONS BELOW: | 8 For cases from state courts: VX 9 The opinion of the highest state court fo.ceview the merits appears at | 10