Whether the Court of Appeals violated the constitutional rights of Appellants to due-process, equal-protection, meaningful-hearing, decision-based-on-record

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Appellants seek review of a judgment of the Supreme Court of the State of Washington denying Appellants’ petition of review of the Washington Court of Appeals’ denial of Appellants’ right to due process, including the right to a hearing, to decisions based on the records, and to a statement of the reasons of its decisions. These violations occurred when the Court of Appeals did not review Appellants’ assigned errors in the trial court’s decisions after the Court of Appeals had lost its records of the trial court’s decisions, amended findings, and the established facts of the case prior to the issue of its opinion; and when the Court of Appeals rested its decision on external records that were not supposed to be part of the record of the trial court hearing nor presented to the parties at any stage prior to the issue of the Court of Appeals’ Opinion; and when the Court of Appeals misfiled and did not file nor correct its records of Appellants’ motions and filings in the court of appeal prior to the Supreme Court’s denial of Appellants’ petition for review and when it did not state a reason for its decisions. 1. Whether the Court of Appeals violated the constitutional rights of Appellants to due process and equal protection of the law when it denied Appellants their right to a meaningful hearing by the Court of Appeals itself; and denied Appellants a decision by that Court of Appeals solely resting on the basis of the record, and precluded any further review of its violations on the basis of the record. 2. Whether the state Supreme Court violated Appellants’ constitutional rights to due process, equal ii protection of the law, and access to the court when it denied the Appellants the right to a hearing before disposition of Appellants’ claims of the court of Appeals’ own violations of Appellants’ constitutional rights, which were only revealed after the Court of Appeals issued its opinion; especially that the Appellate Rules of Procedure do not allow rehearing after denial of the petition for review. 3. Whether repetitive violations of the constitutional rights of more than one single litigant of a special racial group by the same state appellate court necessitate “scrutiny” of the State Court proceedings.