Whether the District Court's decision to subject the Petitioner to a lifetime suspicionless search condition that lacks any limitations at all violated Petitioner's Fourth Amendment Rights, and whether the Court's decision was an abuse of process

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1, Whether the District Court's decision to subject the Petitioner to a lifetime suspicionless search condition that lacks any limitations at all violated , Petitioner's Fourth Amendment Rights, and whether the Court's decision was an abuse of process. ; : 2. Whether the District Court's decision to subject the Petitioner to a lifetime ban of using or owning any computer, electronic, or internet device, as well as a lifetime ban on the entire internet, with no scope or limitations whatsoever, was an abuse of process or violated Petitioner's First Amendment rights. 3. Whether the Government's use of Petitioner's prior no lo contendere pleas at the ‘sentencing hearing to prove both guilt and specific factual admissions of alleged underlying conduct and the District Court's reliance on the Government's comments at sentencing to substantially enhance Petitioner's sentence was constitutionally and/ore procedurally sound. 4. Whether the District Court's decision to punish Petitioner more harshly because the District Court believed Petitioner's prior State sentences were too lenient was unconstitutional or an abuse of discretion. : * 5, Whether a plea agreement can be void for lack of consideration. , . 6. Whether it is constitutional or improper to charge a defendant with multiple counts of violating 18 USC §2252(a)(4)(B) when the factual allegations involve only a single device. 7. Whether it was unconstitutional for police to withhold from a warrant issuing magistrate that a previous, fruitless search had already been conducted when the probable cause for the warrant was based on facts that pre-dated the previous fruit-less search. . . -t €202/Z1/90 . QUESTIONS PRESENTED (Continued) 8. Whether it is unconstitutional or improper for the Petitioner to be subjected to a 100-month sentence enhancement (doubling his guideline range) based solely on uncharged, un-adjudicated, non-law enforcement reports, and whether the District Court erred by relying only on the Government's paraphrasing of those reports which were not presented to the Court. . a -li €20Z/Z1/90 LIST OF ALL PARTIES Jason Boudreau is the only party to this petition. -ili-. . | €20Z/Z1/90