Whether petitioner has a due-process right to be heard and determined as to whether his physical-and-mental disabilities significantly impair his ability to comply with standard-procedural-requirements

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ONE. At what point has petitioner had a Gonstitutionally protected right to DUE PROCESS of his numerous requests for EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS, RELENANT TO JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM & AS A PETITIONER, AS A QUALIFIED INDIVIDUAL WITH DISABILITIES WHICH ARE BOTH PHYSICAL & MENTAL AND WHICH SIGNIFICANTLY IMPAIR HIS PARTICIPATION IN RELEVANT GOVERNMENTAL INSTRUMENTALITIES' PROVIDED SERVICES, PROGRAMS, OR ACTIVITIES, NAMELY HIS RIGHT TO PETITION WITHOUT CRUEL & UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS due to both petitioner's disabilities and those governmental actors’ acts interfering with petitioner's protected civil rights, AND GIVEN THAT THIS QUESTION ANSWERED WILL ANSWER THE QUESTION OF WHETHER PETITIONER'S CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS IN IN BOTH HIS CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT & HIS EFFORTS TO EXERCISE RIGHT TO PETITION FOR REDRESS OF HIS GRIEVANCES TO THE GOVERNMENT IN STATE . & FEDERAL JUDICIARIES THUS FAR, “DOES PETITIONER HAVE A_ DUE PROCESS RIGHT TO BE HEARD & DETERMINED AS TO WHETHER HIS PHYSICAL & MENTAL DISABILITIES ARE SIGNIFICANT IMPAIRMENTS TO SUCCEED ‘OFFICIALS'RATIONAL RELATIONSHIP'AND STATE & FEDERAL COURTS' STANDARD PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS WHICH PETITIONER, DUE TO DISABILITIES & CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT “EVADING & DENYING REQUESTED ACCOMMODATIONS TO_ PARTICIPATE MORE/MOST FULLY, WILL THIS SUPREME COURT HOLD HEARING & DETERMINATION OR ORDER HEARING & DETERMINATION OF PETITIONER'S INDIVIDUAL SPECIAL/DISABILITY RELEVANT TO APPLICABILITY OF STANDARD PROCEDURAL PROCESSES UNCONSTITUTIONALLY BAR PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO PETITION? TWO. WHETHER NOTICE TO THIS COURT THAT EIGHTEEN YEARS OF NOTIFYING COURT OFFICIALS, COUNTY & STATE OF TEXAS OFFICIALS, & UNITED STATES COURTS & COURT OF APPEALS OFFICIALS, AND NOW THIS SUPREME COURT OF PETITIONER'S INCOMPETENT CAPACITY HAS BEEN RELEVANT TO STATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AGAINST HIM & RELEVANT TO HIS FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL wo QUESTIONS PRESENTED p.2 TWO. cont'd RIGHTS BEING PROTECTED & EXERCISED IN EACH OF THE ABOVE, ALL OF WHICH HAVE FAILED DUE TO INCOMPETENT CAPACITY TO LITIGATE IN HIS DOMICILE TIMELY & EFFECTIVE ACCORDING TO STANDARD RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, : DUE TO HIS PHYSICAL & MENTAL DISABILITIES AND HIS CONDITIONS OF CON~ FINEMENT DENYING DISABILITY ACCOMMODATIONS, DISCRIMINATING AGAINST PETITIONER & HIS LEGAL MATERIALS FOR ASSERTING HIS CIVIL RIGHTS, GRIEVING D&NIALS THEREOF & FILING LAWSUITS, ALL OF WHICH ARE THE ATTEMPTED AND INTENDED CIVIL ACTIONS IN USDC SD, ND, AND ED, AS WELL AS THE 5th CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, "WILL THIS SUPREME. COURT, AS PETITIONER REQUESTED IN THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, IF GRANTED THE HEARING & DETERMINATION IN # ONE ABOVE, GRANT FOR SAID HEARING AND DETERMINATION, APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL WITH EXPERTISE IN DISABILITY , RELEVANT TO EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS OR “CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF PETITIONER (PRISONER) WHO SEEKS. TO EXERCISE RIGHT TO PETITION FOR REDRESS OF HIS GRIEVANCES TO THE GOVERNMENT IN STATE & FEDERAL COURTS TO BE PROTECTED OF HIS RIGHTS THEREOF: & APPOINT SPECIAL MASTER, ALSO AS REQUESTED IN 5TH CIRCUIT, BOTH AS ACCOMMODATION & EQUAL PROTECTION IN THESE PROCEEDINGS SEEKING THIS COURT AND/OR U.S. CONGRESS TO MANDATE IN ALL STATE & FEDERAL COURTS TO IMPLEMENT A NEW | STANDARDIZED RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE BY WHICH CITIZENS WITH DISABILITIES . IM-PAIRING COMPLIANCE TO RULES OF PROCEDURE WITHOUT ACCOMMODATIONS MAY BE FACILITATED OF BEING HEARD AND DETERMINED OF ACCOMMODATION NEEDS TO PETITION TIMELY & EFFECTIVELY THEREBY MINIMIZING DISCRIMINATING PROCEDURAL PATTERNS & PRACTICES BY COURT OFFICIALS? . THREE.,.ARE ANY OF THE FOLLOWING NOT GOVERNMENT INSTRUMENTALITIES OR PUBLIC ENTITIES PER THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973 OR THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT OF 1990 and/or AMENDMENTS THEREOF: ws . QUESTIONS PRESENTED p. 3 . THREE. cont'd STATE OF TEXAS JUDICIARIES: _ ' ‘UNITED STATES JUDICIARIES; | TEXAS DEPERTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE (STATE OF TEXAS PRISON SYSTEM)? FOUR. HAS THE PRISON LITIGATION REFORM ACT AND/OR GOVERNMENTAL OR