Does Tollett v. Henderson preclude a defendant from collaterally attacking a conviction based on grounds other than ineffective assistance of counsel that renders the plea invalid?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This is a joint petition that raises the identical questions presented in Spaeth v. United States, Supreme Court No. 23-6250 (petition filed Dec. 9, 2023; response requested and currently due February 8, 2024). Those questions are: I. Does Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258 (1973), preclude the government and a defendant from conditioning a guilty plea on the defendant’s right to collaterally attack the conviction on grounds other than ineffective assistance of counsel that renders the plea invalid? II. If not, when a defendant conditions a guilty plea on the right to collaterally attack the conviction via “any subsequent claims with regards to ... prosecutorial misconduct,” does this language only authorize collateral attacks based on post-plea prosecutorial misconduct? III. When a defendant pleads guilty, does Tollett preclude the defendant from collaterally attacking the sentence because of surreptitious prosecutorial misconduct into confidential attorney-client communications that predated the guilty plea?! 1 This third question is also pending in Danille Morris v. United States, Supreme Court No. 23-6230 (response requested and due February 12, 2024). i