Due-process-violation

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (1).Does the fatal Variance from the indictment violate Mr.Walkers' Due process rights,tiniwhen he is convicted of and imprisonment for "Controlled Substance" named in the indictment,that the lab results proved not to be the substances Sold,or controlled substance at the time of the investigation. . (2).Does Petitioner Walker being enhanced under Conspiracy for the Money Laundering . and also being charged separately for Money Laundering Constitute duplicitous sentencing and violate Mr.Walker right to be sentenced to serve one punishment for one particular crime as stated in the constitution of the United States,Does not the Consecutive 5years sentence for money laundering and the 2 point enhancement for money laundering violate duplicitous sentencing. (3).Does not Mr.Walker serving an unjust sentence for controlled substances from 2018-2020 when in fact the substances sold were not controlled substances from 2018.The substance. Eulylone became a controlled substance only 6 months before the indictment and a-PiHP became a controlled substance 3 months after Mr.Walkers' indictment and again the substances named in the indictment were controlled substances,but the lab results ultimately proved that the drugs named in the indictment were not the substances sold.Does not Mr.Walker being calculated under “Controlled substance" offense for substances the lab results proved were not "Controlled Substance" from 2018-Oct 2020 for the Eutylone and April 2021 for thea -PiHp constitute an imperative fundamentally unjust sentence and incarceration considering the indictment remanded unchanged. ~ (4).Did the government intentionally and deliberately violate Mr.Walker due process w..1. when,during sentencing,when asked by the Judge what in fact the drugs were that were tested,and the government read the information for A-PVP and MDMA instead of the information for the actual substances sold which was a-PiHP not a controlled substance offense at the time of the indictment and Eutylone which only became a controlled substances 6 months before the indictment.Did not this fatal error by the government mislead the judge and bias the outcome of Mr.walker sentence violating his right to due process. (5).Did the government violate due process when they calculated Mr.Walkers substance sold as a "controlled substance" from 2018 when neither substance “actually and factually" sold was a controlled substance before Oct,2020.And even then only Eutylone became a controlled substance.Did the Misrepresentation of the substance as a "controlled substance" from 2018 cause Mr.Walker base level calculation to be prejudiced and incorrect. (6). Was the conspiracy charged in this case "factually unlawful" when it relied on the "controlled substance" clause to make it unlawful, yet the lab results proved the substances “actually sold" not to be “controlled substances". Conspiracy in and of itself is not a crime. Conspiring to sell sugar which is not a controlled substance is not a crime, therefore considering Mr. Walker sold substances that were not "controlled substances" would that not constittued his conspiracy not criminal and not a crime. : , (7). Considering Mr. Walker was not engaging in the sell of "controlled substances" from 2018 as the government contended and the lab results proved, did not Mr. Walker have the 4th Amendment right to possess and bear arms to protect his home as he has reiterated time and time again throughout his case that his possession of his .38 caliber firearm was intended to be used for? QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ; (8). According to the constitutionally correct law and process of law a person must know and intentionally commit the crime for which they are charged with the intent to commit it. The question to be raised here is considering neither substance became a "controlled substance" until Oct 2020 was Mr. Walker forewarned . and forearrmed with the knowledge he was selling a “controlled substance" (NO) and in