Whether the petitioner's Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process rights were violated when: (A) the respondent provided only 16 hours' notice for a final judicial hearing, resulting in a default judgment, which is an unreasonable notice period under state and federal law; (B) the Florida writ of garnishment awarded interest in conflict with a Michigan criminal sentencing order; (C) the Florida court lacked subject matter jurisdiction due to time limitations; and (D) the court failed to provide a written opinion for appellate review

QUESTIONS PRESENTED IS NONRESIDENT, PETITIONER'S CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT XIV PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS VIOLATED: , A: WHEN RESPONDENT'S GAVE SIXTEEN HOURS NOTICE FOR FINAL JUDICIAL HEARING (TRIAL), RESULTING IN DEFAULT JUDGMENT, AN UNREASONABLE NOTICE, WHERE STATE LAW REQUIRES 30-DAYS NOTICE @ FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES 7-DAYS NOTICE; B: AND CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IV Sec 1, AWARDING INTEREST ON A FLORIDA WRIT OF GARNISHMENT IN CONFLICT WITH MICHIGAN'S CRIMINAL SENTENCING ORDER, NO INTEREST IS AWARDED OR APPLIED; C: WHEN FLORIDA'S SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT LACKS SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION IN VIOLATION OF STATE LAWS AND STATUTES, DUE TO TIME; D: WHEN FAILURE TO PROVIDE A WRITTEN OPINION FOR APPLLATE REVIEW? PETITIONER ANSWERS YES RESPONDENT ANSWERS NO “ti