Whether a state appellate court violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments by dismissing federal constitutional claims on procedural grounds without addressing the merits of allegations that a defendant was prosecuted twice by separate sovereigns for the same conduct in violation of due process protections against duplicative prosecution

No question identified. : Iam Petitioner Gregory Shawn Mercer, pro se, and I was the Appellant in Gregory Shawn Mercer v. Commonwealth of Virginia & County of Fairfax, Court of Appeals of Virginia (hereafter “COAV”) Record No. 1193-21-4 filed 11/4/2021. Now I am the Appellant in Gregory Shawn Mercer v. Commonwealth of Virginia & County of Fairfax, Supreme Court of Virginia (hereafter “SCV”) Record No. 230354 filed 5/18/2023 and corrected 5/23/2023 where the Appellees are impeding the Appellate Jurisdiction of this SCOTUS by continuing not to file Rules of the Supreme Court of Virginia (hereafter “RSCV’) Rule 5:18 “Briefs in Opposition.” Supreme Court of the United States (hereafter “SCOTUS”) Clerk Redmond Barnes received my 8/28/2023 SCOTUS Petition on 8/31/2023 with Complimentary Record and with a Motion for Leave of Court to file a 44-Page Petition. On 9/13/2023, SCOTUS Clerk Barnes informed me I needed to file an Application to the Circuit Justice to exceed 40 Pages by 4 Pages (SCOTUS Rules 20.2 & 33.2(b)). The COAV had issued a Memorandum Opinion on 3/28/2023. I then filed a 4/3/2023 “Petition for Rehearing En Banc, Objection, and RSCV Rule 5A:4A Letter to COAV Clerk” in the COAV. The COAV then issued a Final Order on 4/18/2023 making the 3/28/2023 Memorandum Opinion the COAV final decision in my COAV appeal (Record No. 1193-21-4). But the COAV had failed to rule on my 11/5/2022 “Motion for Ruling” which moved the COAV to: 1) compel Appellee County of Fairfax to appear in the COAV; and 2) compel both Appellee Commonwealth of Virginia and Appellee County of Fairfax to file “Briefs of Appellee.” My 5/25/2022 “Opening Brief of Appellant” in the COAV was unchallenged since no Page 2 of 9 Appellee filed a “Brief of Appellee.” The COAV had failed to consider my Assignments of Error claiming they were contrary to RSCV Rule 5A:20(c) because my Assignments of Error were in Question Form not Affirmative Statement Form. But RSCV Rule 5A:20(c) states nothing about Question Form or Affirmative Statement Form. Meanwhile, my Assignments of Error alleged a violation of my invoked and preserved US. Amendment V & XIV Right (the Supreme Law of the Land in accordance with the U.S. Supremacy Clause) where Appellee County of Fairfax had convicted me on 9/21/2021 in the Fairfax General District Court (hereafter “FCGDC’) of Code of Virginia, §46.2-841 adopted into the Code of Fairfax County by Fairfax County Ordinance §82-1-6 then Appellee Commonwealth of Virginia had convicted me on 11/4/2021 in the Circuit Court of Fairfax County (hereafter “FCCC’”) of the same Code of Virginia, §46.2-841. I had invoked my Federal Rights (U.S. Amendments V & XIV) in and after the FCCC wherein I testified that Appellee County of Fairfax had appeared in improper person as Appellee Commonwealth of Virginia to no avail. By placing RSCV Rule 5A:20(c) erroneously above an alleged U.S. Amendment V & XIV violation and the Supreme Law of the Land, the COAV violated U.S. Amendment X which denies the COAV certain powers by language in the U.S Supremacy Clause. In previous litigation reaching all the way to the SCOTUS, it is Res Judicata between Petitioner, Appellee County of Fairfax, and Appellee Commonwealth of Virginia that these two Prosecutors are separate, distinct, and not substitutable Prosecuting Authorities [8/31/2023