Whether an independent judicial determination of probable cause was made prior to entry and seizure of property, and whether the trial court erred in appointing conflicted counsel that potentially violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights

No question identified. : ; QUESTIONS 1. WHETHER AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL DETERMINATION WAS MADE OF . . PROBABLE CAUSE OR A WARRANT ISSUED 1/22/2017 AT INCIDENT No. 20170122M1328 PRIOR TO ENTRY O SEIZE PETITONER'S PROPERTY. 2. DID THE -TRIAL COURT ERROR WHEN IT KNOWINGLY APPOINTED . COMMONWEALTH'S SIBLING TO REPRESENT PETITIONER, DID NOT DISQUALIFY . COUNSEL, DID NOT OBTAIN A SIGNED WAIVER OR TO REMEDY THE PRE SE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. a _ 3. DID PETITIONER RECIEVE THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL GUARANTEED _ BY BOTH THE SIXTH AMENDMENT AND ARTICLE I § 9 OF THE UNITED STATES AND PENNSYLVANIA CONSTITUTIONS; WHERE THE STATE ALSO DEINED PETITIONER COUNSEL OF CHOICE .. . Lo 4. IN LIGHT OF TRIAL COURTS 9/9/2017 CONVICTION PRIOR TO THE / UNLAWEULLY INDUCED COUNSELED 9/19/2017, PLEAD OF GUILTY RATHER THAN "COUNSEL'S" PROCEEDING TRIAL[N.T. 10/30/2017,5,15.], IS THE PLEA CONSIDERED KNOWING, INTELLIGENT OR VOLUNTARY. . a ~ 5. IN LIGHT OF THE INCOMPLETE EVIDENCE IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, DID THE TRIAL COURT CONVICT TWO "KEITH'S" FOR THE CRIME THAT ONLY ONE "KEITH" COULD HAVE COMMITTED ACCORD TRIAL COURT'S 4/10/2018 1925(a)(1) OPINION AT P.10. 6. WHETHER PA. SUPREME COURT REJECTED AS UNTIMELY OR DENIED PETITIONER'S FILED PETITION FOR ALLOWANCE OF APPEAL NUNC PRO TUNC AT 60 WDA 2022 AS PETITIONER'S NOT HAVING "AN APPEAL AS OF RIGHT"