Whether the district court violated constitutional rights by denying relief on indictment charges, charging the same crime across multiple indictments, increasing sentence beyond statutory maximum without explanation, failing to appoint counsel, and potentially violating Brady v. Maryland

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED : 1) Did the district court create a split in circuits by denying relief on charges~in the indictment. that violated Congressional Intent, where | . the D.C. and Fifth Cirucits both gave other defendants relief for the identical crimes charged that had identical indictment defects? 2) Does it violate the Constitution under the Double Jeopardy Clause to charge Movant with the same crime, then dividing a single consspiracy between two indictments, convicting Movant on the second. : indictment then’dropping the first indictment after Movant was convicted on the second indictment? a. ; . 3) Does it violate the Constitution and the Supreme Courts holdings : in Apprendi v. New Jersey to increase Movants sentence for an alien smuggling conspiracy charge above the statutory maximum without any explanation for the district court? . . 4) Does it violate the Constitution for the district court not toisczcink « : appoint counsel upon request of Movant. after the government filed : a second, discovery with new details of this case? . 2 Did the District Court allow the Government to violate the Supreme ourts ruling in Brady v. Maryland at trial and at sentencing? . : . ; . . : . + ares . : : : : : 4 bk . . ' Ea . \ Page 2 (a)