Whether the exhaustion of inadequate remedies in federal habeas corpus actions requires dismissal of a petition under an unconstitutional state statute that violates due process

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED (1) WHETHER THE ADHERENCE TO AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATE LAW IS NOT MANDATE BY A FEDERAL LAW UNDER AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATE STATUTE OF CONVICTION THAT “VIOLATE DUE PROCESS. ART. I, 9, FLA. CONST. ACCORD U.S. CONST. AMEND. XIV", DOES THE POLICY OF EXHAUSTION IN FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS ACTIONS, REQUIRE THE EXHAUSTION OF INADEQUATE REMEDIES? (2) IN THE LIGHT OF THIS COURT PRECEDENT IN ROSE V. LUNDY, 455 U.S. 509, 522, 102 S. CT. 1198, 71 L. ED. 2D 379 (1982). DOES THE DISTRICT COURT SHOULD DISMISS THE PETITION WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ALLOW EXHAUSTION AND THE CIRCUIT COURT WAS INCORRECT IN NOT INQUIRING WHETHER A "SUBSTANTIAL SHOWING OF THE DENIAL OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT” HAD BEEN PROVED ?