Whether defects in a search warrant application process, including failure to satisfy the oath requirement, omitting key facts about witnesses' intoxication, and blurring emergency caretaker function requirements, render a criminal search warrant invalid

1. Under Franks v. Delaware , 438 U.S. 154 (1978), do defects in the search warrant application process, including failure to satisfy the oath requirement; providing an ambiguous and misleading criminal history; and omitting key facts about the complaining witnesses’ intoxication, render a criminal search warrant invalid? 2. Under Brigham City v. Stuart , 547 U.S. 398 (2006) and United States v. Rahimi , 144 S. Ct. 1889 (2024), did the warrant-issuing judge and the reviewing courts impermissibly blur-the-line between the emergency caretaker function requirements to enter a dwelling and the more stringent probable cause requirements for issuance of a criminal search warrant? 3. Under Rock v. Arkansas , 483 U.S. 44 (1987), when an individual represents himself pro se at a criminal trial, does a trial court’s failure to conduct a colloquy to determine whether the defendant understands his right to testify violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Compulsory Process Clause of the Sixth Amendment, and the Fifth Amendment? 4. Under New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen , 597 U.S. 1 (2022) and United States v. Rahimi , 602 U.S. ___ (2024), does the Second Amendment permit a state statute criminalizing the possession of firearms by persons not convicted of a violent crime or otherwise determined to pose a safety risk to themselves or others?