Whether a bias and partial Judge that was recused before trial created a Structural Error when presiding over a criminal defendant's case, whether fraud in the Court produced a fundamental injustice by omitting essential jury instructions, whether an accusation of using a hand-held radio as a deadly weapon requires jury determination, and whether multiple enhancements for the same offense violate double jeopardy

• Whether a bias and partial Judge that was recused (removed) before trial and any way presiding over a criminal defendant ’s trial “created a Structural Error ” when is actually bias. This Judge was recused “three times ” off of this case during the proceeding, also this Judge ignored her own recusal and intentionally kept herself on the Petitioner’ s case and review and rulings in “aN” Motions in a post conviction proceeding. (See First Legal Analysis) and; • Whether a “fraud in the Court ” that created an unconstitutional, a constitutional deficient jury instructions that omitted (“because was intentionally erased ”) the essential element and also removed the total mens rea from the offense produced a fundamental injustice and error that can overcomes the procedural bar to prevent a manifest injustice and a denial of due process, and (see Second Legal Analysis): zbuctuml foror) \£uH<mh WjLovsiattytm) • Whether an accusation alleged that a police hand held radio was used by the Petitioner as a deadly weapon had to be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt in the jury instruction and should reflect on an special verdict form before trial Court may enhance Petitioner ’s sentence and (see Third Legal Analysis). • Whether multiple enhancement (three times) for the same offense are permitted without violating the double jeopardy prohibition of the United States Constitution. 11