Whether the use of a sham legal process by the Eleventh District Court of Appeals of Ohio warrants the issuance of a writ of mandamus, prohibition, or procedendo to relieve the petitioner of adverse effects

WHETHER THE USE OF A SHAM LEGAL PROCESS TO PROCESS FRAUDULENT APPEALS BY THE ELEVENTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO WARRANTED THE ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION OR PROCEDENDO TO RELIEVE THE PETITIONER OF THE ADVERSE EFFECTS THEREOF BY THE SUPREME COURT OF OHIO?I. WHETHER THE FAILURE TO ISSUE A CORRECTIVE WRIT UPON PROPER APPLICATION THEREFOR, VIOLATES PETITIONER ’S RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND TO EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW PURSUANT TO THE FIFTH AND FOURTEENTH AMEND MENTS TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?II. WHETHER THE CONTINUING CUSTODIAL SUPERVISION OF PETITIONER IN THE ABSENCE OF A SENTENCE AND WITHOUT IN REM, IN PERSONA, OR SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION CONSTITUTES CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT IN VIOLA TION OF THE EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION?III. WHETHER THE APPLICATION OF A PRISON TERM AND OF A SUBSEQUENT TERM OF CUSTODIAL SUPERVISION BY THE OHIO DEPARTMENT OF REHBILITATION AND CORRECTIONS VIOLATES THE SEPARATION OF POWERS MANDATES OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION BY USURPING THE AUTHOR ITY OF THE JUDICIARY?IV. -l