Whether the trial court erred by precluding Addie Brice's civil suit statement from evidence and improperly withholding crucial testimony

(1)”Where the Trial Court erred by precluding Addie Brice,Civil Suit statement and making that statement not to be part of the evidence in this case. This Court, will see the Commonwealth witness Ms. Brice, Civil Suit statement filed in Small Claims Court before the Commonwealth brough criminal charge against Pratt. Ms. Brice, claims the same dollars amount, In both criminal and civil cases: Brice stated that she borrowed money to Mr. Pratt, the money stolen and the Commonwealth — Judge refused to bring this crucial evidence on the records.was never The District Attorney, Trail Counsel Steinberg, The Lower Court, Judge Mahon and the States Trooper knew exactly about the Civil Complaint from the Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania witness Addie Bryce, where the first statement contradicts the second statement in both Civil Criminal Proceedings and other evidence was withheld: such as Addie Bryce Stepfather a friend of the Judge that preside over my case but the Court did not say anything about this evidence. APPENDICES-1 (2)-THE Trail Court, erred because the, JUDGEMENT OF SENTENCE IS MISSING, the SENTENCING SHEETS ARE ILEGAL AND MISSING TIME STAMP and THE PLEA COUQUIES ARE MISSSING TIME STAMP PA.R.A.P 341(a)(1) Pa.R.A.P 1925(b)., see, APPENDICES-2 (3)-The PCRA Court erroneously Ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to rule on Pratt claim because Pratt initial probationary sentence has expired while Pratt PCRA Petition was pending, that is not truth. Pratt is on Parole supervised released by the Middle District Court Of Pennsylvania DHS. Commonwealth v. Smith. 17 A.3d 873 (Pa. 2011). Commonwealth v. Ahlhorn. 699 A.2d 718, 720 (Pa. 1997). Commonwealth v. Martin. 832 a.2d 1141 (Pa. Super. 2003). APPENDICES-3. (4)-The Trail Court erred, when the Court refused to consider Trail Attorney Steinberg, (“Affirmation Letter acknowledgement of incompetence of ineffective assistance of counsel ”), that all parties, Judge Mahon, The District Attorney and the Court did not advise Pratt of Immigration doing Court Processing and at the time of the alleged plea. See Plea Transcript. See, the Supreme Court Of The United States ruling-Decision in the cases of: See, Jae Lee V. United States. See, Padilla v. Kentucky, See, Strickland v. Washington (1984 466 U.S. 668, 695, Hill v. Lockhart, (1985) 474 U.S. 52. Pratt was robbed of the right that was given to these three 3, cases above and the same right should be applied to Pratt and all these cases above were overturn. Plea Counsel, the District Attorney, Judge Mahon and the Courts failure to provide clear warnings about the deportation penalties associated with Pratt alleged guilty plea fell below the recognized standard of professional competence under the 6th Amendment (Padilla, supra, Commonwealth v. McDermitt (2013 Pa. Super. 113)(Pa. Super, Ct. 2013); Commonwealth v. Escobar (2013 Pa. Super. 175)(Pa. Super. Ct. 2013. APPENDICES-4. (5)-The Trail Court erred, when the Court refused to accept, Immigration Judge Daniel Conklin, Affirmation Letter, the Court also refused to accept Attorney Wayne Sachs acknowledgement that Judges Conklin, told him that he was the one that advise Pratt, that the Trail Court should had advise Pratt of immigration consequence at the time of the alleged plea and within 60 days of that advice, Pratt filed his first PCRA Petition. Had Pratt been properly advised of the deportation consequences of him entering the instant alleged plea, there is a reasonable likelihood that the result of the instant proceedings would have been different. Had Pratt been properly advised of the deportation consequence of him entering the instant pleas, Pratt would have sought through counsel to negotiate a different plea or would have gone to trial on either or both transcripts. See, Jae Lee V United States, See, Padilla v. Kentucky. APPENDICES 5 (6)-The Trail Court erred, when the Court refused to accept a crucial affidavit from the Commonwealth witness Essence L. Brich Wilkes: stating the true it w