Whether the Due Process clause permits a court to ignore a jury's finding of Not Guilty on a lesser, necessarily included charge while accepting the same jury's finding of Guilty on the greater charge

Petitioner was charged, inter alia, with Assault With a Dangerous Weapon. A single form of verdict was submitted to the jury with two options: Guilty/Not Guilty of the charged crime, and Guilty/Not Guilty of the included crime of Assault. Both options referred to a single charged act. The included crime, Assault, is an element of the charged crime. A jury found Petitioner Not Guilty of that element, that is, Not Guilty of the Assault, but Guilty of the crime of which it is a necessary element. This verdict is internally, logically incongruous. It is not merely inconsistent, “it is metaphysically impossible.” United States v. Shippley, 690 F.3d 1192, 1195 (10th Cir. 2012). The lower court ignored the acquittal and entered judgement on the greater offense. The questions presented are: I Whether the Due Process clause permits a court to ignore without inquiry a jury’s finding of Not Guilty on a lesser, necessarily included charge, while accepting the same jury’s finding, on the same verdict form, of Guilty on the greater charge. II. Whether the right to a trial by jury is violated when a jury returns a form of verdict which both acquits a defendant of a necessarily included offense and convicts that same defendant of the greater offense, and the trial court ignores the acquittal. _ i