Whether the district court's reliance on hearsay evidence in a supervised release revocation proceeding violated the petitioner's Confrontation Clause rights and whether the 60-month sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable

Petitioner Abdul Kilgore respectfully submits this petition for writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. This case presents significant questions regarding the evidentiary standards and procedural safeguards applicable in supervised release revocation proceedings, particularly concerning the use of hearsay evidence and application of the Confrontation Clause under the Sixth Amendment in supervised release revocation hearings to establish alleged new law violations for uncharged conduct. 1. Whether the district court’s reliance on hearsay evidence, including a complaining witness’s video statement and photographic evidence, in a supervised release revocation proceeding violated the petitioner’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment because it was unreliable and there was no good cause found to preclude crossexamination? 2. Whether the district court’s imposition of a 60-month sentence for a supervised release violation, that was based on a finding that a sexual assault occurred by a preponderance of the evidence even though no charges were filed, was procedurally and substantively unreasonable? i