Whether the Third District's decision disallowing Diaz's use of habeas corpus violates his constitutional right to court access and challenges an allegedly null and void judicial opinion

WHETHER THE THIRD DISTRICT'S DECISION DISALLOWING DIAZ'S USE OF THE GREAT WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO PRESENT VALID AND UNBARRED CLAIMS VIOLATES DIAZ ’S RIGHT TO ACCESS TO THE COURT WHERE IT IS THE ONLY VEHICLE THROUGH WHICH DIAZ CAN INVOKE THE THIRD JURISDICTION TO SEEK DISTRICT'S REVIEW OF ITS OWN NULL AND VOID OPINION WHICH: l) REINSTATED AN 8APPEAL/MANDATE; 2) YEAR-OLD PURPORTEDLY CONFERRED JURISDICTION IT ITSELF DID NOT HAVE TO A TRIAL COURT IT ORDERED TO MITIGATE DIAZ ’S LEGAL 8 YEAR OLD 22 YEAR SENTENCE TO LIFE; 3) ORDERED SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE THAT: A) IMPOSED AN ILLEGAL SENTENCE WHICH VIOLATED THE DIRECT AND EXPRESS TERMS OF THE PLEA AGREEMENT; AND B) SNUBBED THE FACT THAT DIAZ WAS ALREADY IRREPARABLY PREJUDICED BY THE 8 YEAR BREACH OF THE PLEA AGREEMENT, CONTRARY TO THE FIRST, FIFTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT ’S TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. ii