Whether the Supreme Court can review Constitutional errors abroad involving due process and liberty rights, whether a California citizen can be convicted of attempted murder under new legislation, whether a federal habeas corpus claim was adequately stated, and whether the Ninth Circuit deprived the petitioner of liberty rights

1. With having consideration for the meaningful importance involved, notwith standing Rule 10 of this Court, could this Supreme Court of the United States proclaim jurisdiction and review the magnitude of Constitutional errors abroad arising from gross deprivations of substantive due process, equal protection, and genuine rights to liberty? 2. Were, in light of a newly established law enacted under California Senate Bill Mo. 775, could a United States citizen currently be convicted of an attempted murder ’’within the meaning of penal code section 180"? 3. After having issued an "Order to Show Cause"j did the United States District Court for Northern District of California efficiently substantiate petitioner did not fail to adequately state a cognizable claim under federal habeas corpus jurisdiction? 4. Following its "Order of Denial beyond the merits, inclusive to petitioner's Petition for Rehearing, did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judgement further deprive petitioner of'his genuine right to liberty?