Did the State forfeit the claim, reliance or remedy of Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 1 and U.S. v Charles, 801 F.3d 855 (71h Cir.) of an unconstitutional statute not negating probable cause under the rules of forfeiture as stated in People v. Gaines 105 I11.2d 79, 85 Ill.Dec.269, 274, 473 N.E.2d 868 cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1131, 105 S.Ct. 2666 and Teague v. Lane, 109 S.Ct 1060, 103 L.Ed 334.

Did the Supreme Court of Illinois err remanding my case back tot eh Appellate Court for reconsideration in light of People v. Holmes 2017 IL 120407, and denying my Petition for leave to appeal (Appendix C) without first considering their very own well established precedent rule of law for forfeiture of People v. Gaines, 105 I11.2d 79, and this Court's rule of forfeiture Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 at 297 and 298, as the State never raised the argument, issue, nor cited Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 1 and U.S. v. Charles, 801 F.3d 855 of an unconstitutional not negating probable cause in my initial direct appeal.

Should the Appellate Court's original ruling in my case should've remand the same under the Illinois Supreme Court and this United States Supreme Court well established rule of law of forfeiture or arguments and claims not raised in direct appeal as applied to everyone, including the State, see Fagan v. Washington 942 F.2d 1155. as the issue presents a question of violations of my Due Process and Equal Protections rights.

And lastly, did the Appellate Court err in affirming the trial court's decision of whether the police having reasonable suspicion or probable cause to approach, investigate, and inspect my car or probable cause to even open my car door, as the police themselves testified they did not know if I was breaking any law, nor if the allege gun was being transported unlawfully. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, New York v. Class 475 U.S. 106 at 117.

Did the State forfeit the claim, reliance or remedy of Michigan v. DeFillippo, 443 U.S. 1 and U.S. v Charles, 801 F.3d 855 (7th Cir.) of an unconstitutional statute not negating probable cause under the rules of forfeiture as stated in People v. Gaines 105 Ill.2d 79, 85 Ill. Dec.269, 274, 473 N.E.2d 868 cert. denied, 471 U.S. 1131, 105 S.Ct. 2666 and Teague v. Lane, 109 S.Ct 1060, 103 L.Ed 334