May a cart convict and sentence a defendant fetitioner or any aceused for statatay sexud offense statuter based on accusations and eidentiary facts tred, that are of forcible sexval conduct?

4+ rendron and cnder the Ex Post Facto dlause prohibit or places a constraint on the DoJ of this state to (ArtideIseclo,Us. const) ) convict with statutes of strit listility or sdttang crires based on accusstens of Bercible sexual offenses?

D.) Convict on seperate, disparate criminal anti-merger practice on bars of First degree fraible compulsion' proporition, and ther] based on the sae single act conict on Third deyree statiborg crivre because of age fact?

convit on bass of a Erible sexad condat-fovible compision offense, and then add the contion of astattam crire becave de toGge of victim at the time of the tritle sexua condat violation,and

I Does the Equad Protection Chause of The C.s constrtution allow. the DoJ to apply the stattes iratonality as to depie First Arendrat Freedor of Expression and Speech lewiny defordants deferses inopeative(inoperative) and honce mis-labeling victims by the misrepresentaion of their reports of accusations or fdme sex cries and sealed statement of law by the fanded and published verdict. Applying staditer crminal states for accuitiors of frble acts?

Does the case ot state v Cotsley demonstate both Ex-pont facto violation and Duble Jeapardy?

Whether the United States Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits a state from convicting a defendant for a statutory sexual offense based on past conduct that was not criminal at the time it occurred