Does the use of computer/internet surveillance technology, not available to the general public, to intrude into a home or curtilage (KYLLO) without proper ECPA process and procedures, violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment Right to be secure in their persons, house, papers, and effects, against unreasonable search and seizure?

Does the technology utilized by Law Enforcement that is otherwise unavailable to the General Public require verified testing for evidentiary admissibility within any or all of the Kyllo, Daubert, and Illinois v. Gates analysis for (1) witness testimony; (2) evidentiary reliability, and/or (3) scientific validity?

Does evidence derived by State Officials, relying on intercepted wire communications to be received in evidence in any trial, let alone a Federal Trial, presented to any Grand Jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body or any other authority of the United States fail 18 U.S.C. 2515 as it referes to acceptable evidence in a Federal Court?

Is a Federal Prosecution established lawfully when the search warrant and search is performed by a State Officer, the same officer that signed the affidavit for the warrant, performing the search as a State Agent, the Internet, employing the aformentioned technology, thereby accessing same by use of interstate Commerce to commence an investigation within the State of Ohio, in violation of Article III (Commerce Clause) and Article VI (Supremacy Clause), issuing an infirm warrant affidavit issued after the use of the aforementioned jurisdictionally infirm methods, and then forwarded to federal authorities as if on a "Silver Platter" (Elkins silver platter doctrine violation)?

Is it a violation of a defendants Due Process (Fifth Amendment) rights to be held without bail, without a bail hearing, and without reasoning by the Court (placed on the record); then to house defendant three-counties away from his lawyer, court, and family for the duration of the pre-trial development of his case, thereby restricting his access to counsel, and access to his ability to build a defense?

Is it a violation of the Defendants Due Process and Confrontation Clause rights (Fifth and Sixth Amendments) to Delay all for Bail, and Motions for Evidentiary Hearings and to see the Evidence to be used against him; all through Detention, Trial, Conviction, Sentencing and incarceration, before ruling on said Motions, such that all of the Motion Content was denied throughout trial?

1) Does the use of constant Delays, delaying tactics, misquotes of Defendant's declaration of, and asserting of, his Rights, delays promulgated by the Prosecution and Judge, without due cause, creating a forced delay of over one full year (1 year 4 months) violate the Defendants Sixth Amendment right to a Speedy Trial?

8) Does it violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment Right to be free from unlawful search and seizure, when the Search was conducted in violation of the 18 U.S.C. 2500 - 2270 ECPA Statutes and a home-invasion type of search was performed using electronic means, the internet, and thereby entering a private person's domicile, without the proper ECPA Due Process (Fifth Amendment) notification / Data Breach notification having ever been served or issued by the Federal Agents involved in the Home Search, and who then broke down the front door of the homeowner's residence, and refused to show or serve the Warrant?

9) Does it violate the defendants Sixth Amendment, "jury by your peers", rights when

Does the use of computer/internet surveillance technology violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights?