Since it is MDOC Policy to maintan fair possibility & guidelines pursvant PD 06.05.103 as it is initially to Ist discred:t the Mich. State Court greatly it has come all the way to the V.s. Supreme Court, can Favor S exhaustion precedent especially in mentally a disabled litigants potential to have freedom right +o a Conclusively against the Respondent ?

2. If in good faith, can it be d.sputed in as racial/ vader color of laul distinctions distinction +hat Conspiracy clearly means hybrid easily to " cumulative" in my case with )) Failed all white Judicial rule

3. Can it be credible that attempted to exhaust the legal assistance measure of our 6tn Ameadment ..4 times before In Pro Se as a mentally disabled laymer defendent proceeded C

4. Should it be obviously discredible on part the L1 vlhite court apponted lawyers & methods to appoint deferse corld be stood simply r Clain under 4261985 by ?

5. Is it possible that this great Cosrt could threaten defendant Respondents with the punative sanctions effectit vof even responding & prolonging my preventing then remedy X turther 2ith a VidELy vneffective rEspOnsE C

Whether the exhaustion of legal assistance measures, especially in the case of a mentally disabled defendant, can conclusively overcome the respondent's right to freedom