1. Whether petitioner, Robert Murphy, had fair warning as to reach of disciplinary proceedings and precise nature of charges that petitioner's administrative and extraordinary Workers' Compensation recusal proceedings in pending contested Workers' Compensation proceedings in 2010 (hereinafter recusal proceedings) based on Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Act 77 P.S. Section 2504 violated Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct 3.1, 3.3(a)(1), 8.2(a), 8.4(c), 8.4(d) based on Pennsylvania Supreme Court's erroneous retroactive application of its newly enacted 2014 Judicial Code which is plainly effective only on and after July 1, 2014 involving only elected judges in violation of petitioner's fundamental constitutional rights including due process and equal protection guaranteed under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

2. Whether Pennsylvania Supreme Court's comingled accusatory and adjudicative functions based on pre-determined conclusion that petitioner's subject recusal proceedings and other alleged unrelated nonexistent ethical violations violate petitioner's fundamental right to due process and equal protection.

3. Whether Pennsylvania Supreme Court's final biased fiat order entered 12/19/2019 denying petitioner's petition for review pursuant to Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board's arbitrary, irrational and biased recommendations involving ODC's continuous, intentional, egregious prosecutorial misconduct suspending petitioner from Pennsylvania Bar for a period of five years based exclusively on Pennsylvania Supreme Court's retroactive application of its 2014 Judicial Code plainly inapplicable to Workers' Compensation recusal proceedings exclusively governed by 77 P.S. Sec. 2504 involving petitioner's truthful recusal proceedings in 2010 is egregiously erroneous in violation of petitioner's fundamental constitutional rights including substantive and procedural due process, equal protection, truthful free speech, compulsory process, cross examination, confrontation and presentation of evidence and a decision by an impartial tribunal based on a full, true, complete and accurate certified record guaranteed under Art. I, Sec. 10, Cl. 1, First, Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

Whether petitioner had fair warning of disciplinary proceedings