WAS THE COURT UNETHICAL IN NOT FINDING THE REVOCATION OF SENTENCE VOID, 2 3 O 5,0 3 8

2. WAS PETTIONER'S 5T AND IY AMENOMENT DUE PROLESS GUARANTEED BY THE U.S. CONSTTTUTION VIOLATED?

3. HAS THE CONFLICTING DECISIONS OF TWO LOURTS IN REGARAS TO THE DEPRINING OF RIGHTS TO FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS CAUSED BY VIOLATION OF PROCEDURE DUE PROCESS, DISTORTS THE PUBLIC'S VIEW ON JUSTICE AND WHETHER COURT CASE 1S BIAS OR COUGTS IN GENERAL ARE BIAS?

4. WAS COUNSEL'S PERFORMANLE SUFFICIENT DURING PROCEEDINGS, IN LIGHT M P E WITNE SSES, AND FAILED TO CONDULT APOROPRIATE INUESTIGATION, WHICH ARE ALL GROUNDS FOR INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE?

5. ON COUNSEL'S ACTONS, WHEN COUNSEL WITHHELD IMPURTANT DOLUMENTS NOEDED FOK PETITIONER TO FILE HIS HABEAS CORPUS?

Whether the Department of Corrections violated the petitioner's constitutional rights by failing to provide appropriate medical care and treatment