ChARkeicharles r.mcloy, inerr for aesenting an vntruth that the petitiuner Adrian Fseis willams, didnt pAR Dui to the petitroner being Denied an impARtial 'Juay when it is pRven that the petitioner was prose, a on pretaial thrv trial was this wrtruth ll the wsy blio violatiun and an issve of suboRN peRJuey?

2as4 Dd this paisent an in kae Fue Derying the petitioner, Relief based upon (6)wAs the 1thciRcvit coURT Officans and also by her being the Last Black person in the petitioner's Juy pool?

()WAs the IIth CIRcUit CoURt oF ApDEALS IN kRe FuR Failing to ReveRse the illegal convictiun thot Adrian Frnucis W, is under Due to this case at hand when itis prover he was clenied the Right t tRial by an impARtial Juny?

(8)woS ASSISTANT StAtE AHORNEY RIChONd IN. MANTE kRR foe lyina vncer oath that matkrial witnessesin this case in he had recieved swonn statements From t to haar his motiun to Disqualfy in which prives the petitiuner never waived his speeDy taial Rights wAs thIs an MANifEst oF INJUsticE 2

( I2) was the HUNORable 1Ith CiRcUSt Covet of Applols in EaR FoR Deny'ng Dischege of the charging infuRMafion Duk tO the SpeeDy tRial DeMAND under FlonIDS aNles of cRiMinal proctdure 3.iqi(b)encompassed by the 6 th Amendnert of the vnited states of Americs and FLuriDo's Cunstifution where the lithcie in ear that they covldnt Rule upun this ssve because it wos only Raised under Rvlec by The B,ll of Rights to the Constitution of the United stotes of Americs and FLonIDA COnStitUtIOnS WAs thIS ERRUR OF LAW?

Chonging infurmation Like stated by Clanely Estoblished deral Low and also by the Facts that the petitioner was already in state cvs stody because if so Failing tu entertain both of the petitiuner's 6th Amendment speedy trial Rights violatior sr't trve because they by shoting they were only Raised vnder state Law whi Williams's, Constitutional Rights ?

(i5) By the petitioner, already being w state custody and the state knowin where the petiticner is at and having Jurisdiction cver him were they in ere foR Not bainging him to couRt FoR the alleged crimes that he dicnt comm.t before his speeDy taial time had Ran ovt many times oF 175 on 18o Doys?

Whether the petitioner's speedy trial rights were violated by the delay in bringing him to trial