Whether the United States Court's for the Eighth circuit has failed to to adhere to the accepted and usual course of Judicial proceedings established by the constitut i°n/ the Supreme court, the federal rules of procedure, the Universal declaration of civil and political rights (aka) ghts act, as to call for an exercise of this courtand in The Universal ri-'s supervisory powers, and or has decided important federal questions in a way that conflicts with releva- nt decisions of this court and other lower courts such as- beheard before a fair and impartial tribunal that adheres and Supreme Court precedent, that is decided by fact and law.Defendants right to to the Constitution

Whether the United^ States Court of appeals and District and prosecutor lacked standing to bring ; .federal criminal charges against petitwas innocent, without proving Subject Matter Jurisdiction, riminal Jurisdiction et al.Federal cWhen it was challenged and Supported by Supreme Court precedent and Affidavit and Motion on multiple times 6,under the Supremacy Clause, and the 5th;t as set forth in Art. 3 9th, ,& 10th. amendment. -, Art. 4, thereby, violating the Constitutions,• / Due Process Clause and the Supremacy Cla- userc And the Petitioners rigfetsi"ahd:;the 9th and 10th amendments.

Whether the United States Court of Appeals demonstratedex parte procedure xn the upholding of the district Courts rulingon the enforcing on remand a plea agreement that wasbreached by the Government and never repaired, resulting in the enforement of a void contract and reulting in an illegal sentence, thereby violating- Art:.3 and Art. 6, the supremacy clause and the 5th Amend, rights,of the petitioners and his civil rightsDue Process

Whether the United States Court's for the Eighth circuit has failed to adhere to the accepted and usual course of Judicial proceedings