WHERE THE RIGHT TO PROCEED PRO SE IS CONSTITUTIONAL# EVEN ON APPEAL OR A
POST CONVICTION APPLICATION , IS IT A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS AND OR THE
EQUAL PROTECTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES constitution as well as the new
york state constitution TO REFUSE TO CONSOLIDATE C.P.L. 440.10, Habeas
Corpus, WRIT OF ERROR DENIED ALL FILED POST CONVICTION AND BEFORE THE
FIRST INSTANCE DIRECT APPEAL WERE FILED WHERE EACH OF THE POST CONVICT
-ION APPLICATIONS WERE .DENIED.BECAUSE THEY COULD HAVE BEEN DECLARED ON• •
THE
DIRECT .APPEAL. WHICH WAS NOT FILED UNTIL 2 years later?

BASED UPON THE AFOREMENBTIONED IS THE CLAIMANT AT LAW STILL SUFFERING
INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL , AND PREJUDICE FOR ACTING PRO SE WHICH
IS HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT ?FROM

BASED UPON THE CIRCUMSTANCES HEREIN , AND THE FAILURE TO CONSOLIDATE THE
DIRECT APPEAL WITH THE POST CONVICTION DENIALS , THE APPEAL IS NOT PROPER
AND UNACCEPTABLE TO BE ACCEPTED BY A TRAINED ATTORNEY AT LAW.

Where the right to proceed pro se is constitutionally even on appeal or a post conviction application, is it a violation of due process and or the equal protections of the United States constitution as well as the New York state constitution to refuse to consolidate C.P.L. 440.10, Habeas Corpus, Writ of Error denied; all filed post conviction and before the first instance direct appeal were filed