This case is here by upon writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of the United States. Honoring the life, liberty and property of CORPORATION ex-rel [ALPHONSO VERNELL FRAZIER II] and "natural" person Alphonso Vemell Frazier II. The question is jurisdiction and deprivation of due process of law denied equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Obstruction of justice of the Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure rights protected under the U.S. Constitution "Bill of Rights. " Secured rights that were interrupted by Omaha Police Officers and other government agents who operated "under the color of law" in a conspiracy of the "meeting of the minds " with private actors. The question is whether the authorities of the Municipal Government of the City of Omaha failed to properly train their officials and employees. Who operated outside their jurisdiction in a "willful" act of unreasonable search and seizure without a search warrant. Taking personal property from my home without good cause. That led to me being unlawfully: incarcerated twice for the same fabricated criminal charges. A double jeopardy case of invpluntaiy servitude that maliciously deprived me of my fireedom. Corruption executed by the defendant's Who "knowingly "targeted meiti apfemhdithtedConspiracy of extortion.

Allowing me the right to sue for monetary damages under the federal law of Section 1983. Against unreasonable search and seizure. The fourth amendment of the Constitution protects American citizens from police officers pr other government agents from searching your home, car or other personal property without good cause. Without a search warrant they do not have consent to infringe Upon my personal property, The fifth and the fourteenth amendments of the Constitution protect every citizen from being treated diffpreiitiy by thd federal of state governmentsdup to aspects of their personthey cannot change. The government can not discriminate, or treat you differently, based on the factors of race, gend^brinatiphafe^puri^pf^
to secure every person withiri the state's jurisdiction against ihtentlbnhl and arbitrary diSdrifomatfon, whether occasioned by express terms of a statute or by its improper execution through duly constituted agents. In regards to intentional inflection by state officials.

Jurisdiction is the power to exercise authority over persons, and things within a territory. The jurisdiction of a legal case depends On both personsi jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction. A court must have both subject matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over the matter to hear a case. Therefore it is no doubt the enforcement of this case lies in the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Questioning the elements behind the dilemma of the massive crimes committed in this case:

1. The question is jurisdiction and deprivation of due process of law denied equal protection of the laws in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment?

2. Did defendants violate obstruction of justice of the Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure rights protected under the U.S. Constitution "Bill of Rights " Secured rights that were interrupted?

3. Did Omaha Police Officers and other government agents operate "under the color of law 5' in a conspiracy of the "meeting of the minds " with private actors?

4. Did the authorities of the Municipal Government of the City of Omaha fail to properly train their officials and employees?

5. Did Omaha Police Officers and government agents operate outside their jurisdiction in a "willful" act of unreasonable search and seizure without a search warrant,?

6. Why di

Whether the authorities of the Municipal Government of the City of Omaha failed to properly train their officials and employees