carse /evidantiary haaring af a fetition fon a writ of habaas corpus wherein the
prasanted faets include : Marlon Blacher, hereinafter "Patitioner ", is arbitrarily
daprived of default judgment; Petitioner is deprived of resentencing autside the
baunds of the s+ipulations sat by the statute spon which such resenteneing
rests ; Patitioner is depoived of the right to appeal set boy said statrte ; the courts
tha sthar unjust eircumstances detailed by said petition (see AppenDIx e313.) is inappropriate y unjsst gand deprive the Patitioner of due protess of law?

2. Is it not tove that the sforesaid presented facts (Gae id) warronts
issuance of an order to show carse /evidentiany hearing?

3. Does the evidence evince that release/resentencing is due to the Petitioner?

4. Ia it not true that the srders at issue here (see AppENDIx AB.),
"s
which issue fram courts that neither Lal's Lonstoy nar ony pnsitively
enacted statute of the stateg mention are null/usidgas a matter of
positive law, and,therefore nst lawfully binding vqan /enforceable against
the Patitioner.

5. Is it not true that where courts Af the state uojustifiably
fail to file /hear cases/causes brought by the Petitioner then no
actual and valid means sf recourse and remedy are available gat
the state level, to the Petitioner and thefefore federal commonlow lother remedy is due to the Petitioner?

Whether the arbitrary denial of an evidentiary hearing on a petition for writ of habeas corpus deprives the petitioner of due process