WHETHER THE PETITIONER'S PSYCHIATRIC HISTORY AND LEARNING DISORDERS CONTRIBUTED TO BRAINWASHING A LEGALLY INCOMPETENT ACCUSED—A DISADVANTAGED PERSON?

III. WHETHER THE D.C. CIR. ERRORED IN DENYING JURISDICTION TO HEAR A SENTENCING DIFFERENCES IN THE LENGTH OF SENTENCES IMPOSED... VIOLATED THE ARM CAREER CRIMINAL GUIDELINES ON NON-QUALIFYING PREDICATE CONDUCT?

V. WHERE THE TRIAL COURT SENTENCED THIS PETITIONER UNDER THE HIGHER GUIDELINES BASED ON THE FABRICATED EVIDENCE THE GOVERNMENT PROSECUTOR PROCURED FALSE EVIDENCE WITHOUT ANY PROOF OF THIS PETITIONER MAKING SUCH THREATS TO KILL HIS OWN FAMILY—INTERFERING WITH ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE?

VI. WHETHER THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT OR WILL NOT NEVER SURMOUNT A DEFENSE CONTRADICTING THIS PETITIONER'S DISPUTED FACTS, PREJUDICES FLOWING FROM TWO PUBLIC DEFENDERS FAILURE TO PUT THE GOVERNMENT TO ITS PROOF?

VII. WHERE THE STATE GOVERNMENT UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A PRIVATE CITIZEN'S LIES AND DECEPTIONS... SYMPATHETIC TO MR. DIAL'S ALLEGATIONS THAT THIS PETITIONER MOLESTED HER FIVE YEAR OLD NIECE IN AT3 BARRED ALL AVENUES OF RELIEF IN HIS ORIGINAL 1995 § 2254 PETITION, AS DESCRIBED RESTRICTED ALL THESE YEARS TO KEEP THESE TRUTHS FROM SURFACING DESIGNED FOR THE TRUE MERITS OF THIS CASE NEVER TO BE KNOWN AFTER BRAINWASH?

X. WHETHER A PRIVATE CITIZEN ACTING AS A STATE AGENT IN SUBMITTING FABRICATED INFORMATION THAT INITIATED PROBABLE CAUSE VIOLATED THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION—A PRIVATE CITIZEN MOTIVATED THROUGH A VENDETTA OF REVENGE WAS ENCOURAGED BY COUNTY OFFICIALS OF ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES THAT CONSTITUTED A PREDICATION OF SLAVERY?

Question not identified.