WHETHER THE PEOPLE SUBMITTED INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THAT PETITIONER COMMITTED A KIDNAPPING FOR ROBBERY, AND SINCE THE CONVICT - HERE VIOLATES PETITIONER'S RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS UNDER THE FOUR TEENTH, AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, PETITIONER'S CONVICTION MUST BE REVERSED.

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT RULINGS IN UPHOLDING PETITIONER 'S CONVICTION FOR KIDNAPPING FOR ROBBERY, DISREGARDS WELL-SETTLED CASE LAW THAT ESTABLISHS THAT MOVEMENT OF A VICTIM, COMPLETELY WITHIN THE VICTIM'S HOME IS GENERALLY INSUFFICIENT TO.ESTABLISH THE ELEMENT OF ASPORTATION.

WHETHER THE EVIDENCE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT PETITIONER WAS THE PERPETRATOR OF THE OFFENSE.

WHETHER THE LOWER COURT OPINION ERRED IN ITS APPLICATION OF WELL-SETTLED FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IN REQUIRING PETITIONER' TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE FAILURE OF THE POLICE TO PRESERVE EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE WAS THE PRODUCT OF BAD FAITH ON THE PART OF THE POLICE,WHERE THE EXCULPATORY VALUE OF THE EVIDENCE WAS CLEAR THUS NO SUCH SHOWING WAS REQUIRED.

WHETHER THE MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WAS DEFINED IN THE OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE POINTING TO FACTUAL INNOCENCE WAS CONSCIOUSLY DISREGARDED FOR. PROVEN GUILT TO A CRIME NOT POSSIBLY HAVING COMMITTED.

WHETHER PETITIONER IS FACTUALLY INNOCENT IN COMMITTING THE CRIME OF KIDNAPPING AND ALL OTHER CHARGING ARE NOT APPLIABLE FOR CHARGING UNDER THE CRIMINAL CONDUCT BASED ON EXCESSING THE JURISDIC(1) TION, OF THE COURT.

WHETHER PETITIONER HAS BEEN DISADVANTAGE BY THE FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE IN THAT KIDNAPPING IS THE CONDUCT OF MOVING A PERSON FROM THE BEDROOM,INTO THE BATHROOM, IN ORDER TO CIRCUMVENT THE STATUTORY TIME PERIORD.

WHETHER THE STATE COURT ALLEGED IN A COLD CASE OCCURRING IN 1983, CHARGES' OF ROBBERY, ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON COULD BE IM— POSED, BASE ON THE VICTIM WAS KIDNAPPED WHEN SHE WAS'MOVED FROM THE BEDROOM TO THE BATHROOM. THE COURT STATED KIDNAPPING IS A LIFE SEN TENCE, APPLICATION AND HAS NO TIME LIMITATION TO BE ASSERTED IN THE YEAR 2011.

WHERE THEREFORE THE PETITIONER REQUEST THIS COURT TO GRANT A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR THE FILING'UNDER FEDERAL CIVIL CODE PROCEDURE 60 (b), AS THE FINDING OF GUILT UNDER KIDNAPPING, AS REFERENCE TO THE VICTIM MOVE FROM THE BEDROOM TO THE BATHROOM WAS AN UNAUTHORIZED AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONVICTION AS THE RECORD WAS UNSUPPORTIVE TO THE CRIMINAL CONDUCT OF KIDNAPPING, BUT THE COURT USED THE STATUTORY LAN GUAGE, AS A MEAN TO IMPOSE' A PROLONG CONDITION OF CONFINEMENT IN EXCESS OF THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT.

Whether the evidence was insufficient to establish that the petitioner committed a kidnapping for robbery, and whether the conviction violates the petitioner's due process rights