1) When thegovernment moves to strip a defendant of hiscounsel
of choice,does the court have any obligation to hold
to inquire and determine what the factsa hearing
are vis-a-vis Cuyler
v. Sullivan ? If not, does this meet the constitutionalminimum
for right to counsel of choice

2) Whether a forged, fraudulent,under the sixth amendment?
altered plea petition inapparent
violation of federal law under 18 USC §1512(c)(l)
level of 'extraordinary circumstances
the standards of 60(b)(6)?

3) Whether a judgement basedrises to the
' sufficient to satisfy
on a plea that was tampered with
is from its inception, a null and void judgement,and sufficient
to satisfy the standards of 60(b)(4)?

4) Whether whena court disregards or ignores all of the defendants
pleas, complaints, motions , i . e . ,refuses to let the defendant
meet the constitutional minimum forbe heard does thisdue process
under the Fifth Amendment?

5) Does an appointed defense
'author' of a document havepanel attorney who is the
any obligation to inform the
i.e., the plea petition?
Judges M. Smith and Leeputative
court
who tampered with the document,

6) Whether the panel of circuit
Introverted thestatutory order of operations, by applying the
wrong standard in denying Cabellos petition for Certificate
of Appealability, in contravention of the
unambiguous hold of the Supreme Court
clarifies the standard for COA .controlling and
in Buck v Davis that

When the government moves to strip a defendant of his counsel of choice, does the court have any obligation to hold a hearing to inquire and determine what the facts are vis-a-vis Cuyler v. Sullivan?