I. WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD GRANT THE WRIT WHERE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL VIOLATES DUE PROCESS WHERE NO SEXUALLY EXPLICIT VIDEO IS IN POSSESSION OF THE GOVERNMENT; WHERE NO VIDEO EXISTS, AND WHERE THE GOVERNMENT CLAIMED TO POSSESS A VIDEO TO PROSECUTE OBTAINING A COERCED PLEA OF GUILTY THE DEFENDANT BY FALSELY PROSECUTING 18 U.S.C. SECTION 2251(A) AND (E) WHERE LOWER COURTS ERRED IN DENYING 2255 RELIEF.

II. WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD GRANT THE WRIT WHERE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL VIOLATES DUE PROCESS WHERE THE DEFENDANT WAS COERCED INTO SIGNING A PLEA AGREEMENT AND STIPULATION OF FACTS, WHILE UNDER DURESS BY THREATS OF CHARGING HIS PARENTS CLAIMED AS THIRD-PARTIES, AND WHERE NO PROBABLE CAUSE EXISTED IN ORDER TO PROSECUTE AND CHARGE THIRD-PARTIES WHERE LOWER COURTS ERRED IN DENYING 2255 RELIEF.

III. WHETHER THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD GRANT THE WRIT WHERE PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL OCCURRED WHERE COUNSEL FAILED TO INVESTIGATE AND FOLLOW THE LAW PERTAINING TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 2423(B); I.E., COUNSEL FAILED TO DISCOVER THAT COUNT 2 NEVER OCCURRED; THAT COUNT 3 DOES NO CONSTITUTE A FEDERAL OFFENSE, AND WHERE DUE PROCESS IS VIOLATED WHEN THE GOVERNMENT PROSECUTED 18 U.S.C. SECTION 2423(B) WHICH DO NOT CONSTITUTE FEDERAL OFFENSES AS STIPULATED WHERE LOWER COURTS ERRED IN DENYING 2255 RELIEF.

Whether the Supreme Court should grant the writ where prosecutorial-misconduct, ineffective-assistance-of-counsel, due-process, plea-bargaining, 18-usc-2251, 18-usc-2423, 2255-relief