I. SHOULD PETITIONER BE ALLOWED RETROACTIVELY TO REJECT A PLEA OFFER WHEN HE REFUSED TO ADMIT GUILT TO ONE SINGLE COUNT OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT BY EJECTING THE PLEA OFFER OF 7/30/13?

II. SHOULD McCOY V. LOUISIANA 138 S.Ct 1500 (2018) APPLY TO PETITIONER'S CASE OF COLLATERAL REVIEW?

III. SHOULD McCOY BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY?

IV. SHOULD McCOY BE APPLIED TO PETITIONER'S CASE WHERE A REJECTED PLEA OFFER OF ONE SINGLE COUNT OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT IS A CLEAR ASSERTION OF INNOCENCE ON TWO COUNTS AND TRIAL COUNSEL OVERRIDE MY SECURED AUTONOMY RIGHT TO REJECT THE PLEA OFFER OF ONE COUNT WHEN HE, WITHOUT MY CONSENT ADMITTED GUILT TO THE JURY TO TWO COUNTS?

V. AFTER I REJECTED A PLEA OFFER AND REFUSED TO ADMIT GUILT TO ONE COUNT OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT AGAINST DYLAN BELDGYA, THE TRIAL COUNSEL ADMIT GUILT TO THE JURY ON MY BEHALF TO THAT VERY SAME FELONIOUS ASSAULT CHARGE THAT I EARLIER REFUSED TO ADMIT GUILT TO?

VI. PER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE HONORABLE JUDITH E. LEVY: WOULD THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF A RECORD EXPOUNDING THE DETAILS OF THE PLEA OFFER EXTENDED ON 7/30/13 CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF MY CASE?

VII. SHOULD McCOY BE APPLIED TO A RUN-OF-THE-MILL TRIAL OUTSIDE OF A CAPITAL CONTEXT?

VIII. IS AN INTRANSIGENT OBJECTION TO A TRIAL COUNSEL'S ADMISSION OF GUILT TO TWO COUNTS OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT INNATE PLEA OFFER TERRORISM LAST EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT WHEN THE STATE COURTS WERE GIVEN ALL OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS, AS NEW SENTENCE, PLEA REJECTION ISSUE AND REFUSAL TO THE ADMIT GUILT TO ONE SINGLE COUNT OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT BUT THEY DID NOT?

IX. SHOULD SCOTUS INVOKE SUPERINTENDING MANDAMUS CONSTRAINTS DO NOT APPLY, YET WERE APPLIED BY THE LOWER COURTS ANYWAY?

X. AS A RESULT OF MICHIGAN'S PRISONS BEING PLACED ON COVID-19 OUTBREAK STATUS SHOULD TIME LIMITS TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL AND MOTIONS TO EXTEND/REOPEN THE TIME TO APPEAL BE EXTENDED?

XI. SHOULD I BE PROCEDURALLY DEFAULTED APPEAL TIME LIMITS WHERE THE PRISON FACILITY HAS OBSTRUCTED ACCESS TO THE COURTS BY NOT PROMOTING OR PROMOTING DELAYED LAW LIBRARY SERVICES LEGAL MAIL SERVICES?

XII. SHOULD THE FEDERAL COURTS CONSIDER FACTUAL A PETITIONER'S CLAIMED DATE OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF A JUDGMENT WHERE THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DOCUMENTATION OF RECEIPT OF AN LEGAL MAIL FROM ANY U.S. DISTRICT OR CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE ENTIRE YEAR OF 2020 UP UNTIL OCTOBER 2020 AND SELECTIVELY THEREAFTER, ASIDE HAVE A VERIFIABLE LEGAL MAIL "A CODE REQUIRING PRISON OFFICIALS TO DOCUMENT RECEIPT OF

Whether the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was violated when the trial court closed the courtroom to the public during the testimony of certain witnesses