4th AMENDMENT CLAIM
Testimony giving during the November 12,2013, Suppression hearing record
demonstrated NO exigent circumstances existed and NO attempt was made to secure a search
warrant, as the Law requires absent any established exigent circumstance.
Does the Constitution or Laws require a trial court fabricate facts outside sworn
testimony to justify a warrantless entry?
Does the Constitution or Laws require the Northern District of Ohio or the Sixth Circuit
court of Appeals completely ignore these contradicting facts because petitioner was only given
an opportunity to have his fourth amendment claim heard?

6th AND 14th AMENDMENT CLAIM
The Northern District of Ohio and the Sixth Circuit court of Appeals both agreed
petitioners' ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim, is frivolous and holds no merit.
Does the Constitution or Laws require appellate counsel fail to raise a claim of Police
and Prosecutorial Misconduct or Ineffective Assistance of Trial Counsel, on Direct Appeal, when
petitioners grand jury and trial record demonstrated the State and Trial counsel intentionally
allowed "Officers" witnesses testify to evidence that was knowingly not submitted, or tested,
not presented or even a participant within the avoided BCI Lab Report?

Whether the Constitution or laws require a trial court to fabricate facts outside sworn testimony to justify a warrantless entry