Charles Nemon Vandross v. Bryan P. Stirling, Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections, et al.
HabeasCorpus
I. Certiorari should issue to resolve whether the USCCA has denied and is denying Petitioner access to the courts, during Indigent Petitioner's United States Supreme Court appeal timeframe, in part via denial of appointment of new counsel, where appointed counsel strongly encouraged Petitioner to appeal, but quit for personal reasons without notice to court, and where Petitioner has expressed need for assistance of counsel to proceed.
II. Certiorari should issue to resolve whether the USCCA has denied Petitioner access to the courts, via failure to serve uncounseled Petition as a "legitimate client, customer, or party" seeking information from the court but was and is considered necessary in order to proceed, both after a showing that the assistance needed would not likely be obtained here via counsel of record, and after showing counsel of record had quit.
III. Certiorari should issue to resolve whether the USCCA has denied Indigent Petitioner access to the courts, via failure to properly supervise the United States District Court, District of South Carolina, declining to investigate when Petitioner's Motion to Stay et al was submitted well within 9 days, was docketed and considered by the Magistrate Judge and District Court judges, and if not, "why".
Whether the USCRY has denied Petitioner access to the courts