Whether a sworn and verified criminal complaint can be commenced under Illinois law (Ill. Rev. Stat. ch. 38, Para. 109-3(C)) without violating the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Section 6 Article II of the Illinois Constitution of 1870.

Whether a criminal complaint is void and taint the line-up procedure that was obtained with it, and if the complainant and witnesses viewed the line-up, do they also have to sign the criminal complaint, and does the line-up appear defectively from the suspect, and does it violate 725 ILCS Stat. 5-4-5.

If Mr. Beykin was later indicted for the same offense and the line-up identification process was employed in the indictment, does that make the indictment void and defective and the fruit of the poisoned tree?

If a court ordered a buccal swab to be taken for genetic analysis, if the order has someone else's name on it, does that order become defective for not naming the proper person, and under Amendment on Fourth, Section 2 must the order name the person to be searched or seized?

On 3-28-18 Mr. Beykin and his counsel was denied access to the beach forensic material (sheets on 3 of all the charges in this case) #12 Material. Is this not a discovery violation under 725 ILCS 5-47 on Evidence?

Is ineffective assistance of appointed counsel to not bring up prior issues with Mr. Beykin's behalf in his appellate brief, is it clear error of the Illinois Court of Appeals to allow this to happen?

When the first form of charge (certain complaint) gets dismissed, does "double jeopardy" apply when the same offense is brought up again for indictment?

Whether the lineup identification procedure employed violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and the right to effective assistance of counsel under the 6th Amendment