1)ASTHE T CIR. ERZ IN EFERING TO THE LOWER COUGTS DECISION THAT M2. HOPE TRIAL WAS HELA INTNE PRPPER COUNETY WNEN PROCF WAS PROVIE THAT HIS CBIME DCCURES IN ANOTHER COULTY AN ISTRICT LONG BEFORE T WAS ISCOVERE BH THE PROSECLTING COUNT4?

RSTHE TCR. ER INPEFERRING TO THE LOWER COUTS BEUSION THAT MZ. HOPE WADNOT PRESUDICE BY NIOTRIALCOUNSEL FRULURE TO DBSECT TO THETRIAL COUGT LACK OF JURISSICTION WHEN IT WAS MADE KNOWN NURING RETRIAL MOTION NEARING ANA SENTENCING HEARING THAT THE LICENDE VIOLATON MR. HOPE WAS ARREST EANCHARGEWITH OCCUREINANOTHER COUNT ANAISTRICT

3THE ITCR. EBR IN PEFERING TOTHE LDWER COURTS ECISION THAT NO ABUSE OF ISCRETON WAS COMMITTES FOR ALLDUING THE STATETD PRESENT TOTHEJLURY CONL ATERAL CRIME EVNENCETHAT AIANTSUPORT THECRIME CHARGE

HSTHE TCR. ER IN DEFERZING TO THE LDWER COURTIS DECISION THAT MR. HOPE WAS EVIDENCE WNEN COUNSELKNEWTHE OBECTON WOULDVE OLACESTHE COURT ON NOTCE THATERROR WAS BEING COMMITTED?

5THE TCR.E IEFERRINGTOTHE LOWER COURT ECUSION THAT THIS ISSUE WASNT PROPERLH RAISE I POSTCONVICTON PZOCEEDINGS AS MR. HOPE WAS ENIE FOR ARREST OF UPGEMENT UTIL 2O MONTHS LATER?

THETCUR. ERR IN NEFERRING TO THE LOWER COUTS DEUSION THAT A STATES WIT. NEDS CHARUE PWOWARS NTLE UNER OATH H CLAIMING TD HOU AN OFFICIAL POSITONWHENHS FAILURE TO MAINTAINHIS OFFICER CERTIFICATIONPROHBITS HIM FROM HOLD ING AN OFFICALPOSITIONA OUTLNEB HE CBIMINAL USTICETANARSAN TRAININGCOMMISSION?

THE TR. ERRINDEFERRIGTOTHE LOWER COUT NECSION THA ND BRA VOLTON WAS COMMITE BHTHE STATE FOR WITHHOLDING COURT-DRNERE EVIDENCE RECALIDE IT WAS FABRICATEDAND ISNTEXIST?

8)THE THCIG. ER EFERRING TOTHE LOWER COURTS NECSIONTHAT THERE WAS ND PROSECLITORIAL MICONDUICT BH THE STATE FOR FABRICATING FALSE EVIDENCE AN AN 3-8-4 THERE WERE RCRIMES CHARGE IN THE INFOZMATION BUT DNL I CRIME CHARGE INTHE AZREOT NOCUMENT?

9THER. ERB IN EFERBINGTO THELOWER COUTS ECISION THAT NO SUICIAN MISCONDUCT WAS COMMITTED BHTHE TRIAL J

Whether the lower courts erred in finding that Mr. Hope was not prejudiced by mistrial counters due to his failure to object to the trial court's lack of jurisdiction