1. Does a false conviction from a "fatally defective" Indictments violate the Constitutional Rights of Due Process Clause - if a key part of the prosecution's case was based on "unlawful" and "unconstitutional" concealment of exculpatory evidence — as "MATERIAL FACT" - that the "Defendant" and the "Complainant" in the Invalid, Defective Indictments — are "factually" and "legally" are one of the same persons as the Petitioner; and that later developments have proven were fraudulent (or "Fraud on the Courts") — as presented at Trial??

If so, what legal standard governs this claim?

2. Does the findings that the grand jury issued indictments and / or the petit jury false "guilty" verdict — both were based on fraudulent affidavits; false arguments; inadmissible evidence; false statements to law enforcement; false evidence; or perjured testimony, that was initiated by the prosecution "unlawfully" and "unconstitutionally"; and did the petit jury and the Texas Court of Appeals "constitutionally" made findings in accordance with the "Statutory Law" or "Texas Penal Code": and that later development have proven false and fraudulent - does this gives rise to an action under 42 U.S.C. 1983 for a violation of the United States Constitution, and the Texas State Constitution?

If so, what legal standard governs this claim?

3. Did the Trial Court — as a matter of statutory law - have proper jurisdiction to proceed without a lawful, proper probable cause(s) - under Texas State Law, standing alone; and if so, gives rise to an action for a violation of the United States Constitution and Texas State Constitution claims, arising from adversary actions in the Petitioner's actual innocence claims? And that when the Trial Counsels failed to file a pre-trial motion to dismiss "invalid, defective indictments" or made timely objections — during the Trial, yet failed to announce to the Trial Court that the "Indictments" are "fatally flawed" and "void", and to move the Trial Court for dismissal of indictments ~ "as a matter of statutory law" — for the Trial Court did not have the proper jurisdiction to preside over the case and to validate that a "constitutionally deficient" indictments violates the "Fifth Amendment Righis" "..no person shall be held to answer for...infamous crimes that never occurred..."?

Whether the lower court erred in dismissing the petitioner's claims