Pirat AYv^e\> Btf\£5F,

I; feaOxawG a \y_^vj\ihktvT To A Wi/aSEEF buOU/& PoE/COAPW B0=*v\S ; A SQtCiAL (Lo^biXX<>f\) Of PaofiATEOrJ , vIolATE JXE- PROCESS ^ THE CoiSTT'eTXAJ Of VW= UXTET) STATES of A^EilrcA ?WITWESS A6ATX&T

n: GA/E stTqaJ Ca/O ^ XEfTXbAMS 'bEWXAL TUaT we COA'/'TPVTET) TWf CepAE T^OTXG ^SEX-oFfEA/bEfT PolvtbOAFTV TESTtX/G", A £f_ G^OmfAAfA/T DF 90'oF)ATT q\/( Be O-OivSlt^dED GftouAbS Foa GSooCMToyo ?

hl; Q v/ESTT om Caw a PoE/SoaPA <lx<?oaT Pe EMmc\) AS Ei/lbFXCe I/v Sopfoar Gf PJfVoCATTOXJ 7

T.\J \ QvjFSTI oa/ can; A PoLyOXApWfaS QffOfU EE BTEO-Eb AS FvtbEAC£ vTTfoiyr TV\£ AFVfo<L of TWt O-EPofUT BfWC PCESfA/T foe 0Xo5S - ty'^VN'tA/A TFoa; ?

V t Qtl£STXg M iToec. TWE bfA/iArL OF A Coayxwaa CE , i^O- AStki/AYE TtMf To patPwiE A bffEA/SE XV oPp<7SxTloAV JO OoLY^tVAfWfas ftffoeT (I&S ol-T Tio STATE-Tvbuceb) TA/EFfECXTVE ASS15TM4E Of G0o/0S8L ?

xx: TATAL CO^aT l\AvF TfE AroTf oll-TTN TO TkPoSE ATT>T\X dw/VL ftvtes AAb CcwwbXTroVS Of POoTSatTOa) d/1 Mv^-txo-/ 90ST- IMeqx^^T SoPQLVTSow &Ey0wb AWE SOOT' S OF TWE OOXGxwAE PLE\ 'QoEsTXON AGC&E A1£ wt ?

Whether the lower court erred in its interpretation of the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions