1. Whether Petitioner's allegations of violation, abridgment and denial of his constitutional rights by the named defendants' ignoring and violating the mandatory statutory rules of construction: after repeated requests, by Petitioner that his rights were/are being violated, denied him of his rights under the CONSTITUTION?

2. Whether the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals erroneously dismissed his appeal when, Petitioner made attempts to properly effectuate his action although based upon the Covid-19 Epidemic wherein mail was delayed and/or untimely, he has tried his best but the Court ignored his pleas thereof and therefrom?

3. Whether the District Court erroneously dismissed Petitioner's cause of action without accepting the factors involved herein (Covid-19 Epidemic), that may have been and was a factor in his mail being delayed causing said same to arrive at irregular times; were it not for said epidemic such mailing would not have been late and the court committed error in not taking such account(s) INTO CONSIDERATION?

4. Whether Petitioner's issues are of constitutional magnitude claiming violation by the defendants and should never have been denied or dismissed as said claims are cognizable by statutory and constitutional law, and Petitioner requests this Court to grant his Writ of Certiorari and such other and further relief as deemed appropriate and proper within its discretion?

5. Whether the District Court committed irreversible error and abuse of discretion and powers when it failed, refused, or ignored to rule on Petitioner's issues against the named Defendants in their individual Capacities?

6. Whether constitutional provisions in state law which mandates certain procedures be followed but are not followed and are ignored, although requests are made to state authorities to follow said procedures upon which state and federal constitutional rights are violated, constitutes a denial, abrogation and violation of state procedures and personal constitutional rights OF AN INDIVIDUAL?

Whether the petitioner's due process rights were violated when he was misinformed about the length of his life sentence and parole eligibility requirements