1. When there is case and questions before the Court on a writ of certiorari awaiting
judgment, #23-7059 Alissa Peterson, Petitioner v. Jackson County Department of
Health and Human Services, et al, this court has acknolwdged defendants ' appeals
challenging the District Court 's order and the uncontested issues added there in by
the Supreme Court of Michigan regarding that case in an added issure concerning
intentful repeated poor legal representation and violations of rights and related
federal question ...
Then the question presented is whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing
the Attonery Grievance Commission and Judicial Tenure Commission to remand
the case issue to the lower court or Michigan Supreme court without delay. Court
should clarify what remedy exsists that has not already been sought and expired for
this added issue therefore purging the taint from the judicial holding in Gideon v.
Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963) regarding pre-trails and the 6th Ammendement
that without assistance of FAIR legal representation the ""noble ideal " of "fair trails
cannot be realized" Court should clarify where justice realized and tangible? where
Judge Diane Rappleye violate the rules announced in Doe v. Doe, 99 Haw 1, 52 P3d
255 (Haw 2002) by filing and granting the petition against Alissa Peterson to begin
I with and, Court should clarify under what circumstlances could Alissa Peterson
I "initiate" further legal mediation with prosecutor atid Judge and thereby purge the
taint from the Doe v. Doe violation of Res Judicata and Estoppel? Where legal
representaions sought for divorce specifically Att Joanne Laux of South Central
Legal Services in 2014 and Rebecca Kerr/ Calebs who also drafted a divorce for
MS. Peterson in 2019 and Bert "Tiger" Whitehead IV who wrote the divorce
finalized in 2019 violate law with no sworn affidavits of patemage ? Court should
clarify where has the legal standard for fair and equal treament been satsfied by the
14th ammendment and also in regard to the best interest of the children
specifically? Where Prosecution and Appointed legal counsel of Ms Peterson
violate Sworn Ethical Code law ,The accused's Right to Education, the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 affrimative defense and federal rules of evidence
Rule 26. Duty to Disclose Depriving the accused of their right to "presumed
innocence by law" aka "Innocent until proven guilty" Court should clarify the legal
and judicial holding in Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963) regarding pre
trails and the 6th Ammendement that without assistance of FAIR legal
representation the ""noble ideal " of "fair trails cannot be realized" Where MS.
Peterson sought help repeatedly from South Central Legal services for multiple
issues how is the noble ideal "realized" if the poor indigent accused with crime has
to face their accusers without a lawyer to assist them?

2. Where Prosecutors and state Attorneys both detained and appointed violate civil
rights of Alissa Peterson repeatedly over the span of 10

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the Attorney Grievance Commission and Judicial Tenure Commission to remand the case issue to the lower court or Michigan Supreme court without delay