D/d "the f\faom Soperic^\po\ate {hp-Hoacr Nth Ammirrmt
Ktolttf b fte federal CardHstiund of due Prmss uJherfhe Court denied fdfdiortfS Spatial-Aches/} dtief MjfafhC&urfabJ&c/ ddiam
lf\tSbnicLrd offev/eio

D» Pehkdntr EsbU'ishihdt'the $dadOf ELearKve,
CJl-emmcuj mrued Iwidue^ pmcos,

l> Doe process ne^Utremmk applicable io CermmukhrrB.

2/ Pefdifjnsr d/d es-ktbiish ifi^hfhe fcowd denied hdri dm process'.

C, Did the AnTmcuSbdrh UncctGosey\ board of Ekewhrt
Qjemmvj pyoondonji is/hab f\num sjaPh ai^ortmm&
foulard Blade flfloda Sen offenders i/1 V/oldieyi ofpeh'h
Nfk Avc^drvusnt (dflhk due proves? ?

D' fchhsmr father clowns Erthfle him jp SpeacJ Action)
Relief i

L pthhmr u/a? enhHeA k relief on ks esp/aj fwfahrf'

2* fefihtmr fa/uU Cj> federally cdheM tug famch&fl w
d *petid asdics feditwn Seefinj raoM cfaCmmoHoyi
dmbd,

3« dhe peeked Support fehtifflef (Upums th<d~fhe
fcr\inr\G\ faoeud wfyiuij\vt clzMamoi d/d riofdo r\r\
(Ami mb iPs l&wcbiM
fbhe\n rtkd ypor\ fidfc in pfWlbivC dwtPkm iff hndi
oner

Whether the Arizona Board of Executive Clemency violated the petitioner's due process rights by denying his request for a commutation hearing without a meaningful investigation or hearing