1. The primary question presented is whether a criminal court in
a state can renege on the dismissal of criminal cases when a
prior judge and/or the same judge has rendered a verdict of
dismissal? And does this action constitute judicial
misconduct?

2. Does a court lacking jurisdiction, which defies the federal
courts and the Connecticut Supreme Court, possess immunity
from civil liability or criminal prosecution for abuse of process
or any other civil/criminal law or tort? (e.g. Fraudulent
Misrepresentation, Defamation, Misconduct, Abuse of Process
and any statutory provisions listed herein)?

3. Do the prosecutors for the State of Connecticut possess
liability in civil or criminal cases that contravene double
jeopardy, the {U.S. Const, amend. XIII) and {U.S. Const, amend.
XIV), the anti-peonage act (42 U.S.C.S. § 1994), and have defied
the higher courts in favor of malicious prosecution and
defamation of a U.S. Congressman?

4. Did the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit err in its judgment by misleading Plaintiffs,
U.S. Congressman Edwin L. Rojas and the State of
Massachusetts Attorney General's Office, into believing that
the case (Rojas v. Connecticut, No. 23-7179,2023 U.S. App. LEXIS
34536 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 27,2023)) would be overturned in favor of
Appellant U.S. Congressman Edwin Rojas, consequently
dissuading the filing of a potentially disruptive brief by the
intervening party?

5. Did the United States Court of Appeals fail to appropriately
adjudicate the motion to add the State of Massachusetts as an
Appellant subsequent its leave to intervene, thereby
compromising the presentation of substantial evidence
indicative of violations of Massachusetts and Federal labor
laws by an identified interstate network of labor violators?

6. Was the case's (see id) dismissal executed without due
consideration of the severe violations articulated by the State
of Massachusetts Attorney General 's Office and U.S.
Congressman Edwin Rojas, which include allegations of acts
tantamount to peonage [42 U.S.C.S. § 1994)?

7. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals accord the Petitioner(s)
appropriate standing under the Thirteenth (U.S. Const, amend.
XIII) and Fourteenth (U.S. Const, amend. XIV) Amendments to
effectively initiate a civil action against a specific network of
labor violators alleged to be in contravention of federal and
multi-state legal provisions?

8. Petitioner(s) hereby challenge the Appellate court's dismissal
of the case (Rojas v. Connecticut, No. 23-7179, 2023 U.S. App.
LEXIS 34536 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 27, 2023)), and the designation of
the briefs, (id) and (l:23cv3140, Rojas Et Al V. State of
Connecticut Et Al (2023) 11th Cir. D.

Whether a state criminal court can renege on a prior dismissal of criminal cases and whether such action constitutes judicial misconduct or violates due process rights