Other Criminal Charges & Offenses needs help to make questions more appealing to the supreme court

[lilibet98]

Hello, my name is William and I need your help.

I am going to be presenting these 2 questions to the Supreme Court, I understand that they are VERY picky on what cases to hear, and some judges even determine to grant or deny the writ by looking at the dang questions. I welcome any pointers to make these quesitons more "attractive" ...thanks.

Question 1) Is it a Rehabilitation Act 504 violation when an Federal Agent conducts a "Knock and Talk" intervew, gets a consent to search, and to gather evidence agaist a deaf subject without an sign language interperter present? If so- should the consent to search be suppressed?

Question 2) Did the 6th District Appeal court err to consider a (Pro Se) petitioner's argument, to an Affidavit, even though it was signed under Declaration under penalty of perjury rather than stating it was Petitioner's Affidavit?

Thanks for any pointers!

n.b. - These questions are from my deaf son who is in federal prison. I will ask him for clarity, should anyone ask.

 

[fredrikklaw]

Habeas Corpus!

LILIBET98:

Yes; it would help matters a lot if you could ask your son to be a bit more specific as to the purpose of posing these questions; or what does he hope to achieve, if you will. And from the information provided in your post, I can only assume that he (your son) wants to challenge the validity of the circumstances leading to his arrest, conviction, and the eventual and on-going incarceration in a Federal Prison. If that is the case, then sending mere questions to the Supreme Court of the Unites States, or indeed to any other court in the country for that matter, is not a potential solution to his dilemma. For two reasons.

In the first place, the Supreme Court does not provide answers to singular, vague questions no matter how well they are presented, unless the question(s) posed is part of a case involving issues of Federal Law over which the Court has appellate, albeit, discretionary jurisdiction.

Also, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is legislation prohibiting discrimination against individuals with disabilities to exclude them from participating in or receiving benefits from programs and activities which are Federally Funded. It has nothing to do with suppression of evidence in a criminal case. So I am afraid your son may have very well misinterpreted the Act in reading.

These type of cases, or questions rather, may be remedied or answered by way of a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Federal Court. Habeas Corpus is a writ which brings into question the validity of a person's incarceration and can be brought by either the prisoner himself or a person aiding him in this matter.

fredrikklaw