David Souza v. California

QUESTION 1 Does it violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the holding in Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) [“”] and the mandate of Napue v. Illinois, 360 U.S. 264 (1959) [“Napue”], when a state prosecutor does not acknowledge and correct false and/or misleading testimony at a preliminary hearing and/or at any pretrial hearing where the testimony was introduced, and where instead of immediately correcting the testimony, the state prosecutor continues to rely upon it even after being made aware that the testimony was not truthful? QUESTION 2 When a state prosecutor consolidates two separate and distinct cases into one case, and then proceeds to preliminary hearing, and thereafter files an Information thereon, is the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the holding in Berger implicated when that same state prosecutor thereafter, several years later, files a new Complaint (without seeking the permission required by statute) alleging new offenses based upon the same nexus of operative facts as in the initial case?