In Re Arthur Edward Ezor

Was it was a denial of procedural and sub­ stantive due process for the lower Court to not order dismissal of the subject criminal case with prejudice against Petitioner/Defendant Arthur Edward Ezor (“Ezor”)?

Was it was a denial of procedural and substan­ tive due process for the lower Court to not order dismissal of the subject criminal case with prejudice against Ezor due to a finding of prosecutorial miscon­ duct?

Did the prosecutor’s intentional intrusion into the attorney-client relationship constitute a direct interference with the Sixth Amendment rights of Ezor, and was it a per se violation of said Sixth Amendment?

Was Ezor denied the fundamental and due process right to a fair adversary proceeding as a criminal defendant due to the illicit actions of the prosecutor in violating the 6th Amendment?

Was Ezor denied equal protection of laws and treated disparately and unfairly from other criminal defendants by virtue of the aforesaid prosecutorial misconduct and denial of fair pretrial criminal pro­ ceedings?

Did the Honorable Supreme Court of California commit prejudicial constitutional and reversible error in not ordering the Superior Court of State of Cali­ fornia for the County of Los Angeles to dismiss the criminal case against Ezor with prejudice, via the Writ of Mandate presented to it?