In Re Deryl Nelson

The magistrate issued an arrest warrant without probable cause based on a complaint that was not sworn to but instead signed by an unknown person functioned as the complaining witness to make it appear that the arrest warrant was properly issued. This act and omission violated numerous federal laws including the Fourth Amendment that requires an arrest warrant to be issued upon a finding of probable cause supported by Oath of affirmation. I. DID THE STATE APPEALS COURT ERR WHEN IT RE­ ACHED A DECISION THAT THE COMPLAINT MET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ABSENT OF A OUDICIAL FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE? II. DID THE STATE APPEALS COURT ERR WHEN IT RE­ ACHED A DECISION THAT THE PROBABLE CAUSE WAS ESTABLISHED TO CONVICT PETITIONER AT PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION RATHER THAN DECID­ ING WHETHER WAS THERE PROBABLE CAUSE AT THE FIRST OUDICIAL HEARING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE ARREST WARRANT? III. DID THE STATE APPEALS COURT ERR WHEN IT RE­ ACHED A DECISION THAT PETITIONER DID NOT RECEIVE INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL WHERE THE RECORD SHOW COUNSEL FAILED TO AT­ TACK THE VALIDITY OF THE COMPLAINT AND WAR­ RANT VIA EVIDENTIARY HEARING AND WITHDREW THE MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING AFTER THE JUDGE INSISTED THAT THE HEARING WAS NEEDED?