William R. Jackson v. Georgia, et al.

Under-the Extradition Clause of the Constitution Art. TV, §2, cl, 2 and 13 tkS.L §3182 providing procedural safeguards of UCEA does not Subjects a person be removed from Asylum to Demanding State by a private, extradition company of idiom demanding State officials were members while employed by Ebe demanding state agency without arty Siate proceeding whatsoever in the asylum or demanding state's, for which, purported Only by Ci Corruptly, and fraudulently warrant to be detained and arrested from a departmental letterhead document, then token against his will. Accordiny to the above- mentioned, no proper warrant, no pre-extradition heaving.^ from Sending or demanding States, but directly confined without a Court Conviction or a"Board Viacrant^ preserving parole revocation hearing that no, nor any Court of Georgia would address tine issues or merits , but Met'fin !e the case, oronly deny or dismiss ^UJitkout prejudice"pursuant to"PlRfi" towards Cases filed while he was incarcerated from Us \3&& Conviction before he paroled in 2DH? and no io designate h\m as a "three-striker "to evade addressing the complete ttoncompliaricE criminal act's and malicious use of process by state officials A^ut caused an Illegal confinement from kidnapping, by imitating U.S. official clothing — aprivate extradition Company, Sunder L1EEA are" mandatory language" and petitioner anonConvi cted pv\s.oner or one awaiting pre-trial when these intentional violations occurred ogiainst him, then how does the PLRA Apply to bim ?