In Re Santos Cuevas

May the Sixth Amendment in retroactive by the state allow remedy to initial and successive post-conviction proceedings, if so, may the right to effective assistance of counsel at trial, direct appeal extend to these proceedings, and if so, may a post­ conviction court, on initial or subsequent petition have the authority to reverse, modify or change the highest court’s opinion and statement of law and with an innocence claim?

Does judicial estoppel doctrine or estoppel by judgment bar misstatements of law when a judge avoids submitting an aggravated fact to the jury instead imposes a bench trial equates to a second prosecution with mandatory guidelines ‘prior conviction sentence increase’ to all the indicted convictions found by the judge not the jury, under federal law and to bar burdens at sentencing on a criminal defendant to show that if findings require a concurrent sentence in order to reduce his sentencefrom being subject to prior convictions that which otherwise would aggravate the crime and sentence, here alleged to violate the double jeopardy federal law and on joinder of alleged counts on two alleged victims, at three different locations, and bar affirmance that the verdict does not implicate the Sixth Amendment without a jury poll and without special jury instructions , and does it violate the Eighth Amendment Ex-post facto, and double jeopardy federal law and fifth amendment Santos Cuevas 11207100