Roman Vladimirovich Serpik v. Oklahoma

Whether an INFORMATION filed on January 25, 2023 (CM-2023-31, Beckham County) is constitutionally valid when signed by Assistant District Attorney Gina Farris Webb whose statutory oaths of office were not on file, and whether such an INFORMATION may lawfully designate the defendant under the resjudicata entity name “ROMAN SERPIK’ from TR-2020-1163 (Beckham Co. Okla 12/08/2020-12/09/2020) rather than the certified identity “ROMAN VLADIMIROVICH SERPIK” (See prosecutor oath requirements! Trade name for LLC)

Whether structural defects arising from identity variance, intentional caption conversion, and record obstruction violated Petitioner’s federal constitutional rights and rendered the state post-conviction process fundamentally unfair. (See structural defects)

Whether the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals violated due process and its own binding mandate (M-2023-910, Footnote 1) by issuing the August 14, 2026, Order and Mandate under the defective entity caption “ROMAN SERPIK,” despite the jury verdict identifying the defendant as “Roman Vladimirovich Serpik” and requiring all versions of the name to be included in subsequent proceedings. (See caption defects)

Whether due process is violated when a state appellate court issues a mandate under a defective entity caption (“ROMAN SERPIK’) that contradicts the County Clerk’s certified record identifying the defendant as “ROMAN VLADIMIROVICH SERPIK,” the trade name of Roman Serpik LLC (Last 4 SSNZEIN-2305). (See Oklahoma Articles of Organization for Roman Serpik LLC) is Appearing: Sui juris. De- jure at Common Law pursuant Supremacy Clause. Not “pro se”