Notice for a first appeal

1. Whether the dismissal of a criminal appeal for failure to respond to a notice that Petitioner never received while in a facility he was in the process of leaving, during continuous Bureau of Prisons custody, violated the Due Process Clause under Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (1950), and the right to a first appeal of right recognized in Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387 (1985), and Rodriquez v. United States, 395 U.S. 327 (1969). 2. Whether the loss of an entire first appeal of right through court-created notice failure constitutes structural error under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), requiring reinstatement without a showing of prejudice. 3. Whether the Fifth Circuit’s reinstatement of other appeals following materially identical notice failures, while denying Petitioner relief, denies the equal protection of the laws guaranteed against the federal Government through the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.