E.D.Ky.: Pleading a constitutional violation without saying how preserves nothing for review

“Cruz next present a series of direct challenges, obviously hoping one will stick. He generally asserts that his ‘conviction and sentence are violative of the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution.’ (DE 32, at 7). He claims violations of ‘his right to freedom of speech and to keep and bear arms and to petition, his right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure, his right to due process of law, his rights to counsel, to jury trial, to confrontation of witnesses, to present a defense, and to compulsory process, and his right to be free of cruel and unusual punishment under the Constitution.’ Id. …. Nowhere throughout his many submitted pages (as well as in reply) does Cruz append any meat to these claims’ bones. Quite to the contrary, he says he merely ‘pleaded [them] to protect the record … in the event of a change in law or new facts or circumstances which come to light during the litigation of this motion.’ Id. at 17.” United States v. Castenada, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179360 (E.D. Ky. Oct. 11, 2018).*