Adam Reeves, Pro Se

510 Buckhorn Tavern Rd., Dahlonega, GA 30533

706-265-5644

This document is http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8211.pdf

http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8211.html

and http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8211.wpd

Lumpkin County Courthouse Dahlonega, Georgia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dahlonega,_Georgia

The Clerk of Court, having unlawfully usurped the prosecutorial function that is solely the province of the elected prosecutor, dba under false color of law and corrupt legal fiction as “The People of Georgia”

Adam Reeve, one of the actual people of Georgia.

Case Number 06-07-008

1^st Substantive Motion for Defendant.

Document #8211 Version 1.003

Demand to Quash for failure to file a complaint.

Demand for recordation by a court reporter.

Demand for prompt e-transcript of every hearing by email to my address shown above.

Date: Tuesday, January 23, 2007.

Time: 1:30 pm

Place: _____________

Demand to Quash

To the clerk of court who has usurped the role of the prosecutor by filing a ticket in this case thereby initiating prosecution and bypassing the prosecutorial function: At the venue designated in the caption or at such other venue as the court shall designate, I will demand that you dismiss this case. You are not a prosecutor. The inquisition ended some years ago. You have done the work of the prosecutor and yet you don’t do my work. You should be neutral; you are not. “Equal Protection of the Law” is the law.

Signed _________________ Adam Reeves Tuesday, December 19, 2006.

Contents of this Demand to Quash/ Dismiss:

Notice of Concurrent and Upcoming Motions and Demands

Demand for Effective Assistance of Counsel.

Statement of the Case

Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of prosecutor; Dismissal is my remedy.

Police officer has usurped the clerk’s role.

Table of Authorities and Fountains of Liberty cited herein:

U.S. Constitutional Clauses Cited herein:

Georgia Constitution. Clauses cited herein:

Treaties cited herein:

Illinois, California, and other Foreign Constitutions rightfully cited herein:

Table of Statutes cited herein:

Cases cited herein:

Argument

Under U.S. Constitution IV, 2, I am entitled to Georgia, Illinois, and California rights

Fountains of Liberty: Magna Charta, 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights.

The Georgia Constitution: Independent State Grounds:

The statute employed in this case is too vague; it violated the Georgia constitution.

I am a beneficiary of the rights declared by the California constitution.

The clerk is acting as prosecutor; that is wrong. Dismissal is the remedy.

Declaration of Attorney Douglas Palaschak regarding Summonses

A ticket can never be a summons.

A defendant may appear by motion.

Permitting Police to Summon denies Equal Protection Under the Law

The Legislature may not give Police the Power to Summon and may not give Clerks the power to prosecute.

You are Equitably Estopped from Presuming a Waiver of Jurisdictional Challenge.

Pleadings of Pro Se Litigants must be given some leeway

Special Scrutiny and Prosecution for those who know the law denies equal protection.

Proof of Service

Topical Index

Notice of Concurrent and Upcoming Motions and Demands

1 The statute employed for prosecuting me is impermissibly vague and overbroad. I will be moving for dismissal for that reason.

2 Pretextual Stop using the instrument of a vague and overbroad statute. All traffic laws are merely recommendatory. Otherwise the statutes would be oppressive. I will be moving in that regard.

Demand for Effective Assistance of Counsel.

Statement of the Case

I have not yet been properly accused of having violated Georgia statute 40-6-390 or any law. Forty 6 390 reads as follows:

“40-6-390. (a) Any person who drives any vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons or property commits the offense of reckless driving. (b) Every person convicted of reckless driving shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 or imprisonment not to exceed 12 months, or by both such fine and imprisonment, provided that no provision of this Code section shall be construed so as to deprive the court imposing the sentence of the power given by law to stay or suspend the execution of such sentence or to place the defendant on probation. “ You can find this statute at:

http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/GaCode/?title=40&chapter=6&section=390

Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of prosecutor; Dismissal is my remedy.

There was no basis for the traffic stop. Even if there were a basis for the stop, a prosecutor he would be required to make the decision to prosecute - not this clerk. A prosecutor would have an ethical duty to reject this case. However, the clerk, being uneducated in the law violates my rights when she usurps the prosecutorial role as she has done here. Furthermore the clerk is biased in this case by loyalty to her employer. Money from my fine would be added to the fund that pays her. She has thereby caused the court to be unconstitutionally biased. See for example: Tumey v Ohio (1927) 273 U.S. 510. In this prohibition era case, the city received $5 for each conviction. The Tumey case can be see at:

http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/Tumey.html

Police officer has usurped the clerk’s role.

There has been a reciprocal usurpation. Ironically the police officer usurped the clerk’s function which is to summon people to court only after there is a case filed by a duly authorized person. There was no such complaint/ case when the usurpatious officer issued the faux, spurious summons/ ticket to me appear in court. My remedy is this motion to Quash .

To this date, I have been served neither a valid summons nor a verified complaint. I therefore demand dismissal. I demand that this court recognize that I have neither been properly summoned to court nor properly prosecuted by an authorized prosecutor. Instead a mere police officer performed the legal nullity of serving me a substitute for a summons. The officer has no authority to summon me to court; issuance of a summons is the duty of the clerk. The officer may not ordain himself a clerk even if the legislature so deems.

The clerk, who would ordinarily issue summonses, now elevates herself to the position of prosecutor by prosecuting this case without the requisite legal formality of a complaint signed by a complaining party/ witness. This is classic stealthy incessant encroachment. Only a prosecutor may lawfully file a complaint. The clerk may not ordain herself to the status of prosecutor.

Usurpation denies me Due Process. Both the federal and Georgia constitution guarantee me due process.

By stealthy encroachment our oppressive governments encroach. Corporations including governments enjoy eternal life and infinite wealth. They tell the lie over the course of generations. My children do not know the lie that the government told my parents. This truth about the lie is most obvious regarding income taxes. They were sold to Americans around 1909 as a tax that would never tax the wages of the working man. Example 2: In 1903 the federal government usurped the power of our various state militias by creating the National Guard and seizing control of the militias by co-opting/ incorporating them.

Every court wants to be a profit center. They incorrectly claim to be working for the greater good but they are not. Like all corporations they exist to serve their own; they thus create “the governing class” which is a parasitic class. Traffic tickets are the bite of these parasites. The city justifies traffic tickets as a means to raise revenue. In New Orleans the Public Defender is paid from revenue from parking meters.

In American the individual is king. All the aforementioned usurpations are destructive of our great country.

So now we have a dynamic tension: the struggle between the individual human and the corporate/ government for hegemony. Today the various governments have sent forth swarms of employees to eat up all our wealth.

This will not stand.

Table of Authorities and Fountains of Liberty cited herein:

U.S. Constitutional Clauses Cited herein:

Article IV, Section 2.: The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states. 1

Commerce Clause/ interstate commerce 1

Due Process Clause 1

Equal protection clause of the 14^th amendment 1

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. - Privilege and Immunities Clause of the 14^th amendment. 1

Georgia Constitution. Clauses cited herein:

Georgia’s Due Process clause. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law.” - Georgia constitution Article 1. Bill of Rights. Section I. Rights of Persons. Paragraph I. Life, liberty, and property. The Georgia constitution can be found at: http://www.law.emory.edu/GEORGIA/gaconst.html 1
2

Preamble to Georgia Constitution: To perpetuate the principles of free government, insure justice to all, preserve peace, promote the interest and happiness of the citizen and of the family, and transmit to posterity the enjoyment of liberty 1

Treaties cited herein:

Treaty. 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights“Article 20(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.” http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8213.html 1 This treaty, the 1^st amendment, the 6^th, and the 14^th amendments preclude the regulation of the practice of law by non-government lawyers. 2

Illinois, California, and other Foreign Constitutions rightfully cited herein:

California constitution: Section 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1 1 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/const-toc.html 2 3

Illinois constitution. Section 6. Searches, Seizures, Privacy, and Interceptions: The people shall have the right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and other possessions against unreasonable searches, seizures, invasions of privacy or interceptions of communications by eavesdropping devices or other means. No warrant shall issue without probable cause, supported by affidavit particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized
1

Illinois Constitution. Section 1. Inherent and Inalienable Rights: All men are by nature free and independent and have certain inherent and inalienable rights among which are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. To secure these rights and the protection of property, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. 1

Illinois Constitution: Section 2.Due Process and Equal Protection. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws.
1

Table of Statutes cited herein:

Georgia statute 40-6-390. http://www.legis.ga.gov/legis/GaCode/?title=40&chapter=6&section=390 (a) Any person who drives any vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons or property commits the offense of reckless driving. (b) Every person convicted of reckless driving shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not to exceed $1,000.00 or imprisonment not to exceed 12 months, or by both such fine and imprisonment, provided that no provision of this Code section shall be construed so as to deprive the court imposing the sentence of the power given by law to stay or suspend the execution of such sentence or to place the defendant on probation. 1

PC 949. The first pleading on the part of the people in a misdemeanor or infraction case is the complaint except as otherwise provided by law. 1

Penal Code§ 740 states as follows: Except as otherwise provided by law, all misdemeanors and infractions must be prosecuted by written complaint under oath subscribed by the complainant.
1

Cases cited herein:

People v Dragomir Feb 14, 2006 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/Dragomir.html 1 2

Haines v Kerner (1972) 404 U.S. 519 (1972) Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/haines.html 1 Pleadings of Pro Se litigants are entitled to some leeway. Haines v Kerner (1972) 404 U.S. 519 (1972) Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/haines.html 2 This ruling is consistent with statutes in nearly all jurisdictions. The law is not a trap for the unwary. For every wrong there is a remedy. 3

People v Carlucci 1979 http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/Carlucci.htm 1
http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/carlucc.html 2 3

Pousson http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/pousson.html 1 Not pertinent. 2

Spence http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7968.html 1 Not pertinent here. 2

Tumey v Ohio (1927) 273 U.S. 510. In this prohibition era case, the city received $5 for each conviction. http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/Tumey.html 1 The clerk has usurped the prosecutorial function - for profit. 2

Argument

Under U.S. Constitution IV, 2, I am entitled to Georgia, Illinois, and California rights.

Under the constitutional concept of “dual federalism” we are all beneficiaries of at least two constitutions, to wit: state and federal.

The federal constitution and the common law invest us with additional rights as follows:

All people in all states, including Georgia, are entitled to the rights of Californians, except the right to vote, which is reserved to California citizens. That is why I cite California law herein.

U.S. Constitution: Article IV, Section 2.: The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.

The officer violated the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14^th amendment which states:

Fountains of Liberty: Magna Charta, 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights.

We struggle to “find” the law. Example: A lawyer need not change his bar license upon entering a sister state. Once he has passed his test he has proven himself. Compulsion to join the compulsory bar violates the compulsory association clause of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights

“Article 20(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.” - Treaty. 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8213.html

Likewise I need not re-register my car every 60 days. Such a requirement violates so very many clauses in the various fountains of liberty. Example: To do so imposes an undue burden on interstate commerce. Both lawyers and drivers are subjected to ever tightening reigns of state governments. Governments by stealthy encroachment over the course of generations seek to fatten the corporate bureaucracies and extract greater percentages of the wealth of the citizenry which they view as their subjects. In the beginning we sought government to provide law and order - not to enslave and rule us.

Consider the portentous words of “our” Illinois constitution. By terms of the U.S. constitution, we free people of Georgia are beneficiaries of the liberating clause of ths constitutions of Illinois and California as well as our own. We have 51 fountains of liberty from which to drink:

There are 50 state constitutions. It is interesting to compare them and investigate their derivation. Consider the flowery language of the first paragraph of the California Constitution which is constantly under attack by Republicans shaming Lincoln and attempting to curtail our rights by, for example, limiting our own search prohibition so that it is no stronger than the 4^th amendment . Here is that first flowery meaningless clause:

The Georgia Constitution: Independent State Grounds:

The Georgia constitution can be found at http://www.law.emory.edu/GEORGIA/gaconst.html .

The preamble of our Georgia constitution reflects some bureaucracy and totalitarian influence by using the oxymoron “free government” as follows:

To perpetuate the principles of free government, insure justice to all, preserve peace, promote the interest and happiness of the citizen and of the family, and transmit to posterity the enjoyment of liberty . . - Preamble to Georgia Constitution.

The statute employed in this case is too vague; it violated the Georgia constitution.

Georgia’s Due Process clause: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property except by due process of law.” - Georgia constitution Article 1. Bill of Rights. Section I. Rights of Persons. Paragraph I. Life, liberty, and property. The Georgia constitution can be found at: http://www.law.emory.edu/GEORGIA/gaconst.html

I am a beneficiary of the rights declared by the California constitution.

I was exercising my California defined Section 1 rights as a free and natural human when the police officer unconstitutionally violated my rights to enforce his institutional corporate prejudice against drivers. My remedy is dismissal. Do it.

Our Illinois constitution forbids unwarranted searches.

I have addressed the search issue in a concurrent motion listed at another section in this brief.

The clerk is acting as prosecutor; that is wrong. Dismissal is the remedy.

This argument is based on the Due Process Clause of the U.S. constitution.

This argument is based on independent state grounds. The Illinois constitution makes it sound as though we created the government to serve us, not to govern us:

Illinois Constitution: Section 2.Due Process and Equal Protection. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law nor be denied the equal protection of the laws.

By stealthy encroachment over the court of generation, all governments and other corporations encroach upon the personal freedoms of humans. The human lives only 75 years. The father fails to warn the grandchild of the lies of the corporation. The lie remains unchallenged generations later due to human ignorance and mortality. The immortality of the corporation gives the government opportunity to encroach as such a speed as to be imperceptible by a single generation of humans.

The summons was originally a document issued by a civil court only after the civil prosecutor had made a decision to prosecute. As the court corporations became fatter they ordered the litigants: “write our summonses and bring them to use for signature”. Their fellow government minions in the legislature wrote the corresponding rules.

Then the courts saw the money flow and realized that they should promote the traffic ticket game by processing the tickets without a prosecutor.

The court recognized the power it wields in criminal case. If they converted a civil action into a criminal action they could then change their posture to an inquisitorial posture.

This is unconstitutional. The remedy is dismissal. Only a prosecutor can prosecute a criminal offense. This is not an administrative tribunal. If it were, there would be a hearing officer or administrative law judge.

The prosecution may not be done without any prosecutor. People v Carlucci 1979 http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/Carlucci.htm http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/carlucc.html People v Dragomir Feb 14, 2006 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/Dragomir.html

I hereby mention the cases of Pousson http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/pousson.html and Spence http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7968.html which I list for completeness and to say that they are not pertinent to my case.

Declaration of Attorney Douglas Palaschak regarding Summonses

I, Douglas Palaschak, declare the following under penalty of perjury: I am an Engineering Graduate of the University of Illinois, Urbana, where I was an honors student. I marched in “The Marching Illini”,the world’s undisputed Premiere Marching Band. I began my career as a Registered Professional Engineer having consulted for the U.S. Navy, Mobil, and Exxon. My expert testimony resolved a personal injury case where my calculations proved that a hydraulic accumulator could not contain sufficient oxygen for combustion to have overloaded the failed bolts.. This tended to prove that the cause of the explosion was a failed hydraulic safety valve.

I conceived and designed subsea machinery for the U.S. Navy. I performed the buckling analysis for the riser tubes and contributed to the design of the giant seafloor template for a quarter mile tall oil rig presently in service in the North Sea.

I have been a licensed lawyer for nearly a quarter century. I publish approximately 1200 legal articles on the internet. My areas of expertise are:

Licenses, Rights, and Privileges, and their use as Instruments of Oppression ,

Criminal Defense,

Internet-driven Improvements in the Efficiency of Litigation,

Empowerment of Pro Se Litigants,

Bankruptcy.

My most recent book is on the subject of Pre-trial Criminal Litigation of Malum Prohibitum Crimes. It is available by mail order via the internet.

A ticket can never be a summons.

A summons is required for the court to gain jurisdiction. A summons is a notification from the court addressed to the defendant in a pending case. A ticket is never a summons despite the intentions of the legislature. When a person write a ticket there is no pending case. There will be no pending case until a prosecutor has made a decision to prosecute. Then the prosecutor files a complaint. Only then is a summons possible. There is then a pending case. I would then have the opportunity to settle the case with the prosecutor. Most traffic courts today permit the clerk to prosecute the case. This practice is unconstitutional. It is an example of denial of equal protection. I would like the clerk to be working on my side of the case. The clerk has demonstrated a bias for the prosecution. Also, the clerk is paid by the money earned by the ticket that she prosecutes. No. This will not stand.

- Douglas Palaschak

A defendant may appear by motion.

I need not appear in person but may appear by motion. I have appeared as agreed by my signature on the notice to appear by entering this motion to quash .

The ticket is no kind of summons. To call it a summons is to redefine fundamental terms in the middle of the game. This denies me due process. Changing the terms is a common instrument of oppression. See the entire list of Modern Day Instruments of Oppression at:

http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/5724.html

Permitting Police to Summon denies Equal Protection Under the Law

When I want to sue the police I must jump through the hooks of a summons and complaint and filing fee. Conversely when he wants to “sue” me he uses his ticket book. Then the clerk prosecutes for him. Wouldst that my lawsuits against the police were that quick and easy. That difference denies me equal protection under the law. Your process violates the equal protection clause of the 14^th amendment . My remedy is dismissal. Do it.

The Legislature may not give Police the Power to Summon and may not give Clerks the power to prosecute.

Penal Code§ 740 states as follows:

Except as otherwise provided by law, all misdemeanors and infractions must be prosecuted by written complaint under oath subscribed by the complainant.

PC § 949 states as follows:

The first pleading on the part of the people in a misdemeanor or infraction case is the complaint except as otherwise provided by law. - PC 949

All criminal law follows the ancient common law. The statute merely codifies and distills what is already the law.

You are Equitably Estopped from Presuming a Waiver of Jurisdictional Challenge.

You have denied me discovery and thereby prevented me from knowing that there was no complaint in this case. You have denied me effective assistance of counsel. My appointed public defender Bolan has refused to answer my calls or meet with me or file any papers. You may not bootstrap that into a waiver of jurisdiction. You have no jurisdiction over me. There is no controversy. The police and clerk may not prosecute.

Pleadings of Pro Se Litigants must be given some leeway

Pleadings of Pro Se litigants are entitled to some leeway. Haines v Kerner (1972) 404 U.S. 519 (1972) Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/haines.html This ruling is consistent with statutes in nearly all jurisdictions. The law is not a trap for the unwary. For every wrong there is a remedy.

Special Scrutiny and Prosecution for those who know the law denies equal protection.

You may not now subject me (and only me) to prosecution by a prosecutor. To do so would punish me with special scrutiny for having performed this public service as a Private Attorney General. Though your purpose be masked as efficiency it is in truth mere corruption and fraud. You must dismiss my case now.

Signed _________________ Adam Reeves. Tuesday, December 19, 2006

Proof of Service

I, Adam Reed, served this document upon the prosecutor in this case by hand delivery to the prosecutor’s office on Tuesday, December 19, 2006.

Signed ______________________ Tuesday, December 19, 2006.

Topical Index

14th amendment 1 2

amendment 1 2 3

appear 1 2