8423 Version 1.000

Your Constitutional and Common Law Right to Use Foreign Law! A new theory by Lawyerdude.

This sub-document is: Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8423.html Right to use foreign law. See also Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8428.html the right to a remedy. Derived from http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/1538.html Related pages: Section 1538.5 is found at FindLaw at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/1523-1542.html Mark Henning’s motions: Notice of Interlocutory Appeal: Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7739.html and Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7739.pdf Motion to Suppression Evidence: Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7732.html and Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7732.pdf

Related page: At least 4 state constitutions specifically enunciate your right to a remedy. Here is what the Illinois constitution says. Article 1. Bill of Rights. Section 12. Right to remedy and justice. “Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries and wrongs which he receives to his person, privacy, property or reputation. He shall obtain justice by law, freely, completely, and promptly. “ For more details see http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8428.html

This article is cited in: Advice to strip club owner: http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8437.html

This theory pertains to a: Motion to Suppress Evidence - The Most Important Motion. From this motion you are entitled under California statute PC 1538.5 to an Interlocutory Appeal. You are entitled to use the best law from the most advanced state - and the best words from the most advanced criminal lawyer! Lawyers are not fungible . Demand the best. Also: Demand the O. J. standard !

Rights are taken, not given!

Powerful and Empowering Constitutional Clauses cited herein:

Amendment 9: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

And again regarding abridgment: “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.” - 14^th amendment.

Article IV. Clause2: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Empowering Supreme Court Cases cited herein:

Miranda 1966 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/miranda.html

U.S. v Weeks 1914 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/weeks.html

List of State Constitutional Clauses cited herein. Significance: If you litigate this, then argue Independent State Grounds and use your own state constitutional clauses to prevent usurpation by the Supreme Court.

“Every person shall find a certain remedy in the laws for all injuries and wrongs which he receives to his person, privacy, property or reputation. He shall obtain justice by law, freely, completely, and promptly. “ - Illinois constitution. Texas constitution is similar.

You in Texas and Wisconsin are entitled to employ statutes from California! Brothers and sisters, as I write this on a Sunday morning I am filled with the Holy Spirit! God has blessed us with this tool of the internet! God gave us this tool to make us free! Can I get an Amen ! Many of our brothers and sisters today are suffering the isolation of imprisonment due to the forces of evil that are at work in our country. They have been ensnared in the traps set by misguided legislators. God gave us this tool called the internet so that we may rise up and free ourselves from the slavery of oppressive government run rampant ! Click on this link and find out how to use your right to Suppress Evidence and appeal that issue before trial! http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/1538.html

God helps those who help themselves! Rights are taken, not given! All Supreme Court cases arise from litigants - not the court! I am thinking of our deceased brother Gideon who sat there in a jail cell thinking that he was wrongly convicted. Like our brother Mark Henning in prison in Wisconsin, Gideon was denied effective assistance of counsel . Brother Gideon wrote a letter in pencil and eventually the U.S. Supreme Court answered him! The court gave Gideon a remedy. The court ordered that Gideon be given a new trial with the assistance of a lawyer even though he could not pay for a lawyer. This time Gideon won.

Your time in jail can be a time of reflection and learning. Remember that Gideon prevailed - but he had to communicate his plight to those who were in a position to grant him relief.

God gave us this prophylactic remedy called Suppression of Evidence. The Holy Spirit enlightened our Supreme Court way back in 1914 and caused them to enunciate the Suppression remedy for a violation of the 4^th amendment in the 1914 case of U.S. v Weeks http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/weeks.html . Click on this link to read the details about how you can benefit from the statutes in all the states even if your state failed to speak up for you! http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/1538.html Actually it comes from the ancestors of the Weeks case. This prophylactic remedy is similar and a cousin to the prophylactic remedy enunciated by the Supreme Court in the 1966 Miranda case:

http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/miranda.html The Miranda remedy is a prophylactic remedy for a wrongful violation of the 5^th amendment. The 4^th and 5^th amendments go hand in hand. In addition, two other clauses of the constitution go hand in hand:

Article IV. Clause2: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. Amendment 9: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

And yet two more:

Re: Abridgment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” And again regarding abridgment: “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.” - 14^th amendment.

(I am reminded of a habit of the brilliant Professor David Harrell of Ventura. He would write on the blackboard at each lecture. After the 4^th class the blackboard looked nearly the same for every class. That is because he gave emphasis to the most important cases and then deviated slightly to show where the new concepts fit in with the most powerful concepts. I find myself repeating the most important concepts - and often they are the same concepts emphasized by Professor David Harrell.)

Mere Statutes do not supersede your rights won since 1066 under the common law!

Here is what you won’t here from anybody except Lawyerdude: Statutes are merely the legislature’s work to state the law concisely. Statutes shorten 1000 years and 1 million pages of case law into 20 sentences on the subject. Therefore they cannot supplant the common law; they do not supersede the common law! The common law is natural law. Law is our attempt to do what is fair. Statutes cannot possible embrace every possible permutation. Exception: Where an informed populace has decided that it will deviate from the common law then our constitution gives the legislature that power - subject to judicial review.

The courts provide your remedy for majoritarian oppression . 30,000 compared to 600,000

The courts provide your remedy. The legislature does not. The legislature is the source of majoritarian oppression. The legislature should concern itself with building roads. In the worst parts of the country we have toll roads. These toll roads are a symptom of a legislature run amok. The place that can best afford roads have fat legislators spending your money on stuff like people control. Margie Strite, a student of the law, sent me a gift of a fascinating book pertaining to the constitution. This book reminds us that a Co ngressman may not represent less than 30,000 people. Today he represents 600,000 people. He cannot possibly represent you. This is a failure of representation. The same failure happens in the state legislatures. And yet some idiots continue to write to their legislators when they have a problem. Consider this: If you want to be heard individually then you can go to court. People read more cases than statutes. In other words, cases are more well thought out than statutes.

Statutes should have their reasons affixed to them - but they don’t.

For over a quarter century I have stated that “Statutes should have reasons affixed to them.” Sometimes the legislature will make a statement of legislative intent. However, there must be some reason why the reasons are almost never there in the statute. The reason for the lack of stated purpose/ reason behind the statute is the same reason that the sausage maker does not say much about why he makes sausage. The reason would disparage the statute. The legislature would be forced to admit that the statute is the product of dynamic tension - subject to change next year. The legislature would be forced to acknowledge that the statute is due to the effort of the lobbying efforts of powerful corporations. Indeed California legislators were proven to have accepted bribes in the 1980s and yet the legislation that was the product of those bribes remained on the books. The legislature would be forced to admit that this statute cannot possibly fit all situations - and this statute is a product of compromise of principles. If we knew the truth behind the statute we would have no respect for the statute! For this reason we do no abandon the common law and our common sense in light of a statute!

You and the statutes receive more attention from the judicial branch than from the legislative branch.

The legislature works best by dealing with the building of roads, bridges, and schools. They have no business in the subjects of torts and crimes.

The Common Law controls torts and crimes.

The interpersonal relationships between people is the subject of the laws of tort and crime. These subjects are spelled out uniformly in Gilbert Summaries of the Law - uniform throughout the country without regard to any statutes! I know. There are exceptions. The legislature spells out the punishment for crimes - but the judicial branch will readily throw out any punishment deemed unfair according to the common law.

The common law is the application of natural law. People say that we merely “find the law.” We find an appropriate Remedy. The subject of Remedies is one of 12 standard bar exam subjects that is uniform throughout the country regardless of state statutes. How is that? It is so because the issue has been resolved over the past 1000 years of civilization - since the days of Norman Conquest in 1066.

Here is my ultimate point: You Texans can feel free to borrow from the work of California’s Legislature!

Texans make chemicals. Texans grow beef in feedlots. Californians make movies and laws. The Texas legislature meets only once every two years and then for only 90 days. They are forced to spend a larger percentage of their time on the funding of roads and bridges. As late as 1971 you could shoot and kill your spouse if you found your spouse having sex with another person. Their legislature does not give much attention to the details pertaining to the law of criminal procedure.

The words are understandable.

Application: Denial of Suppression Motion without chance for pretrial appeal in Wisconsin.

Recently I wrote motions for Mark Henning, an inmate in Wisconsin. The Judge jammed up his case just like another judge that same week jammed up a case making headlines in another stated. In Wisconsin the did his trial before they did the Suppress Motion that we had scheduled. They did his trial despite our having taken away the jurisdiction of the trial court by filing notice of interlocutory appeal. Here is a link to my Notice of Interlocutory Appeal: Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7739.html and

Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7739.pdf Here is Mark Henning’s suppression motion: Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7732.html and Http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/7732.pdf

Mark Henning ’s case was prejudiced. He is in prison now. He was convicted solely on the testimony of the woman who was actually driving that night. It was her van. The police admitted that they did not see who was driving. She had to stop to puke. Mark could have testified at the Suppression Motion while retaining his right to refuse to testify at trial. Also, he should have testified at trial and I would have instructed him to do so but the court’s jamming action had the desired effect of preventing Mark from contacting me in the usual way - by internet.

Wisconsin does not forbid a conviction based solely on an accomplice but California does forbid such testimony via Penal Code section 1111. Query: Isn’t Mark entitled to invoke section 1111? Isn’t he entitled to the same rights as citizens of California? Isn’t that what article IV, clause 2 says? Article IV. Clause2: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. Mark was even denied counsel!

Royce from Texas inquires whether indeed California statute mandates that the suppression hearing be held on a separate day; the answer is Yes. You can prove that to yourself by reviewing the California Penal Code section 1538.5 at the clause I have listed in the “highlights/ table of contents” below.

California grants you an automatic delay between the day of the jury verdict and the day of sentencing. This enables you to prepare a notice of appeal - and to write words pertaining to sentencing.

There are so many specific procedures set forth in the California Penal Code. Incidentally Penal codes were adopted as a whole in the early days - when it saved time for the legislature. The rights of the human supersede the rights of the legislature. Now that some state legislatures have done more work than others, Mark is entitled to use the most advanced law.

Back to the Mark Henning case: What are those rights that are retained by the people as stated in the 9^th amendment? If there were not a 9^th amendment would we have these rights? Yes, we would. We are intelligent creatures. Article IV. Clause2: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. Amendment 9: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Mark has a right to benefit from the effort of California legislators who designated a specific procedure regarding the Suppression Motion. Citizens of Wisconsin are entitled to all the privileges of the citizens of California. The failure of Wisconsin’s legislature to lay out the procedure may not take Mark’s rights away. Mark’s rights are what he rightfully demands - even if no state or court has yet discovered that right. Mark has reached out and found lawyerdude. Lawyerdude reached out and sought protection from the court of appeal in Wisconsin. Lawyerdude notified the local court and they lost jurisdiction. They proceeded anyway without jurisdiction. Now Mark must find a remedy.

As for Royce in Texas, he likewise is entitled to benefit from the vision of other luminaries. Indeed why should Texas reinvent the wheel. Indeed why should the legislature be writing laws pertaining to our rights? Isn’t that the subject of natural law? Should we each be entitled to explore our minds and find the appropriate remedies? Rights are taken, not given. No state shall enact or enforce any law that would abridge the privileges and immunities of the people!

Thus spake Lawyerdude!

Heed my words!

Demand the O. J. standard ! We watched O. J.’s trial stretch over the course of a year. We did not hear Judge Lance Ito ever say to Johnny Cochran “Counsel, you can bring that motion on the morning of trial.” No. Never happened. They did however do Forrest Bishop’s motion along with his trial.

You need a separate hearing day before trial so that you can appeal before trial! In California (and by argument, the rest of the country) a denial of suppression is appealable before trial by application for writ to the court of appeal - spelled out in Penal code section 1538.5 as quoted below.

Highlights of Penal Code section 1538.5 regarding a Motion to Suppress Evidence for Violation of 4^th Amendment Search and Seizure Clause:

“(3) Any written response by the people to the motion described in paragraph (2) shall be filed with the court and personally served on
the defendant or his or her attorney of record at least two court.”

“(g) If the property or evidence relates to a misdemeanor complaint, the motion shall be made before trial and heard prior to trial at a special hearing relating to the validity of the search or seizure. If the property or evidence relates to a misdemeanor filed together with a felony, the procedure provided for a felony in this section and Sections 1238 and 1539 shall be applicable.”

Here is your right to appeal:

“After the special hearing is held, any review thereafter desired by the defendant prior to trial shall be by means of an extraordinary writ of mandate or prohibition filed within 30 days after the denial of his or her motion at the special hearing.