Roy Dahlin Reserved for Clerk’s Filing Stamp.
9 Mermary Drive., Fredericktown, Ohio 43019
740-398-6842.
Imported Hotshot Defense Lawyer 888 476 8954
This document is http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8474.pdf , http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8474.html http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8474.rtf and http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8474.wpd
Mount Vernon Police/ Municipal Court
Judge Paul E. Spurgeon
5 North Gay Street, 3rd Floor, Mount Vernon, Ohio 43050
http://www.mountvernonmunicipalcourt.org/criminal.htm
Clerk Lisa Hart, a high school graduate, having unlawfully and unconstitutionally (in violation of her oath of office) 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 State of Ohio”
Plaintiff
v
Roy Dahlin, age 65,
One of the actual People of Ohio.
Putative Faux non-Defendant
Case Number
Ticket Number 48581
1st Substantive Motion for Defendant.
Document #8474 Version 1.001
Demand for adjournment/ continuance/ postponement of arraignment on March 26 to consider this motion.
Demand to Quash due to the clerk’s having usurped the power of the prosecutor and for failure to file a complaint.
Demand for recordation by a stenographic court reporter.
Demand for prompt e-transcript of every hearing by email to my address shown above.
Date: Tuesday 24 April 2007
Time: 1:30 pm
Place: Court of Judge Spurgeon
Demand to Quash. Demand to Vacate. Waiver of time.
To Clerk Lisa Hart, Judge Spurgeon, and the police officer: You have all conspired and 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 the court dismiss this case. Not one of you is a prosecutor. Some of you work for the court; the court’s job is to be a neutral judge - 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. I waive my right to a speedy trial as necessary to vindicate my legal rights. You should have advised me well; you didn’t. If there were a neutral prosecutor I could have worked this out with him. You may not be both judge and prosecutor.
Signed _________________ Roy Dahlin Friday, March 23, 2007
Contents of this Demand to Quash/ Dismiss:
Notice of Concurrent and Upcoming Motions and Demands
Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of prosecutor; Dismissal is my remedy.
Police officer has usurped the clerk’s role.
Declaration of Attorney Douglas Palaschak regarding Summonses
A ticket can never be a summons.
Table of Authorities and Fountains of Liberty cited herein:
U.S. Constitutional Clauses Cited herein:
List of Clauses from the Ohio Constitution cited herein:
List of U.S. Supreme Court cases cited herein:
Illinois, California, and other Foreign Constitutions rightfully cited herein:
Table of Statutes cited herein:
List of Foreign state cases cited herein:
Argument. Memorandum of Points and Authorities.
Under U.S. Constitution IV, 2, I am entitled to Georgia, Illinois, and California rights
I am entitled to utilize the constitutional concepts expressed in foreign constitutions.
Fountains of Liberty: Magna Charta, 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights.
I am a beneficiary of the rights declared by the California constitution.
The clerk and judge have usurped the prosecutorial function; that is wrong. Dismissal is the remedy.
A defendant may appear by motion.
Permitting Police to Summon me to court denies Equal Protection Under the Law
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.
Appendix: Ohio Bill of Rights as amended to 1974.
Notice of Concurrent and Upcoming Motions and Demands
1. I will be filing a motion to suppress all evidence in this case.
2. Regarding the Pretextual Stop using the instrument of a vague and overbroad statute, I will be challenging the statute should that issue arise. All traffic laws are merely recommendatory. Otherwise the statutes would be oppressive. I will be moving in that regard.
I was ticketed in a pretextual traffic stop.
Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of prosecutor; Dismissal is my remedy.
There was no legal basis for this traffic stop/ ticket. Even if there were a basis for the stop, a prosecutor 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.
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.
Roy Dahl has retained me to vindicate and preserve his constitutional rights in this matter. I need some time. I have not yet even mailed my book to Roy. He won’t receive it until at least 28 March.
For over a quarter century I have studied the tactics and methodology of traffic courts. They are an instrument of oppression. Over half of my work consists of writing motions for traffic court. I see the same patterns in nearly all the 50 states. Feudalism is a natural system. As civilized people we rise above the medieval cruelty that was feudalism.
Police court retains the vestiges of both feudalism and the Inquisition. Proof: “Mr. Smith, you are accused of going 50 in a 35. How do you plead.” Mr. Smith never thinks to ask “Who accuses me?” It is obvious: the court accuses you! When the court is the accuser and the judge, then the system is Inquisitorial and not Adversarial. Such is this police court of Mount Vernon. Masquerading under the euphemism of “municipal court” changes nothing. This is military power used unconstitutionally against
the people.
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. The clerk has demonstrated a bias for the prosecution. Also, the clerk is paid by the money earned by the ticket that she prosecutes.
Your pretext for prosecuting this defendant is violation of a license. The license is a legal fiction. We are each entitled to use the roads! It is only by incessant stealthy encroachment that the police state now treats the roads as its private fiefdom. The right to use the highway has been eroded and diminished until today it is no longer a right of the people but a franchise of the state.
The police power stems from a medieval concept of questioning every stranger. The police court has been an instrument of institutional oppression. Your name has now been changed to the euphemism of “municipal court” but the game remains the same. Your name change is part of your institutional deceit.
You are a mockery to justice.
No. This will not stand.
Signed by Roy Dahlin with Special Permission of Palaschak _____________________. 3/23/07
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 14th amendment 1
Griffin v Illinois (1956)100 L Ed 891, 351 US 12, 79 S Ct 585, 55 ALR2d 1055 I have a right to a transcript even if I cannot afford one. http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/griffin.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
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 14th amendment. 1
List of Clauses from the Ohio Constitution cited herein:
Ohio Bill of Rights as amended to 1974. Appended to this brief. 1
Ohio Constitution: Art. Sec. 16. All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in his
land, goods, person, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and shall have justice
administered without denial or delay. Suits may be brought against the state, in such courts and in such
manner, as may be provided by law. (Adopted Sept.3, 1912.)
1
Ohio 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. 1
List of U.S. Supreme Court cases cited herein:
Bell v Burson (1971) 402 US 535, 29 L Ed 2d 90, 91 S Ct 1586,
http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/Burson.html 1 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/bursonb.html 2
3
MLV v SLJ (1996) 519 US 102; 117 S Ct 555; 136 L Ed2d 473 http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/mlb.html 1 Right to a free transcript even in some civil cases. 2
Norton v Shelby County, Tennessee (1886) 118 U.S. 425 . “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it
confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal
contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/norton.html 1
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
U.S. v Gonzalez-Lopez 2005-352. Decided 2006. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8345.html 1 2
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 1st amendment, the 6th, and the 14th 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:
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
List of Foreign state cases cited herein:
People v Dragomir Feb 14, 2006 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/Dragomir.html 1 2
People v Carlucci 1979 http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/Carlucci.htm 1
http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/carlucc.html 2 3
Argument. Memorandum of Points and Authorities.
I have a right to a remedy. Thirty-five states include a “right to a remedy” in their constitution. Ohio is one such state. The list is at the following hyperlink: Constitutional Right to a Remedy http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8428.html
Our Ohio constitution guarantees my right to a remedy for today’s denigration of my right to a jury and transcript:
Ohio Constitution: Art. Sec. 16. All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in his land, goods, person, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and shall have justice administered without denial or delay. Suits may be brought against the state, in such courts and in such manner, as may be provided by law. (Adopted Sept.3, 1912.)
You can’t take away a driver license without a hearing. That’s what the Supreme Court said: Bell v Burson (1971) 402 US 535, 29 L Ed 2d 90, 91 S Ct 1586, http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/Burson.html http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/bursonb.html . Therefore the purported suspension by a mere high school graduate was void ab initio.
This void act was a legal nullity. Norton v Shelby County, Tennessee (1886) 118 U.S. 425 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/norton.html
“An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” - The U.S. Supreme Court in Norton v Shelby (1886)
A void act does not become valid by the running of time.
My right to a transcript even if I cannot afford one is guaranteed by the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution. The Supreme court ruled so in Griffin v Illinois (1956)100 L Ed 891, 351 US 12, 79 S Ct 585, 55 ALR2d 1055 http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/griffin.html . The Supreme Court reaffirmed that right even in some civil cases in 1996. MLV v SLJ (1996) 519 US 102; 117 S Ct 555; 136 L Ed2d 473 http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/mlb.html
The state constitution and the 7th amendment guarantee my right to a jury trial.
My right to counsel of choice is guaranteed also. The Supreme Court ruled on this in 2006 in the case of U.S. v Gonzalez-Lopez 2005-352. Decided 2006. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8345.html
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:
I am entitled to utilize the constitutional concepts expressed in foreign constitutions.
All people in all states, including Washington, are entitled to the rights of Californians, except the right to vote in California state and local elections, which, or course, 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 14th amendment which states:
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 14th amendment.
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 a driver need not register himself at every state border. Neither should a statute require that I re-register my car upon residing in a state more than 60 days or whatever that state requires. 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 every state are beneficiaries of the liberating clause of the constitutions of Illinois and California as well as our own. We have 51 fountains of liberty from which to drink:
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. - Illinois Bill of Rights.
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 4th amendment. Here is that first flowery meaningless clause:
California constitution - same as Ohio 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-toc.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.
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.
I have addressed the search issue in a concurrent motion listed at another section in this brief.
The clerk and judge have usurped the prosecutorial function; 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 course of generations, 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
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 me to court denies Equal Protection Under the Law
When I want to sue the police I must jump through the hoops 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 state constitution and the 14th 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 no jurisdiction over me until a prosecutor files a complaint. 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 _________________Roy Dahlin Friday, March 23, 2007
I, Roy Dahlin, served this document at the criminal filing window. No service on the prosecutor is necessary because no prosecutor has appeared in writing in this case. I served the clerk at the filing window by hand delivery in court on this day.
Signed ______________________ Friday, March 23, 2007
Appendix: Ohio Bill of Rights as amended to 1974.
Preamble:
We, the people of the State of Ohio, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and promote our common welfare, do establish this Constitution.
Article 1. Bill of Rights:
Sec. 1. All men are, by nature, free and independent, and have certain inalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and seeking and obtaining happiness and safety.
Sec. 2. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter, reform, or abolish the same, when ever they may deem it necessary; and no special privileges or immunities shall ever be granted, that may not be altered, revoked, or repealed by the General Assembly.
Sec. 3. The people have the right to assemble together, in a peaceable manner, to consult for their common good; to instruct their Representatives; and to petition the General Assembly for the redress of grievances.
Sec. 4. The people have the right to bear arms for their defence and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.
Sec. 5. The right of trial by jury shall be inviolate, except that, in civil cases, laws may be passed to authorize the rendering of a verdict by the concurrence of not less than three- fourths of the jury. ( Adopted Sept. 3,1912.)
Sec. 6. There shall be no slavery in this state; nor involuntary servitude, unless for the punishment of crime. Sec. 7. All men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own con- science. No person shall be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or maintain any form of worship, against his consent; and no preference shall be given, by law, to any religious society; nor shall any interference with the rights of conscience be permitted. No religious test shall be required, as a qualification for office, nor shall any person be incompetent to be a witness on account of his religious belief; but nothing herein shall be construed to dispense with oaths and affirmations. Religion, morality, and knowledge, however, being essential to good government, it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to pass suitable laws, to protect every religious denomination in the peaceable enjoyment of its own mode of public worship, and to encourage schools and the means of instruction.
Sec. 8. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety require it.
Sec. 9. All persons shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses where the proof is evident, or the presumption great. Excessive bail shall not be required; nor excessive fines imposed; nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Sec. 10. Except in cases of impeachment, cases arising in the army and navy, or in the militia when in actual service in time of war or public danger, and cases involving offenses for which the penalty provided is less than imprisonment in the penitentiary, no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous, crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a grand jury; and the number of persons necessary to constitute such grand jury and the number thereof necessary to concur in finding such indictment shall be determined by law. In any trial, in any court, the party accused shall be allowed to appear and defend in person and with counsel; to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, and to have a copy thereof; to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to procure the attendance of witnesses in his behalf, and a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed; but provision may be made by law for the taking of the deposition by the accused or by the state, to be used for or against the accused, of any witness whose attendance can not be had at the trial, always securing to the accused means and the opportunity to be present in person and with counsel at the taking of such deposition, and to examine the witness face to face as fully and in the same manner as if in court. No person shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself; but his failure to testify may be considered by the court and jury and may be the subject of comment by counsel. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. ( Adopted Sept.3,1912.)
Sec. 11. Every citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of the right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech, or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury, and if it shall appear to the jury, that the mat- ter charged as libelous is true, and was published with good motives, and for justifiable ends, the party shall be ac- quitted.
Sec. 12. No person shall be transported out of the State, for any offense committed within the same; and no conviction shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture of estate. Sec. 13. No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner; nor, in time of war, except in the manner prescribed by law.
Sec. 14. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and possessions, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated; and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be search- ed, and the person and things to be seized.
Sec. 15. No person shall be imprisoned for debt in any civil action, or mesne or final process, unless in cases of fraud.
Sec. 16. All courts shall be open, and every person, for an injury done him in his land, goods, person, or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law, and shall have justice administered without denial or delay. Suits may be brought against the state, in such courts and in such manner, as may be provided by law. ( Adopted Sept.3, 1912.)
Sec. 17. No hereditary emoluments, honors, or privileges, shall ever be granted or conferred by this State.
Sec. 18. No power of suspending laws shall ever be exercised, except by the General Assembly. Sec. 19. Private property shall ever be held inviolate but subservient to the public welfare. When taken in time of war or other public exigency, imperatively requiring its immediate seizure or for the purpose of making or repairing roads, which shall be open to the public, without charge, a compel- sation shall be made to the owner, in money: and in all other cases, where private property shall be taken for public use, a compensation therefor shall first be made in money, or first secured by a deposit of money; and such compensation shall be assessed by a jury, without deduction for benefits to any property of the owner.
Sec 19(a) Damages for wrongful death. The amount of damages recover- able by civil action in the courts for death caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of another, shall not be limited by law. ( Adopted Sept.3,1912)
Sec. 20. This enumeration of rights shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people; and all powers, not herein delegated, remain with the people.
citizens in the several states
clause of the state constitution
province of the elected prosecutor