Michael Pierre Reserved for Clerk’s Filing Stamp.

4953 Vir Mar, Fair Oaks, CA 95628

916-515-8761

Lawyerdude: 888 476 8954

Lawyerdude1989@yahoo.com

This document is http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/9004.pdf http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/9004.html and http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/9004.wpd

Related documents: Picture of the ticket:

Superior Court of California for Solano County

The mission of this Solano Court is to (1) protect rights, (2) uphold the constitution and laws of California and the United States, and (3) provide impartial and accessible forum for the fair and expeditious resolution of legal matters.

Judge David Edwin Power, Supervising Civil Judge

Department 2, Room 201, Hall of Justice, 600 Union Avenue, Fairfield, CA 94533

Ex Parte’s heard Tues-Fri at 8:15 a.m.

http://www.solanocourts.com/ http://www.solanocourts.com/general/court/civil.htm

Michael Pierre,

Petitioner

CHP Officer Guy #13433,

State of California,

California Highway Patrol,

Solano (365) 3050 Travis Blvd., Fairfield (707) 428-2100

http://www.chp.ca.gov/depts_divs_offs/goldengate.html

Respondents.

Case Number

Document #9004 Version 1.001

Application for Order to Show Cause why this writ should not issue.

Application for Writ of Detinue or other Extraordinary Writ to Compel Respondents to return my 1985 BMW 735i .

Declaration of Petitioner consisting of a Chronology of Operative Events .

Argument, Points and Authorities.

Proposed Order.

Proof of Service

Proposed Venue:

Date: Thursday 17 November, 2008

Time: 8:15 a.m.

Place: Room 201, 600 Union Ave., Fairfield CA 94533

The Supreme Court has ruled that you can’t suspend a 9th grader from school without a pre-deprivation hearing . (Goss v Lopez. 1975 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8877.html ) You can’t even repossess a cook stove without due process. (Fuentes v Shevin 1972) You can’t automatically suspend a driver license. (Bell v Burson 1971) Surely then you can’t take a man’s sole means of transportation without a pre-deprivation hearing - especially when he lives 25 miles from town. If it is important enough to take his car, then it is important enough to take him before a judge immediately - or let him keep his car until the hearing.

Notice of Application for Order to Show Cause and for Extraordinary Writ.

At the venue designated in the caption or at such other venue as the court may designate, I will ask the court to Command the Petitioners to return my 1985 BMW 735i which was illegally seized by CHP officer #13433 on 24 December, 2007.

My Declaration consisting of a Chronology of Operative Events appears below. My legal reasoning appears further below in my Argument/ Memorandum of Points and Authorities.

Signed __________________ Michael Pierre. Monday, January 14, 2008

Contents of this Application for An Extraordinary Writ :

Affidavit. Chronology of Operative Events

Declaration of Expert Attorney Douglas Palaschak regarding the trend in the law toward recognition of the right to Due Process..

Table of Authorities and Fountains of Liberty cited herein:

Maxims of Jurisprudence Cited herein:

U.S. Constitutional Clauses Cited herein:

List of Clauses from the Oklahoma Constitution cited herein:

List of Clauses from the Washington Constitution cited herein:

List of Clauses from the Colorado Constitution cited herein:

List of Clauses from the Kansas Constitution cited herein:

List of Clauses from the Florida Constitution cited herein:

List of U.S. Supreme Court cases cited herein:

International Treaties cited herein:

Washington Supreme Court Cases cited herein:

Oregon cases cited herein:

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

Table of California Statutes cited herein:

List of California state cases cited herein:

Treatises and “Fundamental Things” cited herein:

Argument. Memorandum of Points and Authorities.

Part 1. Specific Constitutional Provisions and other arguments pertinent to the unconstitutional impoundment of my 1985 BMW.

The law does not expect the impossible.

My arguments against the state here are imputable to the tow company; they acted in collusion with the state.

This impoundment violates the 4^th amendment and §30 of the Oklahoma Bill of Rights

The 24^th section of the Oklahoma Constitution’s Bill of Rights forbids you to take my property without compensation.

I have a constitutional right to a “speedy and certain remedy for every wrong to . . property”

Part 2: These arguments are more generalized and included for sake of completeness. You may want to skip forward to the Summary of Argument.

Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of judiciary.

The main purpose of government is to protect my rights; the traffic ticket system is categorically and inherently evil and unconstitutional.

My constitutional right to a remedy.

Courts of justice shall be open to every person, and a speedy remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character; and right and justice should be administered without sale, denial or delay. - Colorado constitution

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.

Application: Kansas Constitution contains no Due Process Clause - and yet I have a state constitutional right to due process.

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.

Pleadings of Pro Se Litigants must be given some leeway

Appendix: Brief Biography of Attorney Douglas Palaschak

Appendix: Oklahoma Constitution: Bill of Rights: Selected Provisions:

Appendix: 38 Maxims of Jurisprudence

Appendix: Washington state bill of rights. Only the good parts.

In no instance shall any accused person before final judgment be compelled to advance money or fees to secure the rights herein guaranteed.

Appendix: Michigan Bill of Rights

Appendix: Sample state Bill of Rights. Excerpts from the Florida Bill of Rights.

Excessive fines

Topical Index

Affidavit. Chronology of Operative Events

I, Michael Pierre, declare the following under penalty of perjury:

I was born in 1967. I am 40 years old.

Around 1985 I was 18 years old. The California DMV conducted a written test of my driver knowledge. The conducted an on-the-road test of my driving ability. The California DMV certified my knowledge and ability to drive a car. I am even a better driver now because of the 23 years of driving experience since I passed my test.

I recently purchased this 1985 BMW 735i after the police seized my other car on

September 17, only 4 months ago. I have not yet registered the car.

I harbor strong convictions of a religious stature as follows: I believe that the government by stealthy encroachment takes away our freedoms and our property. I follow the Lawyerdude philosophy.

On December 24, 2007 (Christmas Eve) CHP Officer Guy badge #13433 pulled me over on Interstate 80 in Solano County. He asked if me for my plastic memorialization of my driver license. I did not have one. I gave him a valid California ID. He said he was going to take the car because I have a suspended license. My license cannot be suspended; I have had no hearing in that regard.

He said he should arrest me but offered to refrain from arresting me if I would promptly walk away after signing the ticket. He called for a taxi to meet me at the 76 station. I walked down the freeway to the exit and thence to the 76 station. I did not see who towed my car.

As of this writing I have not been accused by any person with prosecuting authority.

The car is in the name of some other person but I have possession of the car and the consent of the registered owner to use it.

Due Process requires that I have notice and opportunity to state my case prior to the deprivation of my property - both my right to drive and my car. There has been no pre-deprivation hearing and there has been no post-deprivation hearing.

I have been a safe driver all of my life

My legal remedy is neither speedy nor effective. I need a Writ of Mandate.

My legal argument is set forth below in my Memorandum of Legal Authorities.

I so declare under penalty of perjury:

Signed _____________________ Michael Pierre. Monday, January 14, 2008

Declaration of Expert Attorney Douglas Palaschak regarding the trend in the law toward recognition of the right to Due Process..

I, Attorney Douglas Palaschak, declare the following under penalty of perjury:

My biography is appended hereto. I have been a lawyer for nearly a quarter century.

For over a quarter century I have studied the tactics and methodology of traffic courts. They are instruments of oppression . Over half of my work consists of writing motions for traffic court. I see the same patterns in nearly all of the states in which I have litigated.

What happened to Michael Pierre also happened to me.

I, Douglas Palaschak, received a ticket for not wearing seat belts in California. I, Douglas Palaschak, moved to Oregon. Oregon refused to give me a driver license because of a notation in their computer alleging this outstanding California ticket.

I know the trouble that Michael Pierre faces. I have been there. Police have seized 7 cars and a motorcycle that I can recall. I was able to obtain release of 4 of the cars. I lost the remainder.

On February 14, 2007, the Oregon police stopped me and took my car from the side of the road based on a computer note from California.

The remedy for a crime in a foreign state is spelled out in the constitution: extradition. The states cheat with this driver license scheme.

While states are obligated by the constitution to respect a foreign judgment, the mere hearsay allegation of having received a traffic ticket is not a judgment.

The state may not apply this unconstitutional remedy that they have applied to Michael Pierre.

The various state governments treats citizens as their subjects and the state boundary as the boundary of their fiefdom.

Feudalism is a natural system. As civilized people we rise above the medieval cruelty that was feudalism.

Example of lies by traffic court: For years Ventura, California, showed a video that contained blatant lies about our rights. In particular they said there were 3 pleas; there are 6. They ignored the demurrer.

Example of violation of statutes by traffic court: They prosecute insurance tickets in

California even in the absence of an accompanying citation on the same ticket - in violation of the statute that specifically forbids a prosecution for seat belt violation alone in the absence of a crash. I brought this to the attention of the traffic court there. The judge acknowledged that I was right. He ruled in my favor. And then he continued to violate the statute in every other similar case.

In my lifetime I have witnessed the growth of this new trend of seizure of the cars of persons without any process whatsoever.

In the news this past week State Rep. Bettie Cook-Scott (D-Detroit), a Legislator from Michigan, called the insurance law “poor people’s tax”. I reprinted this story at http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8874.html One of the most frequent case situations that I encounter is the person whose car has been taken because he did not have car insurance.

I know from personal experience that having car insurance does not prevent tragedy. Many years ago I represented family of a victim killed in a car crash. The negligent driver was insured as required by law. My clients received only $8,000 compensation for having their mother killed in a car crash. There were 4 people killed. They shared the insurance proceeds of around $30,000. Even more money would not compensate these people for the loss of their mother/ sister/ daughter/ teacher. My point is that insurance cannot compensate for the worst scenarios - death and serious injury.

Insurance should be a free market decision.

Driving without insurance should not be punished if there is no at-fault crash. This is the sentiment of the case of Bell v Burson (1971) discussed in the argument.

For nearly a quarter century I have been wrestling with this issue of summary impoundment of cars. I am seeing progress.

In recent years I have witnessed the courts coming to the rescue of the individual human in this situation where his car is seized by police. Cases from Georgia, Washington, and Oregon come to mind. These 3 cases are Bell v Burson (1971), City of Redmond v Dean A Moore (2004), and Miranda v Cornelius (9^th Circuit 2005) (not the more famous Miranda case from Arizona in 1966), respectively. They are listed in the Table of Authorities and discussed in the argument below.

Michael Pierre contends that the right thing to do is to order that the BMW be returned to Michael Pierre. If the police officer thinks that he has a right to be judge, jury, and executioner then let him re-read the constitution and the cases that interpret the constitution in this area.

Michael’s argument/ points and authorities appears below.

Signed by Michael Pierre for and with Special Permission of Palaschak _____________________.

Monday, January 14, 2008

Table of Authorities and Fountains of Liberty cited herein:

Maxims of Jurisprudence Cited herein:

The Maxims of Jurisprudence are found on the internet and at the California Civil Code. I have reprinted them in the appendix.

California Civil Code §3531 codifies a maxim that is applicable in all Western civilizations: “The law never requires impossibilities.” 1

§ 3529: That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due.
1

§3517: No one can take advantage of his own wrong. 1

§3523: For every wrong there is a remedy. 1

U.S. Constitutional Clauses Cited herein:

5^th amendment requires that they pay just compensation. 1

4^th amendment 1

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

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

List of Clauses from the Oklahoma Constitution cited herein:

§ 33: The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny, impair, or disparage others retained by the people.” 1

§24 Private property - Public use - Character of use a judicial question. Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation. Just compensation shall mean the value of the property taken, and in addition, any injury to any part of the property not taken. Any special and direct benefits to the part of the property not taken may be offset only against any injury to the property not taken. Such compensation shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners of not less than three freeholders, in such manner as may be prescribed by law. Provided however, in no case shall the owner be required to make any payments should the benefits be judged to exceed damages. The commissioners shall not be appointed by any judge or court without reasonable notice having been served upon all parties in interest. The commissioners shall be selected from the regular jury list of names prepared and made as the Legislature shall provide. Any party aggrieved shall have the right of appeal, without bond, and trial by jury in a court of record. Until the compensation shall be paid to the owner, or into court for the owner, the property shall not be disturbed, or the proprietary rights of the owner divested. When possession is taken of property condemned for any public use, the owner shall be entitled to the immediate receipt of the compensation awarded, without prejudice to the right of either party to prosecute further proceedings for the judicial determination of the sufficiency or insufficiency of such compensation. The fee of land taken by common carriers for right of way, without the consent of the owner, shall remain in such owner subject only to the use for which it is taken. In all cases of condemnation of private property for public or private use, the determination of the character of the use shall be a judicial question.
Amended by State Question No. 624, Legislative Referendum No. 278, adopted at election held on Aug. 28, 1990. 1

§30 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches or seizures shall not be violated; 1

§6: The courts of justice of the State shall be open to every person, and speedy and certain remedy afforded for every wrong and for every injury to person, property, or reputation; and right and justice shall be administered without sale, denial, delay, or prejudice. - Oklahoma bill of right, §6, found at http://oklegal.onenet.net/okcon/II-6.html 1 2

List of Clauses from the Washington Constitution cited herein:

Washington bill of rights: § 1 Political Power. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights. 1

§ 12 Special Privileges and Immunities Prohibited. “ No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations.” The police speed routinely and with impunity in violation of this clause. 1

List of Clauses from the Colorado Constitution cited herein:

§6. Equality of justice. Courts of justice shall be open to every person, and a speedy remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character; and right and justice should be administered without sale, denial or delay. - Colorado constitution. 1

List of Clauses from the Kansas Constitution cited herein:

Kansas Constitution contains no Due Process Clause - and yet I have a right to due process - even if it is not written into the federal constitution. It is a constitutional concept. We remember the ancient common law. Forty-nine other state constitutions accrue to my benefit. Also, I rely on the common law since the Norman Conquest of 1066. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Conquest 1 2

List of Clauses from the Florida Constitution cited herein:

Florida Bill of Rights. Excerpts are reprinted in the Appendix. 1

Florida constitution Art. 1, section 21. guarantees my right to a remedy: Art. 1, section 21. Access to courts- The courts shall be open to every person for redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. - Florida Bill of Rights. 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 4 5

Fuentes v Shevin (1972) 407 U.S. 67 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/fuentes.html 1 The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Firestone was prohibited from repossessing its gas stove. The statutory scheme there as here denied due process prior to the taking. 2

Goss v Lopez 1975 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8877.html 1 The Supreme Court ruled that you cannot suspend a high school student without giving him due process - a hearing. 2 3

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

MLB 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

U.S. v Gonzalez-Lopez 2005-352. Decided 2006. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8345.html 1 2

International 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

Washington Supreme Court Cases cited herein:

City of Redmond v Dean A Moore (2004) Docket #72614-1 reported at http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/6352.html 1 held that summary taking of a driver license is unconstitutional.
2

Oregon cases cited herein:

Miranda v Cornelius (9^th Circuit 2005) 1

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 California Statutes cited herein:

List of California state cases cited herein:

People v Kurt Albert Stapf (1999) http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8289.html 1 Only the duly elected prosecutor or attorney general may prosecute. 2

People v. Municipal Court (Real Party: Pellegrino) (1972) http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8453.html 1 27 CA3d 193 (Ventura). In Pellegrino a Ventura judge appointed a local lawyer to prosecute after the prosecutor declined to prosecute. The court of appeal ruled that the special prosecutor was unconstitutional. See also the Stapf case herein.
2

Treatises and “Fundamental Things” cited herein:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Conquest Story of the Norman Conquest

The fundamental things apply as time goes by.” - Casablanca 1942. 1

Argument. Memorandum of Points and Authorities.

Part 1. Specific Constitutional Provisions and other arguments pertinent to the unconstitutional impoundment of my 1985 BMW.

I don’t know who has my BMW. The police took it from me on 24 December 2008. My lawyer called the office and talked to Corey Irving who claimed to be the supervisor at the CHP office at 3050 Travis Blvd., Fairfield, California, 94533. Ms. Irving hung up the phone on my lawyer and would not tell him who has my car.

I have struggled to find a remedy. I suffered the impoundment of my other car only 4 months ago.

The law does not expect the impossible.

California Civil Code §3531 codifies a maxim that is applicable in all Western civilizations including California, to wit: “The law never requires impossibilities. “ On the one hand California suspends my right to drive even though I am qualified and would gladly pay the fee. The two elements of every permit, to wit: 1 Payment of a fee; 2 Passing of a test. On the other hand they want to punish me for their own unconstitutional deprivation of my proof of my being qualified to drive.

California Civil code §3517: No one can take advantage of his own wrong. The state here wrongfully refuses me car registration and then uses that as a pretext for seizing my automobile. That is not right.

My arguments against the state here are imputable to the tow company; they acted in collusion with the state.

This impoundment violates the 4^th amendment and §30 of the Oklahoma Bill of Rights

§30 The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches or seizures shall not be violated; and no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, describing as particularly as may be the place to be searched and the person or thing to be seized.

If the state is to take my car then they must pay me. The 5^th amendment requires that they pay just compensation.

The 24^th section of the Oklahoma Constitution’s Bill of Rights forbids you to take my property without compensation.

Section 24 read as follows:§24 Private property - Public use - Character of use a judicial question. Private property shall not be taken or damaged for public use without just compensation. Just compensation shall mean the value of the property taken, and in addition, any injury to any part of the property not taken. Any special and direct benefits to the part of the property not taken may be offset only against any injury to the property not taken. Such compensation shall be ascertained by a board of commissioners of not less than three freeholders, in such manner as may be prescribed by law. Provided however, in no case shall the owner be required to make any payments should the benefits be judged to exceed damages. The commissioners shall not be appointed by any judge or court without reasonable notice having been served upon all parties in interest. The commissioners shall be selected from the regular jury list of names prepared and made as the Legislature shall provide. Any party aggrieved shall have the right of appeal, without bond, and trial by jury in a court of record. Until the compensation shall be paid to the owner, or into court for the owner, the property shall not be disturbed, or the proprietary rights of the owner divested. When possession is taken of property condemned for any public use, the owner shall be entitled to the immediate receipt of the compensation awarded, without prejudice to the right of either party to prosecute further proceedings for the judicial determination of the sufficiency or insufficiency of such compensation. The fee of land taken by common carriers for right of way, without the consent of the owner, shall remain in such owner subject only to the use for which it is taken. In all cases of condemnation of private property for public or private use, the determination of the character of the use shall be a judicial question. Amended by State Question No. 624, Legislative Referendum No. 278, adopted at election held on Aug. 28, 1990.

If the impoundment is punishment then let there be a trial first. If it is a taking then the constitutions of the state and this country forbid it unless just compensation is paid.

Also, requiring me to pay storage violates the “no payment of damages” clause of section 24 which reads as follows: “Provided however, in no case shall the owner be required to make any payments should the benefits be judged to exceed damages.”

The police officer was driving a car on which the fee had not been paid. County and municipal vehicles are exempt. This exemption violates the spirit if not the case law of equal protection. Although counties and towns are persons they are persons with special benefits. “Some animals are more equal than others” - Animal Farm. George Orwell. 1945.

Police cars routinely speed even when there is no emergency and yet they do so with impunity. This also violates equal protection. Even when they are on an “emergency”, it is no more important than the emergencies that many other drivers face. In essence we have created a special class of citizens, the police. The police state results in totalitarianism which is what we see when the states conspire to extract a penalty without the niceties of due process and extradition.

There are so many constitutional violations implicit in the California scheme that I am frustrated in merely trying to list them all.

They should not have taken my car.

I have a constitutional right to a “speedy and certain remedy for every wrong to . . property”

I have a constitutional right to a remedy . The Oklahoma bill of rights , §6 guarantees me a speed remedy: Courts of justice open - Remedies for wrongs - Sale, denial or delay:

My remedy at law is neither speedy nor adequate. The Officer Guy of the CHP took my car without due process of law.

It has been established law for 35 years - since Bell v Burson - that you can’t take a license or other property without due process of law. The cop based his mistake on California’s having taken away without due process my right to register my car.

This is a common pattern. Once the state establishes that you may not use the road without paying the tax they then encroach. All states do it. California passed a law permitting them to take away any bar and driver licenses and all licenses of anybody who was behind on their child support. They law was rectified through litigation.

The leading cases pertaining to the unconstitutional seizure of my car are as follows: Around 38 years ago Reverend Bell was driving his car. A child on a bicycle crashed into the side of his car. The Georgia statutes permitted the summary taking of his driver license if he could not pay twice the value of the alleged damages without regard to whose fault caused the accident. The Supreme Court of the United Statues ultimately declared the Georgia statute unconstitutional for the same reason that you must now declare the California scheme unconstitutional: It denies due process. The Georgia case from 35 years ago was Bell v Burson (1971) 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

The police and Sam Carter must bear the responsibility for knowing this established law.

In the case of Fuentes v Shevin (1972) 407 U.S. 67 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/fuentes.html

the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Firestone was prohibited from repossessing its gas stove. The court held that the Florida statutory scheme failed to provide due process in the form of a pre-deprivation hearing .

In the previous year the Supreme Court ruled that the state can’t take away a driver license without a hearing. That case is 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 effective suspension of my driver license ordered by a mere high school graduate clerk at the DMV was void ab initio.

Citing Bell v Burson, the Washington Supreme Court ruled in June 2004 that an automatic suspension of a driver license is unconstitutional. That case was City of Redmond v Dean A Moore (2004) Docket #72614-1 reported at http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/6352.html That Redmond case is best explained by a newspaper story:

Seattle Times Eastside bureau. The state Supreme Court issued a sweeping ruling yesterday that could mean thousands of people whose driver's licenses were suspended won't be prosecuted. In a 5-4 ruling, the court scar down two state statutes as unconstitutional because the laws don't provide for an administrative hearing or an appeal procedure and thus deny individuals due process guaranteed by the Constitution.

At issue is the state Department of Licensing's (DOL) lack of a formal hearing or appeal process for people whose licenses were suspended after they didn't appear in court or pay traffic tickets. Yesterday, state and city attorneys were scrambling to understand the full implications of the ruling. In Seattle, the ruling could have serious ramifications — and a huge financial impact — because of the city's controversial impound policies, which the City Council recently voted to scrap for drivers cited for third-degree license suspensions. Drivers arrested for third-degree license suspensions typically have their licenses lifted because they failed to pay tickets for minor traffic violations, such as speeding. In contrast, drivers arrested for first- and second-degree license suspensions are those whose licenses were suspended for being habitual traffic offenders, driving while intoxicated, reckless driving and other serious traffic offenses. "It seems to me that any (third-degree) license suspension in the state of Washington is currently unconstitutional because it doesn't comply with due process," said Donna Tucker, one of two Bellevue attorneys who argued before the Supreme Court to have the statutes struck. Potential for error The case was brought before the Supreme Court after the city of Redmond sought direct review of a King County District Court decision to dismiss charges against two men, Jason Wilson and Dean Moore, for driving with suspended licenses. Wilson's license was suspended for failing to deal with a speeding ticket, and Moore's was lifted for failing to resolve a citation for driving without liability insurance. A district-court judge concluded the suspensions didn't comply with due process because DOL failed to provide the opportunity for an administrative hearing and so dismissed the charges. In writing for the majority, Justice Richard Sanders said the statutes "are contrary to the guaranty of due process because they do not provide adequate procedural safeguards to ensure against the erroneous deprivation of a driver's interest in the continued use and possession of his or her driver's license." There is substantial potential for error in DOL decisions to revoke a driver's license, especially given that DOL issues some 300,000 suspension notices a year based on information from the courts, Sanders wrote. When a driver receives notice his or her license is to be suspended, the individual has 30 days to resolve the issue in court. "He or she is not, however, offered any procedure to contest the suspension other than being instructed by the notice to resolve the matter with the court," Sanders wrote. "The public is left to its own devices to secure a timely hearing from a court to reverse the error before the suspension takes effect." Burden on DOL But in a seven-page dissenting opinion written by Justice Bobbe Bridge, four justices argued that just because there's a potential for error, no evidence was provided to show a pattern of erroneous license suspensions. The dissenting justices also pointed out that requiring DOL to give an administrative hearing to anyone whose license is suspended would require vast public resources for the staff, time and space to conduct such hearings. "The majority seizes upon the scant record in these cases to answer a question that has not been raised by any party and in so doing stretches the requirements of due process beyond precedent and common sense — establishing no clear benefit for the licensees and burdening an administrative system designed by the Legislature to provide swift determination for the protection of the motoring public," Bridge wrote. Gerald Anderson, an assistant attorney general who advised DOL on the case, said his office is still trying to digest the court's ruling. Because the court struck down the statutes, it's unlikely DOL can devise an administrative remedy, he said, adding "it's too early to speculate what legislative remedies are possible." A Redmond city prosecutor and a DOL spokesman would not comment yesterday, both saying they needed more time to analyze the decision. Financial impact The impact could be huge for Seattle, which has seized, towed and held almost 5,000 vehicles a year from drivers with third-degree license suspensions. Roughly 30 percent of those vehicles are scheduled for auction because their owners could not pay fees, fines and storage charges. But the city doesn't track how many are sold, said Kathryn Harper, spokeswoman for the City Attorney's Office. Some lawyers believe the city faces potential financial liability for vehicles seized under its Operation Impound program. "I think a strong argument can be made that all seizures were unlawful and drivers deserve compensation. This would be additional legal basis for that argument," said Lisa Daugaard, a public defender and outspoken critic of Seattle's impound law. The number of drivers who might seek compensation, the amount they might want and the validity of their claims remain to be seen. But a very rough estimate of $10 million in damages is reasonable, said Adam Berger, an attorney who has brought a class-action lawsuit against the city's former policy, which was in effect from 2000 to late 2002. After that, police officers exercised discretion but still impounded the vehicles of 80 percent of the drivers they cited for third-degree license suspensions. Berger's estimate is based on the premise that there could be 10,000 drivers seeking compensation, with claims of about $1,000 each, on average. Meanwhile, impound opponents who pushed the City Council to dump the controversial impound law in a 6-2 vote two weeks ago said the court's decision validated their arguments.

"It's a welcome decision as far as I'm concerned," said Councilwoman Jean Godden, who co-sponsored the ordinance to repeal the impound policy. Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels signed the ordinance into law yesterday. - Sara Jean Green: 206-515-5654 or sgreen@seattletimes.com. Times staff reporter Bob Young contributed to this report.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001947257_licenses04e.html=

Part 2: These arguments are more generalized and included for sake of completeness. You may want to skip forward to the Summary of Argument.

Clerk has unconstitutionally usurped function of judiciary.

The clerk may not initiate prosecution. And neither may a clerk summarily deny me such a fundamental right as the right to buy a registration license plate for my car - and especially may the clerk not do it based on hearsay.

She has done so in this case. This anonymous clerk at the driver license office has acted as judge, jury, and executioner. Only the duly elected prosecutor may initiate a criminal prosecution. The court may not initiate prosecution. Neither may the court appoint someone to prosecute. Only the duly elected prosecutor or the attorney general may prosecute a criminal case. This is the holding of People v. Municipal Court (Real Party: Pellegrino) (1972) http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8453.html 27 CA3d 193 (Ventura). In Pellegrino a Ventura judge appointed a local lawyer to prosecute after the prosecutor declined to prosecute. The court of appeal ruled that the special prosecutor was unconstitutional.

The concept/ rule of “ exclusive province “ was reaffirmed in People v Kurt Albert Stapf (1999) http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8289.html .

The main purpose of government is to protect my rights; the traffic ticket system is categorically and inherently evil and unconstitutional.

Our California government was established to protect and maintain individual rights. This driver license and towing scheme is unconstitutional.

Authority: California citizens are entitled to the protection of individual rights. This is the hallmark of a free society and distinguished from a totalitarian police state run by high school graduate clerks and cops. The Washington bill of right says what our California bill of rights fails to say: Washington bill of rights: § 1 Political Power. “All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.” California, Oklahoma and federal constitutions express what is common sense. They permit me to utilize other constitutions, to wit: “ The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny, impair, or disparage others retained by the people.”

In addition, the federal constitution mandates uniformity of freedom state to state. 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 fundamental things apply as time goes by.” - Casablanca 1942.

The police state has arisen and granted itself the privilege to speed. This violates our constitution:

§ 12 Special Privileges and Immunities Prohibited. No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations.

My constitutional right to a remedy .

I have a right to a remedy. Thirty-five states include a “right to a remedy” in their constitution. California is not on the list. However I have the protection of 35 other state constitutions. The list is at the following hyperlink: Constitutional Right to a Remedy http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8428.html

The state constitutions guarantee my right to a remedy for the clerk’s usurpation:

Example: Colorado constitution § 6. Equality of justice. Courts of justice shall be open to every person, and a speedy remedy afforded for every injury to person, property or character; and right and justice should be administered without sale, denial or delay. - Colorado constitution.

Other state constitutions proclaims a right to a remedy:

Art. 1, section 21. Access to courts- The courts shall be open to every person for redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay. - Florida Bill of Rights.

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 of the driver license ordered by a mere high school graduate clerk 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. MLB 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 7^th 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 14^th amendment which states:

Application: Kansas Constitution contains no Due Process Clause - and yet I have a state constitutional right to due process.

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 4^th 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 an extraordinary writ .

“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 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.

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.

Summary of Argument.

The Supreme Court has ruled that you can’t suspend a 9th grader from school without a pre-deprivation hearing . (Goss v Lopez. 1975 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/8877.html ) You can’t even repossess a cook stove without due process. (Fuentes v Shevin (1972) 407 U.S. 67 http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/fuentes.html) You can’t automatically suspend a driver license. (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 . ) Surely then you can’t take a man’s sole means of transportation without a pre-deprivation hearing. If it is important enough to take his car, then it is important enough to take him before a judge immediately - or let him keep his car until the hearing.

Prayer

I ask for the relief specified in the universal maxim set forth in California Civil Code § 3529:

That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due .

Injunctive relief is appropriate where there is a multiplicity of action, a log jam, waiting for application of a broad remedy. Also, I seek declaratory relief declaring and vindicating my constitutional rights as set forth above.

I ask the court to issue the relief as specified in the Proposed Order set forth on the following page.

Signed______________________________ Michael Pierre . Monday, January 14, 2008

Proof of Service

I served the Respondent California Highway Patrol by delivering a paper copy of this document in person at their office address designated on their website and in the caption.

Signed ______________________Printed name_______________ Date:

(Proposed) Order

I hereby order that the CHP immediately release Michael Pierre’s car to him. I hereby find that the statutory scheme here has denied Michael Pierre his due process. I find that the equities weigh in favor of not taking away a 66 year old man’s sole means of transportation when he lives 25 miles from a large grocery store as winter approaches.

As for his punishment for driving without insurance and registration I make no ruling. That matter is not before this court. That matter will be resolved in the normal course of events like all other traffic tickets. The petitioner faces his day in court and can present his defense there.

As for the reported hearsay allegation by the California driver license agency that Michael Pierre should not have a license, there has been no hearing

As for the car registration, the maxim states as follows:

That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due .

On that basis I order as follows: the DMV shall register the subject car upon payment of the required fees and proof of ownership.

The clerk shall provide a certified copy of this order to the Petitioner for his use in procuring a registration for his car.

So ordered.

Signed __________________________________ Date ___________

Judge of the Superior Court

Appendix: Brief Biography of Attorney Douglas Palaschak

This subdocument is http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/bio33.html

I, Douglas Palaschak, declare the following under penalty of perjury: I have enjoyed a charmed life. I grew up on the perfect farm. My brother Greg farms it now. I am an Engineering Graduate of the University of Illinois, Urbana, the best engineering school in the world - home of the Hal9000 of 2001, A Space Odyssey. There I was an honors student. I marched in “The Marching Illini”,the world’s undisputed Premiere Marching Band. John Philip Sousa said that we were the best. I began my career as a Registered Professional Engineer. I consulted for the U.S. Navy, the Dept. of Defense, 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 proved 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 passed the California bar exam in 1983. I have my J.D. from Ventura College of Law. I have published 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.

I wrote only one appeal in my career and it won.

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. My proudest accomplishment is having found a mistake in the sheet music for Debussy’s Clair De Lune. Warner Brothers republished their Debussy book. Here is their letter in that matter: http://lawyerdude.8m.com/Warnerletter.jpg I have been feature on The Love Connection, Hard Copy, and Inside Edition.

My heroes are Williams Kunstler http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/kunstler.html Stephen Yagman http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/yagman.html , and Melvin Belli. Kunstler was sentenced to 4 years and 13 days in jail for his zealous advocacy. He won on appeal. Yagman was suspended for 2 years for having accused Judge Real of being a drunk. He won on appeal. Belli was whacked by the California bar for having done a TV spot for his favorite wine.

Appendix: Oklahoma Constitution : Bill of Rights: Selected Provisions:

Amended by State Question No. 624, Legislative Referendum No. 278, adopted at election held on Aug. 28, 1990.

Appendix: 38 Maxims of Jurisprudence

California Civil Code §3510 When the reason for a rule ceases, so should the rule itself.

§3511 Where the reason is the same, the rule should be the same.

§3512 One must not change his purpose to the injury of another

§3513 Anyone may waive the advantage of a law intended solely for his benefit. But a law established for a public reason cannot be contravened by a private agreement.

§3514 One must so use his own rights as not to infringe upon the rights of another.

§3515 He who consents to an act is not wronged by it.

§3516 Acquiescence in error takes away the right of objecting.

§3517 No one can take advantage of his own wrong.

§3518 He who has fraudulently dispossessed himself of a thing may be treated as if he still had possession.

§3519 He who can and does not forbid that which is done on his behalf, is deemed to have bidden it.

§3520 No one should suffer by the act of another.

§3521 He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.

§3522 One who grants a thing is presumed to grant also whatever is essential to its use.

§ 3523 For every wrong there is a remedy.

§3524 Between those who are equally in the right, or equally in the wrong, the law does not interpose. §3525 Between rights otherwise equal, the earliest is preferred.

§3526 No man is responsible for that which no man can control.

§3527 The law helps the vigilant, before those who sleep on their rights.

§3528 The law respects form less than substance.

§3529 That which ought to have been done is to be regarded as done, in favor of him to whom, and against him from whom, performance is due .

§3530 That which does not appear to exist is to be regarded as if it did not exist.

§3531 The law never requires impossibilities.

§3532 The law neither does nor requires idle acts.

§3533 The law disregards trifles.

§3534 Particular expressions qualify those which are general.

§3535 Contemporaneous exposition is in general the best.

§3536 The greater contains the less.

§3537 Superfluity does not vitiate.

§3538 That is certain which can be made certain.

§3539 Time does not confirm a void act.

§3540 The incident follows the principal, and not the principal the incident.

§3541 An interpretation which gives effect is preferred to one which makes void.

§3542 Interpretation must be reasonable.

§3543 Where one of two innocent persons must suffer by the act of a third, he, by whose negligence it happened, must be the sufferer.

§3544 None with this number.

§3545 Private transactions are fair and regular.

§3546 Things happen according to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life.

§3547 A thing continues to exist as long as is usual with things of that nature.

§3548 The law has been obeyed.

Appendix: Washington state bill of rights. Only the good parts.

Washington was carved out of the western part of Washington Territory and admitted to the Union as the 42nd state in 1889. More than most other states, Washington copied its constitution and law from other states. Due to the sparse population of this state, we has suffered regression to military rule by the governing class. See, for example, clauses 25 and 26 which eliminate our grand jury rights. This bill of right is sad proof of the weakening and corruption of our government.

http://www.courts.wa.gov/education/constitution/index.cfm

§ 22 Rights of the Accused. In criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right

to appear and defend in person, or by counsel,

to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him,

to have a copy thereof, to testify in his own behalf,

to meet the witnesses against him face to face,

to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his own behalf,

to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is charged to have been committed

and the right to appeal in all cases:

Provided, The route traversed by any railway coach, train or public conveyance, and the water traversed by any boat shall be criminal districts; and the jurisdiction of all public offenses committed on any such railway car, coach, train, boat or other public conveyance, or at any station or depot upon such route, shall be in any county through which the said car, coach, train, boat or other public conveyance may pass during the trip or voyage, or in which the trip or voyage may begin or terminate.

In no instance shall any accused person before final judgment be compelled to advance money or fees to secure the rights herein guaranteed. [AMENDMENT 10, 1921 p 79 Section 1. Approved November, 1922.]

§ Original text - Art. 1 Section 22 Rights of Accused Persons - In criminal prosecution, the accused shall have the right to appear and defend in person, and by counsel, to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a copy thereof, to testify in his own behalf, to meet the witnesses against him face to face, to have compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses in his own behalf, to have a speedy public trial by an impartial jury of the county in which the offense is alleged to have been committed, and the right to appeal in all cases; and, in no instance, shall any accused person before final judgment be compelled to advance money or fees to secure the rights herein guaranteed.

§ 1 Political Power. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.

§ 2 Supreme Law of the Land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.

§ 3 Personal Rights. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.

§ 4 Right of Petition and Assemblage. The right of petition and of the people peaceably to assemble for the common good shall never be abridged.

§ 5 Freedom of Speech. Every person may freely speak, write and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.

§ 6 Oaths - Mode of Administering. The mode of administering an oath, or affirmation, shall be such as may be most consistent with and binding upon the conscience of the person to whom such oath, or affirmation, may be administered.

§ 7 Invasion of Private Affairs or Home Prohibited.

No person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.

§ 8 IRREVOCABLE PRIVILEGE, FRANCHISE OR IMMUNITY PROHIBITED.

No law granting irrevocably any privilege, franchise or immunity, shall be passed by the legislature.

§ 9 RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS.

No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to give evidence against himself, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense.

§ 10 ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

Justice in all cases shall be administered openly, and without unnecessary delay.

§ 11 Religious Freedom. Not reprinted here. This section has been fatally diluted and corrupted by the forces of evil and government intermeddlers to advance religious causes.

§ 12 Special Privileges and Immunities Prohibited.

No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations.

§ 13 HABEAS CORPUS.

The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety requires it.

§ 14 EXCESSIVE BAIL, FINES AND PUNISHMENTS.

Excessive bail shall not be required, excessive fines imposed, nor cruel punishment inflicted.

§ 15 CONVICTIONS, EFFECT OF.

No conviction shall work corruption of blood, nor forfeiture of estate.

§ 16 Eminent Domain. Not reprinted here.

§ 17 IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

There shall be no imprisonment for debt, except in cases of absconding debtors.

§ 18 MILITARY POWER, LIMITATION OF.

The military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

§ 19 FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS.

All Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.

§ 20 BAIL, WHEN AUTHORIZED.

All persons charged with crime shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for capital offenses when the proof is evident, or the presumption great.

§ 21 TRIAL BY JURY.

The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, but the legislature may provide for a jury of any number less than twelve in courts not of record, and for a verdict by nine or more jurors in civil cases in any court of record, and for waiving of the jury in civil cases where the consent of the parties interested is given thereto.

§ 23 BILL OF ATTAINDER , EX POST FACTO LAW, ETC.

No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law impairing the obligations of contracts shall ever be passed.

§ 24 Right to Bear Arms. Not reprinted here.

§ 25 Prosecution by Information. (This section violates the superior federal constitution.) Offenses heretofore required to be prosecuted by indictment may be prosecuted by information, or by indictment, as shall be prescribed by law.

§ 26 Grand Jury. (This section violates the federal constitution.)

No grand jury shall be drawn or summoned in any county, except the superior judge thereof shall so order.

27 TREASON, DEFINED, ETC.

Treason against the state shall consist only in levying war against the state, or adhering to its enemies, or in giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or confession in open court.

28 HEREDITARY PRIVILEGES ABOLISHED.

No hereditary emoluments, privileges, or powers, shall be granted or conferred in this state.

29 CONSTITUTION MANDATORY.

The provisions of this Constitution are mandatory, unless by express words they are declared to be otherwise.

30 RIGHTS RESERVED.

The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny others retained by the people.

31 Standing Army.

No standing army shall be kept up by this state in time of peace, and no soldier shall in time of peace be quartered in any house without the consent of its owner, nor in time of war except in the manner prescribed by law.

§ 32 Fundamental Principles. A frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is essential to the security of individual right and the perpetuity of free government .

§ 33 and 34 Recall of Elective Officers. Not reprinted here.

§ 35 Victims of Crimes - Rights. Deleted. This section was added by the police state.

Appendix: Michigan Bill of Rights

As amended to 1972.

Article 1: Declaration of Rights.

§1. All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for their equal benefit, security and protection.

§2. No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws; nor shall any person be denied the enjoyment of his civil or political rights or be discriminated against in the exercise thereof because of religion, race, color or national origin. The legislature shall implement this Section by appropriate legislation.

3. The people have the right peaceably to assemble, to consult for the common good, to instruct their representatives and to petition the government for redress of grievances.

4. Every person shall be at liberty to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. No person shall be compelled to attend, or, against his consent, to contribute to the erection or support of any place of religious worship, or to pay tithes, taxes or other rates for the support of any minister of the gospel or teacher of religion. No money shall be appropriated or drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, theological or religious seminary; nor shall property belonging to the state be appropriated for any such purpose. The civil and political rights, privileges and capacities of no person shall be diminished or enlarged on account of his religious belief.

5. Every person may freely speak, write, express and publish his views on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of such right; and no law shall be enacted to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.

6. Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.

7. The military shall in all cases and at all times be in strict subordination to the civil power.

8. No soldier shall, in time of peace, be quartered in any house without the consent of the owner or occupant, nor in time of war, except in a manner prescribed by law

9. Neither slavery, nor involuntary servitude unless for the punishment of crime, shall ever be tolerated in this state.

10. No bill of attainder , ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contract shall be enacted.

11. The person, houses, papers and possessions of every person shall be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place or to seize any person or things shall issue without describing them, nor without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation. The provisions of this Section shall not be construed to bar from evidence in any criminal proceeding any narcotic drug, firearm, bomb, explosive or any other dangerous weapon, seized by a peace officer outside the curtilage of any dwelling house in this state.

12. The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.

13. A suitor in any court of this state has the right to prosecute or defend his suit, either in his own proper person or by an attorney.

14. The right of trial by jury shall remain, but shall be waived in all civil cases unless demanded by one of the parties in the manner prescribed by law. In all civil cases tried by 12 jurors a verdict shall be received when 10 jurors agree.

15. No person shall be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy. All persons shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, except for murder and treason when the proof is evident or the presumption great.

16. Excessive bail shall not be required; excessive fines shall not be imposed; cruel or unusual punishment shall not be inflicted; nor shall witnesses be unreasonably detained.

17. No person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. The right of all individuals, firms, corporations and voluntary associations to fair and just treatment in the course of legislative and executive investigations and hearings shall not be infringed.

18. No person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness on account of his opinions on matters of religious belief.

19. In all prosecutions for libel, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and, if it appears to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the accused shall be acquitted.

20. In every criminal prosecution, the accused shall have

the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury,

which may consist of less than 12 jurors in all courts not of record;

to be informed of the nature of the accusation;

to be confronted with the witnesses against him;

to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor;

to have the assistance of counsel for his defense;

to have an appeal as a matter of right; and in courts of record, when the trial court so orders, to have such reasonable assistance as may be necessary to perfect and prosecute an appeal. (This last clause is mooted by the higher requirement imposed by the U.S. Supreme Court.)

21. No person shall be imprisoned for debt arising out of or founded on contract, express or implied, except in cases of fraud or breach of trust.

22. Treason against the State shall consist only in levying war against it or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless upon the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or on confession in open court.

23. The enumeration in this constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Appendix: Sample state Bill of Rights. Excerpts from the Florida Bill of Rights.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Constitution

1. Political power.--All political power is inherent in the people. The enunciation herein of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or impair others retained by the people.

2. Basic rights.--All natural persons, female and male alike, are equal before the law and have inalienable rights, among which are the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, to pursue happiness, to be rewarded for industry, and to acquire, possess and protect property; except that the ownership, inheritance, disposition and possession of real property by aliens ineligible for citizenship may be regulated or prohibited by law. No person shall be deprived of any right because of race, religion, national origin, or physical disability.

History.--Am. Senate Joint Resolution 917, 1974; adopted 1974; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 9, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.

5. Right to assemble.--The people shall have the right peaceably to assemble, to instruct their representatives, and to petition for redress of grievances.

9. Due process.--No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, or be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense, or be compelled in any criminal matter to be a witness against oneself.

History.--Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.

10. Prohibited laws.--No bill of attainder , ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

11. Imprisonment for debt.--No person shall be imprisoned for debt, except in cases of fraud.

12. Searches and seizures.--The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and against the unreasonable interception of private communications by any means, shall not be violated. No warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause, supported by affidavit, particularly describing the place or places to be searched, the person or persons, thing or things to be seized, the communication to be intercepted, and the nature of evidence to be obtained. This right shall be construed in conformity with the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution, as interpreted by the United States Supreme Court. Articles or information obtained in violation of this right shall not be admissible in evidence if such articles or information would be inadmissible under decisions of the United States Supreme Court construing the 4th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

History.--Am. House Joint Resolution 31-H, 1982; adopted 1982.

13. Habeas corpus.--The writ of habeas corpus shall be grantable of right, freely and without cost. It shall be returnable without delay, and shall never be suspended unless, in case of rebellion or invasion, suspension is essential to the public safety.

14. Pretrial release and detention.--Unless charged with a capital offense or an offense punishable by life imprisonment and the proof of guilt is evident or the presumption is great, every person charged with a crime or violation of municipal or county ordinance shall be entitled to pretrial release on reasonable conditions. If no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm to persons, assure the presence of the accused at trial, or assure the integrity of the judicial process, the accused may be detained.

History.--Am. House Joint Resolution 43-H, 1982; adopted 1982.

15. Prosecution for crime; offenses committed by children.--

(a) No person shall be tried for capital crime without presentment or indictment by a grand jury, or for other felony without such presentment or indictment or an information under oath filed by the prosecuting officer of the court, except persons on active duty in the militia when tried by courts martial.

(b) When authorized by law, a child as therein defined may be charged with a violation of law as an act of delinquency instead of crime and tried without a jury or other requirements applicable to criminal cases. Any child so charged shall, upon demand made as provided by law before a trial in a juvenile proceeding, be tried in an appropriate court as an adult. A child found delinquent shall be disciplined as provided by law.

16. Rights of accused and of victims.--

(a) In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall, upon demand, be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, and shall be furnished a copy of the charges, and shall have the right to have compulsory process for witnesses, to confront at trial adverse witnesses, to be heard in person, by counsel or both, and to have a speedy and public trial by impartial jury in the county where the crime was committed. If the county is not known, the indictment or information may charge venue in two or more counties conjunctively and proof that the crime was committed in that area shall be sufficient; but before pleading the accused may elect in which of those counties the trial will take place. Venue for prosecution of crimes committed beyond the boundaries of the state shall be fixed by law.

(b) Victims of crime or their lawful representatives, including the next of kin of homicide victims, are entitled to the right to be informed, to be present, and to be heard when relevant, at all crucial stages of criminal proceedings, to the extent that these rights do not interfere with the constitutional rights of the accused.

History.--Am. Senate Joint Resolution 135, 1987; adopted 1988; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.

17. Excessive punishments.--Excessive fines , cruel and unusual punishment, attainder, forfeiture of estate, indefinite imprisonment, and unreasonable detention of witnesses are forbidden. The death penalty is an authorized punishment for capital crimes designated by the legislature. The prohibition against cruel or unusual punishment, and the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, shall be construed in conformity with decisions of the United States Supreme Court which interpret the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment provided in the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Any method of execution shall be allowed, unless prohibited by the United States Constitution. Methods of execution may be designated by the legislature, and a change in any method of execution may be applied retroactively. A sentence of death shall not be reduced on the basis that a method of execution is invalid. In any case in which an execution method is declared invalid, the death sentence shall remain in force until the sentence can be lawfully executed by any valid method. This shall apply retroactively.

History.--Am. House Joint Resolution 3505, 1998; adopted 1998; Am. House Joint Resolution 951, 2001; adopted 2002.

18. Administrative penalties.--No administrative agency, except the Department of Military Affairs in an appropriately convened court-martial action as provided by law, shall impose a sentence of imprisonment, nor shall it impose any other penalty except as provided by law.

History.--Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.

19. Costs.--No person charged with crime shall be compelled to pay costs before a judgment of conviction has become final.

21. Access to courts.--The courts shall be open to every person for redress of any injury, and justice shall be administered without sale, denial or delay.

22. Trial by jury .--The right of trial by jury shall be secure to all and remain inviolate. The qualifications and the number of jurors, not fewer than six, shall be fixed by law.

23. Right of privacy.--Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person's private life except as otherwise provided herein. This shall not be construed to limit the public's right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law.

Topical Index

14th amendment 1 2

4th amendment 1 2 3

abuse 1 2

affidavit 1 2 3

affords no protection

against him from whom, performance is due 1 2 3

amendment 1 2 3 4 5