The abuse of the right for Habeas Corpus is one of the cardinal signs of the medieval nature of the states and federal courts in the United States. The origin of the Habeas Corpus right is in the Magna Carta (1215 CE).
In Fay v Noia, Justice William Brennan Jr wrote:
"The basic principle of the Great Writ of habeas corpus is that, in a civilized society... if the imprisonment cannot be shown to conform with the fundamental requirements of law, the individual is entitled to his immediate release" Fay v Noia, 372 US 391 (1963). 372 U. S. 399-402.
One should note that the decision is qualified as applicable only to civilized societies...
jz
LINKS:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/24729084/
jz
_____
PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS for failure to allow bond
Sep 29 (3 days ago)
Suppose you get tossed into jail and held without bond. First take note of Florida’s Declaration of Rights.
From Florida Constitution Article I, Declaration of Rights
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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. H.J.R. 43-H, 1982; adopted 1982.
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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. S.J.R. 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.
SECTION 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 section shall apply retroactively.
History.—Am. H.J.R. 3505, 1998; adopted 1998; Am. H.J.R. 951, 2001; adopted 2002.
SECTION 19. Costs.—No person charged with crime shall be compelled to pay costs before a judgment of conviction has become final.
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.
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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 section shall not be construed to limit the public’s right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law.
History.—Added, C.S. for H.J.R. 387, 1980; adopted 1980; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.
Then note the attachments hereto and the comments below of Dr. Charles Lincoln.
It appears that Florida judges don’t much like habeas petitions, but the tenacious can sometimes prevail with them.
***
Bob Hurt
From: Charles Edward Lincoln III [mailto:lincoln_for_
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:23 PM
Subject: A Florida US District Court PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS for State issue
Unfortunately, before you can present a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus relating to a state incarceration to a Federal (U.S. District Court) you MUST exhaust all state avenues for remedy first. Exhaustion of state remedies, including a petition to the Florida Supreme Court, after failing at the Circuit & District levels, is required. Attached are one attorneys' (Montgomery Blair Sibley's) attempts to get around the exhaustion requirement. Nobody could have stated it any better than he did or try any harder than he did in Nancy's case, but it didn't work. The key relevant case is Rose v. Lundy, attached, and the key federal statute you need to understand and Byron has to satisfy is 28 U.S.C. 2254. (Both are attached here). It doesn't save any time to try to get around the exhaustion requirement, just make the petitions and exhaust the requirement as fast as possible.
Charles Edward Lincoln, III
"Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint"
Deo Vindice/Tierra Limpia
Telephone: 512-968-0031
E-mail: lincoln_for_california@
In case of emergency call Peyton Yates Freiman (Texas)
at 512-968-2666 or e-mail freimanthird@gmail.com
Habeas for failure to allow bond
39 So.3d 1190
Supreme Court of Florida.
STATE of Florida, et al., Petitioners,
v.
Arthur BLAIR, Respondent.
No. SC09-1407.
June 3, 2010.
Synopsis
Background: Defendant filed petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging an order of the Circuit Court, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, John J. Hoy, J., requiring that he be held without bond after he failed to appear for a court date on a felony charge of driving under the influence (DUI). The District Court of Appeal, 15 So.3d 758, granted petition and certified conflict.
Holding: The Supreme Court held that trial court lacked authority to order pretrial detention of defendant without bond for failure to appear, absent finding that failure to appear was willful, or determination as to whether there were reasonable conditions of pretrial release; disapproving, Ricks v. State, 961 So.2d 1093.
Decision approved.
[Message clipped - JZ]
| Sep 29 (3 days ago) | | |||
Suppose you get tossed into jail and held without bond. First take note of Florida’s Declaration of Rights.
From Florida Constitution Article I, Declaration of Rights
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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. H.J.R. 43-H, 1982; adopted 1982.
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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. S.J.R. 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.
SECTION 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 section shall apply retroactively.
History.—Am. H.J.R. 3505, 1998; adopted 1998; Am. H.J.R. 951, 2001; adopted 2002.
SECTION 19. Costs.—No person charged with crime shall be compelled to pay costs before a judgment of conviction has become final.
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.
SECTION 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.
SECTION 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 section shall not be construed to limit the public’s right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law.
History.—Added, C.S. for H.J.R. 387, 1980; adopted 1980; Am. proposed by Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 13, 1998, filed with the Secretary of State May 5, 1998; adopted 1998.
Then note the attachments hereto and the comments below of Dr. Charles Lincoln.
It appears that Florida judges don’t much like habeas petitions, but the tenacious can sometimes prevail with them.
***
Bob Hurt
From: Charles Edward Lincoln III [mailto:lincoln_for_
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:23 PM
Subject: A Florida US District Court PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS for State issue
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 5:23 PM
Subject: A Florida US District Court PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS for State issue
Unfortunately, before you can present a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus relating to a state incarceration to a Federal (U.S. District Court) you MUST exhaust all state avenues for remedy first. Exhaustion of state remedies, including a petition to the Florida Supreme Court, after failing at the Circuit & District levels, is required. Attached are one attorneys' (Montgomery Blair Sibley's) attempts to get around the exhaustion requirement. Nobody could have stated it any better than he did or try any harder than he did in Nancy's case, but it didn't work. The key relevant case is Rose v. Lundy, attached, and the key federal statute you need to understand and Byron has to satisfy is 28 U.S.C. 2254. (Both are attached here). It doesn't save any time to try to get around the exhaustion requirement, just make the petitions and exhaust the requirement as fast as possible.
Charles Edward Lincoln, III
"Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint"
Deo Vindice/Tierra Limpia
Telephone: 512-968-0031
E-mail: lincoln_for_california@rocketmail.com
In case of emergency call Peyton Yates Freiman (Texas)
at 512-968-2666 or e-mail freimanthird@gmail.com
[Message clipped - JZ]Habeas for failure to allow bond39 So.3d 1190Supreme Court of Florida.STATE of Florida, et al., Petitioners,v.Arthur BLAIR, Respondent.No. SC09-1407.June 3, 2010.Synopsis
Background: Defendant filed petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging an order of the Circuit Court, Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, John J. Hoy, J., requiring that he be held without bond after he failed to appear for a court date on a felony charge of driving under the influence (DUI). The District Court of Appeal, 15 So.3d 758, granted petition and certified conflict.Holding: The Supreme Court held that trial court lacked authority to order pretrial detention of defendant without bond for failure to appear, absent finding that failure to appear was willful, or determination as to whether there were reasonable conditions of pretrial release; disapproving, Ricks v. State, 961 So.2d 1093.Decision approved.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All comments are welcome... especially any tips regarding corruption of the courts in Los Angeles. Anonymous tips are fine. One simple way to do it is from internet cafes, etc.