Seth Price and 3 other friends shared Lets find 1 million people who know the IRAQ war is ILLEGAL!'s photo.
Monday, October 1, 2012
12-10-02 Habeas Corpus in the State of Florida
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.
12-10-01 The Spaceship, Jerusalem, Corpus Separatum - Tabernacle 2012
Back from partying in Barcelona, I landed in Jerusalem on one of the biggest fiestas of the year - Tabernacles.
Tabernacles has transformed over the past couple of decades, and it has grown into a major fiesta for both Jews and Christians.
The spaceship is packed full of astronausts from all over the world, people camping on the roof. A couple of night ago, tourists were sleeping on the benches in the square. The neighboring roof has also popped up small tents for the holiday.
The rainy season has just begun.
Tabernacles has transformed over the past couple of decades, and it has grown into a major fiesta for both Jews and Christians.
The spaceship is packed full of astronausts from all over the world, people camping on the roof. A couple of night ago, tourists were sleeping on the benches in the square. The neighboring roof has also popped up small tents for the holiday.
The rainy season has just begun.
12-10-01 Hello World!
Notice: First ever registered visitor from Jerusalem, Corpus Separatum
Recent:
Monday, October 01 @ 19:20 : Jerusalem, IL
Monday, October 01 @ 18:54 : Lidköping, SE
Monday, October 01 @ 18:53 : Los Angeles, California, US
Monday, October 01 @ 18:48 : Levittown, New York, US
Monday, October 01 @ 18:37 : Chicago, Illinois, US
Monday, October 01 @ 17:36 : Grasse, FR
Monday, October 01 @ 15:30 : Glauburg, DE
Monday, October 01 @ 14:56 : Talcahuano, CL
Monday, October 01 @ 14:51 : Melbourne, AU
Monday, October 01 @ 14:35 : Columbus, Ohio, US
12-10-01 US: Pimped prostitution as a political system in practice...
How The Government's Lies Become Truth
By Paul Craig Roberts
The western media and the US Congress comprise the two largest whore houses in human history.
http://www.
http://www.
12-10-01 Hello World!
Recent:
Sunday, September 30 @ 21:23 : Cuernavaca, MX
Sunday, September 30 @ 18:48 : Upland, California, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 17:24 : Chicago, Illinois, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 15:06 : Rockford, Illinois, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 14:37 : West Palm Beach, Florida, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 14:15 : Turku, FI
Sunday, September 30 @ 14:02 : Seattle, Washington, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 13:43 : San Jose, California, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 13:43 : Fort Lauderdale, Florida, US
Sunday, September 30 @ 01:34 : Baltimore, Maryland, US
12-10-01 Greece: Pimped prostitution as a political system in practice...
Αnd the same shit in Greece. Policemen who are paid 800 euros a month, beat pensioners who live on 400 euros a month, obeying the orders of those who earn billions!
Chomsky: Who should you vote for president in 2012?
I happen to concur with Chomsky's opinion in this matter. And it should apply not only to "Progressives", but to any thinking person. JZ
______
______
By Matthew Filipowicz, AlterNet
“I think they should spend five or ten minutes on it -- seeing if there’s a point in taking part in the carefully orchestrated electoral extravaganza.
"READ MORE»
______________
______________
Boycott the vote! It only legitimizes the illegitimate... Where should Occupy go next? Civil Disobedience in the footsteps of Thoreau and Gandhi!http://www.scribd.com/doc/75348301/
_____
Chomsky in the past concurred with my opinion on an entirely different matter (caution, this requires some thinking):
_____
MORE ON CHOMSKY AND THE COURTS
For those, who do not know Chomsky's bio, his true claim to faim is as one of the founders of computer science. His seminal contribution to the field was in developing the fundamentals of linguistic theories, which are applicable to computer languages.
Some years ago, I disucssed with him the following line of argument of mine.
- A computer program is an assembly of rules of operations.
- The statement in 1., above, is valid regardless of whether such computer program is written in machine language, higher level computer language, or in natural (human) language.
- A computer system that runs the operations of a court, is an assemly of rules of operations of such court.
- In most civilized societies, no court is permitted to institute its own rules of opetation. That perogative is reserved to another branch of government (most often - the legislative branch).
Therefore, no court of any nation should be permitted to implement it own computer system. Such systems should be treated as Rules of Civil Procedure/ Rules of Criminal Procedure, and must be implemented under the same branch of government that is lawfully permitted to institute Rules of Civil Procedure/ Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Therefore, the implementation of Sustain by the Los Angeles Superior Court through a privately owned corporation, the implementation of PACER and CM/ECF under the US Administration of the Courts, and similarly, the implementation of the courts' computer sysstems in the State of Israel under the State of Israel Administration of the Courts, with help from IBM and EDS, are unlawful on their face (that is - without any review of the systems in and of themselves).
Chomsky agreed with my position. However, he refused to provide me a short opinion letter on this matter. I sought the opinion for the 2010 Universal Periodic Review of Human Rights in the United States. The reason he provided for refusing to provide the opinion in writing: An opinion bearing his name would only hurt my cause, given his reputation...
Although I never get into the discussion above in my reports, the basic recommendation of my reports to the United Nations is:
NO COURT OF ANY NATION SHOULD BE PERMITTED TO IMPLEMENT ITS OWN COMPUTER SYSTEMS. PERMITTING A COURT TO IMPLEMENT ITS OWN COMPUTER SYSTEMS AMOUNTS TO AN UNANNOUNCED CONSTITUTIONAL REVOLUTION.
P.S.
If he takes the time to think it over, I believe that even Mr Woldgram would concur with this opinion, based on his modest recent experience in the US District Court (and he only experienced the tip of the iceberg...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)