interactive success

[tsunamix1]

I wanted to get some opinions from the members of this group on how to proceed with a traffic matter that seems to not want to disappear. I believe that it may be because I slept at the opportunity to have it dismissed, but , there will be a second chance in the near future. In early June i recieved a citation for disregard of a traffic device. Shortly thereafter i filed do***ents into the case, one of which was a challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, another a sworn motion to dismiss for lack of verified complaint, a sworn motion to dismiss for want of judicial process, an affidavit on material and jurisdictional facts in traffic regulatory schemes, and an acceptance of the oath of office of the magistrate ,( not one on file with secretary of state). all of which were denied at the very beginning of the proceeding, for "lack of foundation".
I believe that I have a small working knowledge concerning administrative procedures and i called the magistrates attention to the fact that there was no plaintiff , firstly because of the lack of a valid cause of action against me , due to the lack of a promulgated rule which was not part of the charge, and therefore the allegation lacked any force and effect of law, (no valid cause of action = no plaintiff) and deprived me of my right to face my accuser, to which his response was that the officer could represent the "city" to which i promptly objected , and stated that i could not recognize the officer as the plaintiff, as that would mean that he would be committing at least two felonies to do so, by representing someone in a court of law and not being a sworn attorney and barratry( bringing and maintaining an action in the court and not having an interest in the relief). The officer didnt say a word in the whole proceeding. [indent][/INDENT] I stated to the court that I was challenging subject matter in the issue , and he immediately asked if i was saying that the officer couldnt issue me a citation, and my reply was that i was engaged in a regulated activity , i expected him to do his job, and yet i still do not understand the nature and cause of this accusation. He then stated that i was charged with disregard of a traffic device, to which i replied, that i know what was being alleged, but that doesnt explain how i'm liable.
Then there was the prefunctory threat of contempt, to which i understand was his way of finding out if I actually believe the court has jurisdiction or not, to which i promptly objected and then he "ruled" that the city has jurisdiction and i objected to that too, then the last statement from him was " well we're gonna do something one way or another" which in hindsight was possibly my out , but being my first case and wanting the court to do what I believe is it's duty to ensure equality under the law, to point out the plaintiff and admit there was none, i decided to appeal. The appeal was just as fruitless, as i pointed out on appeal that there should not have ever been a proceeding , because there was no plaintiff in sight, the judge there determined that the appeal was untimely because there was no determination in the traffic court. Seems to be a vicious circle in motion . Does anyone believe i should go back to traffic court and immediately move to dismiss or should i just file a motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction and see what happens? Anyone see any down sides here? sorry if this is unreadable because i'm not familiar with how to make paragraghs and such here, but give me time i will learn.

[Jerry Pitts]

send me your email addy and I will send to you bountiful amounts of info on the issue of traffic rights.

Jerry

[ezrhythm]

Originally Posted by tsunamix1

...and he immediately asked if i was saying that the officer couldnt issue me a citation, and my reply was that i was engaged in a regulated activity, i expected him to do his job, and yet i still do not understand the nature and cause of this accusation.
It doesn't look like the court had jurisdiction until you answered this question in which your answer looks like jurisdiction was cured. When challenging jurisdiction since it is upon them to prove it and when they are not able to, the judge will try and gain jurisdiction by getting you to answer questions that cure it. Discussing particulars of the case cures jurisdiction.

He then stated that i was charged with disregard of a traffic device, to which i replied, that i know what was being alleged, but that doesnt explain how i'm liable.
After jurisdiction was cured he then continues as normal and (re)states the charge in order for you to plea.

I believe after losing an appeal you would file in regard to vacating a void judgement for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Someone back me up or correct me on this.

[Livefire]

an excellent job for a first time! Was this matter held before a magistrate or a judge?? Reason I'm asking is that in MI, if the hearing is before a magistrate, only the officer and yourself are allowed. A formal hearing before a judge REQUIRES the presence of an attorney on behalf of the state. Check the rules for your state, it might help you out. For future reference you also find out if the judges retirement fund is inured from traffic fines as well.

[tsunamix1]

to livewire,
there was a magistrate and i'm pretty sure the funds from his court is used to pay him. the appeals process just kicked the issue back to the traffic court , to "ripen" . I'm not understanding why the appeals judge didnt throw the issue out after my pointing out that there was no do***ents filed that contained all of the elements of a valid cause of action against me and that the traffic court shouldn't have had a hearing in the first place under such conditions, as there was no "plaintiff".

From my limited understanding , there was supposed to be a promulgated rule number accompanying the statute number to give the statute number the "force and effect" of law, this would be the equivalent of evidence and an information in a constitutionally sanctioned jurisdiction. This failure to include this rule number has many ramifications , imo, firstly , perjury and subornation of perjury, in failure to complete a state required form. second, constitutional denial of any and all of the evidence against me, third, failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted,
fourth, failure by the court to insure equality under the law for both parties , as there was no plaintiff and the only other party there , was there under threat , duress and coercion. fifth, As the matter before the court was an issue concerning a provision of administrative law, and seeing that the procedure was not followed , should know that , for an agency not to follow its own rules strictly, shows that it acts in a willful manner and thereby
damages it's credibility in the good faith department as well as severing its ties with any claims of recieving power and authority of its master.

I did make a typo , in the original post concerning my answer as to whether or not the officer could issue me a citation and in the original i typed that i was in a regulated activity and it should have read" if " i was engaged in a regulated activity, which is why , i believe that i didnt enter into the merits and the magistrate just let the hearing go into limbo.

maybe he believe i did enter into the merits, and if so maybe i should file another motion , maybe to dismiss for subject matter jurisd.

[joseph sugarman]

Your motion to dismiss for lack of a verified complaint is a direct attack on subject matter jurisdiction, and it is the correct attack. Unless the legislature of your state has written a new law or amended an existing law to cir***vent the verification process for this type of traffic infraction. You must research this.

I bring this up as many states are rewritting traffic laws to try to remove the onus of a verified complaint for them. You must research this, as well.

The fact you state the appeals court returned your appeal because it was not ripe tells me there has not been a final determination made in the lower court in which you find yourself. Is this correct?

[tsunamix1]

Originally Posted by joseph sugarman

Your motion to dismiss for lack of a verified complaint is a direct attack on subject matter jurisdiction, and it is the correct attack. Unless the legislature of your state has written a new law or amended an existing law to cir***vent the verification process for this type of traffic infraction. You must research this.

I bring this up as many states are rewritting traffic laws to try to remove the onus of a verified complaint for them. You must research this, as well.

The fact you state the appeals court returned your appeal because it was not ripe tells me there has not been a final determination made in the lower court in which you find yourself. Is this correct?

that's correct, yet i fail to understand why the appeals court didnt see any valid cause in the record from the lower court and determined that the lower court had anything in which to make a determination on .

Even if the legislature decided to try and cir***vent this requirement , it would still have to revise it's APA as well , wouldn't it? The fact that the lower court didnt come to a determination shows that it still didnt realize jurisdiction in the issue, is my take, what do you say?

In my challenge of subject matter jurisdiction was a notice denying my permission , whether expressed or implied , for any governmental actor in the issue at any level to rule on , adjudge , adjudicate , decide , or decree on the jurisdictional bar set in the matter, so that the evidence would come forward , instead of them presuming that i somehow traversed into the "plaintiffs" position.