pulled over

[Smith]

I did the whole process.

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Smith

I did the whole process.

The only issue, then is how he was going to rule on the mandamus. since he didn't, the higher court needs to mandate that judge to mandate to the Clerk to enter your default

[pyroman1]

Originally Posted by Smith

The SOB told me if I wanted to appeal I had to pay a $125 FILING FEE , I do not see how; since it was in evidence that I reserved all my rights including the right to file appeal without charge.

That's nothing. I had to pay a $250 non-refundable filing fee to appeal my case. Then I got ANOTHER bill asking for $300 more to cover the transcript and copies of the documents I filed. The appeal was then denied because I refused to pay more to this corrupt system. If I had paid it I would have then paid double the amount of the original ticket.

I have had to pay this filing fee before and that time I won. But I was still out the money. When one must pay to file an appeal it setups up the system for corruption. After all, why find someone not guilty when you can ensure an income by finding them guilty, whether they appeal or pay.

It is my belief after dealing with the INjustice system that we need to all heed the words of Thomas Jefferson.

[mrg]

Originally Posted by pyroman1

That's nothing. I had to pay a $250 non-refundable filing fee to appeal my case. Then I got ANOTHER bill asking for $300 more to cover the transcript and copies of the documents I filed. The appeal was then denied because I refused to pay more to this corrupt system. If I had paid it I would have then paid double the amount of the original ticket.

I have had to pay this filing fee before and that time I won. But I was still out the money. When one must pay to file an appeal it setups up the system for corruption. After all, why find someone not guilty when you can ensure an income by finding them guilty, whether they appeal or pay.

It is my belief after dealing with the INjustice system that we need to all heed the words of Thomas Jefferson.

Denial of free access to the law (freedom) and the right to petition for redress of grievances.

No due process.

No equality under the law because some filing as paupers have the fees waived and others do not.

The court has a conflict of interest--follow the money trail.

[Smith]

OK . How do I file a good rock solid appeal or petition to destroy their judgement.


First problem getting around the filing fee

second figuring out the proper venue / county/ district/state/ circus to file the Darn thing in

Does anyone have an example of an appeal I could use?

Is there anyway to get the damn judiciary to reconize The US SUPREME COURT CASE as fact and not a legal opinion?

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by Smith

OK . How do I file a good rock solid appeal or petition to destroy their judgement.

You find and articulate the proper grounds on which to establish viable challenges to issues you raised (typically your objections at trial) that the judge ruled incorrectly on and you specifically address those issues in your filing with cites of case law and perhaps memorandum that support your arguments.

Originally Posted by Smith

First problem getting around the filing fee

In some jurisdictions, filing as indigent might be sufficient but if you have an income you're going to be hard pressed to do it for free.

Originally Posted by Smith

....second figuring out the proper venue / county/ district/state/ circus to file the Darn thing in

Your local/state court structure is well defined and you can get the information off the Internet as to the appellate structure in your state.

Originally Posted by Smith

Does anyone have an example of an appeal I could use?

Anything someone might offer you over the Internet is probably next to worthless and might even be bordering, if not crossing, the line of practicing law without a license.

Originally Posted by Smith

Is there anyway to get the damn judiciary to reconize The US SUPREME COURT CASE as fact and not a legal opinion?

Sure. Use it as part of your appeal. But somehow I doubt your interpretation of whatever it is will match up with reality. You say the ruling in the SC says "X" but the legally valid interpretation is "Y" and you're off into the weeds again.