process
to do list (brainstorm)
to do list (itemized)
daily task list. - three things for saturday.
to do list
written:
agenda for mike. 3:30 monday.
libel action
no to lots?
dsicovery re jail
what else?
get rid of arrest report
collect on accident case - find insurance company via other insurance company
disc
irs
court 13
AGO
227 tax
mom and lindy
client letter
taylor v taylor status report
securatex
nonwritten:
vaccuum
pay storage bill
227 turn off lights and water.
pay bills.
(write) oct rent check.
pick up trash
call jewelry doctor
take car for fix
6 cle
chuck's listings for greg
did: took out trash
all i've done yet is make the list, and it's past 4:40 already.
Thursday, September 22, 2005
three things daily task list:
wait for phone call. - woohoo! phone rang! it's a yes on the $3,700 ($4K less commission)(less x in taxes) 1:00 meet marcella. DONE. net about 2,300 - purchase price. 1/2 title work, spcial warranty deed. closing by oct 7.
print rayford letter DONE
go downtown for taxes for 3714 roosevelt, 1909 ingram, 801 e 20th.
tomorrow call back or write re ingraham. done. 227 taxes.
get securatex info. public records request.
that's 3 things.
pick up trash in street. DONE - could use more.
so in order it's
1) print rayford letter
2) pick up trash
3) meet marcella
4) go downtown
to do list
cle hours - 6.
disc commish
- copy dismissal form, send with cover letter.
- facts misrepresented.
- actual facts
- law: statute unconstitutional - allows for abuse of discretion
- significance
irs
call schwab
227 taxes problem - put on caudill list. draft letter.
securatex problem - 1) obtain written standards. review lock seizure.
statute problem - write to john day requesting AGO.
The Honorable John Day,
State Representative
Woodruff Place
Dear Mr. Day,
I am your constituent. I am writing to ask you to request an attorney general opinion. It is my understanding that the AG's office does not issue such opinions
except at the request of an elected oficial.
I have attached a draft of the request.
The statute I have concerns about is IC 35-42-2
Chapter 2. Battery and Related Offenses
IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery.
My concern is that this definition is unconstitutionally vague, and includes
much conduct that is not within the traditional meaning of the crime of battery, and much conduct that is protected expression under the Indiana Bill of Rights and The First Amendment. A vague statute invites abuse, by giving unfettered discretion to police, to prosecutors, and to juries. A person can be found guilty of being black or poor or mentally ill or gay, for conduct most people engage in. This is particularly important in your district, where the incarceration rates are high, most people are too poor to afford lawyers, the public defender lacks resources to actively litigate cases, bail is unafordablely high and the pre-trial detention facilities constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
The statute, read literally or broadly, prohibits football and basketball, prohibits two angry people from settling their differences with a handshake, prohibits a wife from kissing her husband rudely or insolently, and prohibits rude conduct of the sort found constitutionally protected in Lawrence v Texas.
My situation is that I was arrested and charged with three counts of battery, in what was harmless playground fun. I own a vacant lot on my block which I allow the church to use as a playground. Because of overzealous code enforcement by Health and Hospital, I have to go there periodicly in case anyone has littered, or in case the flowers have gotten more than 12 inches high. I digress. While there, I was asked by the children to play with them, which I did. Perhaps I was unnecessarily rough - no offense was intended, but someone became offended, police were called.
The police and detective never got my side of the story, but jumped to conclusions.
I am openly bisexual in the hood, so I have a reputation as the neighborhood pervert, which led to more jumping to conclusions.
I was arrested and confined for a month in the CCA annex on Washington Street.
While there I was tortured. I was denied medicine and food, deprived of sleep, assaulted by a gang of prisoners, denied access to the law library, prevented from calling my lawyer, had a letter to my lawyer confiscated, was prevented from bringing legal materials to court including a pencil and a bible, and on and on. I am a vegetarian because of my religious commitment to nonviolence, so I was unable to eat most of the food offered. I had a broken tooth and was in extreme pain, but was denied aspirin and such. Without access to my medication, I experienced a nervous breakdown, my second. I have spent the past year defending the case - everything was dismissed eventually - and trying to heal from the nervous breakdown. I paid a ransom of $1000 to get free of the unconstitutional condictions in the jail. But I digress.
The damage done by an unconstitutional statute is not just that someone might be wrongfully convicted; it is also that someone might be wrongfully charged, or wrongfully arrested by a police officer who could then argue qualified immunity.
I am indigent; I have been disabled and unable to work for 5 years. But because I still own my house, I was denied a public defender. This wound up being a good thing, because I got a good lawyer who got the charges dropped because I insisted on going to trial rather than taking any plea agreement. An innocent person in my shoes, given the services of a public defender, would be forced to accept a plea in order to escape the unconstitutional jail conditions. This is unjust and unlawful.
I welcome your help. I thank you for the work you have done for years to fight injustice.
Sincerely,
Robbin Stewart esq.
-- draft do not file
State Representative John Day
State Capitol
[Date]
Honorable Attorney General Steve Carter
5th Floor State Office Building
302 W Washington St.
Indianapolis IN 46204
Dear Mr. Carter
I am writing to formally request an Attorney General Opinion on the constitutionality of
IC 35-42-2
Chapter 2. Battery and Related Offenses
IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor.
A constituent, who believes he was falsely charged under the statute, has asked me to have you review the statute for constitutionality under the Indiana Bill of Rights and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The key terms of the statute, "rude", "insolent", or "angry" are undefined.
Clearly there is a core area the legislature intended to prohibit - punches in the nose, for example. But the statute isn't so limited.
There are two problems with a vague statute. One is that it doesn't tell a reasonable person what to do or not do, and ends up chilling expressive conduct - hugs, kisses , handshakes. Since it chills speech, it should be reviewed under the O'Brien test, and since it is vague it should be reviewed under the @ test. @@@ review notes.
The other problem is that it confers unfettered discretion to police, prosecutors, and juries, to arrest, charge, and convict, for reasons other than their conduct.
In my district, many of my constituents are poor and black young men, who are disproportionately convicted of this and other offenses. Many believe that the legal system allows for unfettered bias against them, that the inadequate resources of the public defender system prevent them from getting a fair trial, that the unconstitutional prison conditions amount to a badge of slavery, and that they face injustice from the law. I have other constituents who are concerned the vague statute may be used to unfairly target gays, and be used to do an end run around Lawrence v Texas.
The statute, read literally, would seem to outlaw football and basketball, slam dancing, and other forms of cultural expression. It can only be enforced selectively, creating an appearance of bias.
Statutes should be in plain English and have a clear meaning so people know what to do and know if they are being treated unfairly.
Two specific questions:
Is consent a defense?
Is there any limiting construction that should be applied to help avoid the constitutional question?
Thanks in advance,
Sincerely,
Representative John Day.
court 13 problem - clerks are making pleas for citizens, even when citizens object.
this is a due process violation. and unauthorized practice of law.
to do: memo re the problem.
bmv issue - problem: bmv tried to change my name. i have not recieved requested assurances it won't happen again. with voter ID, could cost a person right to vote.
- demand for court order for name change is unlawful. write letter as a start. find old letter?
remaining case - signs. - send status report.
send majors v abell appendix and cover letter. draft temp restraining order?
pack
renew plate DONE
pay bill - which bill? phone electric gas make bill for roommates.
buy truck from lee.
fix car!
three things for friday: take car to shop.
pay bill.
raccoon statement - revise draft.
Public records request:
I, Robbin Stewart, esq., 227 N temple 46201, request a copy of the sheriff department's procedures regulating searches and seizures at the entrances to the city-county building.
I also request a copy of whatever court order or warrant authorizes such search and seizures.
wait for phone call. - woohoo! phone rang! it's a yes on the $3,700 ($4K less commission)(less x in taxes) 1:00 meet marcella. DONE. net about 2,300 - purchase price. 1/2 title work, spcial warranty deed. closing by oct 7.
print rayford letter DONE
go downtown for taxes for 3714 roosevelt, 1909 ingram, 801 e 20th.
tomorrow call back or write re ingraham. done. 227 taxes.
get securatex info. public records request.
that's 3 things.
pick up trash in street. DONE - could use more.
so in order it's
1) print rayford letter
2) pick up trash
3) meet marcella
4) go downtown
to do list
cle hours - 6.
disc commish
- copy dismissal form, send with cover letter.
- facts misrepresented.
- actual facts
- law: statute unconstitutional - allows for abuse of discretion
- significance
irs
call schwab
227 taxes problem - put on caudill list. draft letter.
securatex problem - 1) obtain written standards. review lock seizure.
statute problem - write to john day requesting AGO.
The Honorable John Day,
State Representative
Woodruff Place
Dear Mr. Day,
I am your constituent. I am writing to ask you to request an attorney general opinion. It is my understanding that the AG's office does not issue such opinions
except at the request of an elected oficial.
I have attached a draft of the request.
The statute I have concerns about is IC 35-42-2
Chapter 2. Battery and Related Offenses
IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery.
My concern is that this definition is unconstitutionally vague, and includes
much conduct that is not within the traditional meaning of the crime of battery, and much conduct that is protected expression under the Indiana Bill of Rights and The First Amendment. A vague statute invites abuse, by giving unfettered discretion to police, to prosecutors, and to juries. A person can be found guilty of being black or poor or mentally ill or gay, for conduct most people engage in. This is particularly important in your district, where the incarceration rates are high, most people are too poor to afford lawyers, the public defender lacks resources to actively litigate cases, bail is unafordablely high and the pre-trial detention facilities constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
The statute, read literally or broadly, prohibits football and basketball, prohibits two angry people from settling their differences with a handshake, prohibits a wife from kissing her husband rudely or insolently, and prohibits rude conduct of the sort found constitutionally protected in Lawrence v Texas.
My situation is that I was arrested and charged with three counts of battery, in what was harmless playground fun. I own a vacant lot on my block which I allow the church to use as a playground. Because of overzealous code enforcement by Health and Hospital, I have to go there periodicly in case anyone has littered, or in case the flowers have gotten more than 12 inches high. I digress. While there, I was asked by the children to play with them, which I did. Perhaps I was unnecessarily rough - no offense was intended, but someone became offended, police were called.
The police and detective never got my side of the story, but jumped to conclusions.
I am openly bisexual in the hood, so I have a reputation as the neighborhood pervert, which led to more jumping to conclusions.
I was arrested and confined for a month in the CCA annex on Washington Street.
While there I was tortured. I was denied medicine and food, deprived of sleep, assaulted by a gang of prisoners, denied access to the law library, prevented from calling my lawyer, had a letter to my lawyer confiscated, was prevented from bringing legal materials to court including a pencil and a bible, and on and on. I am a vegetarian because of my religious commitment to nonviolence, so I was unable to eat most of the food offered. I had a broken tooth and was in extreme pain, but was denied aspirin and such. Without access to my medication, I experienced a nervous breakdown, my second. I have spent the past year defending the case - everything was dismissed eventually - and trying to heal from the nervous breakdown. I paid a ransom of $1000 to get free of the unconstitutional condictions in the jail. But I digress.
The damage done by an unconstitutional statute is not just that someone might be wrongfully convicted; it is also that someone might be wrongfully charged, or wrongfully arrested by a police officer who could then argue qualified immunity.
I am indigent; I have been disabled and unable to work for 5 years. But because I still own my house, I was denied a public defender. This wound up being a good thing, because I got a good lawyer who got the charges dropped because I insisted on going to trial rather than taking any plea agreement. An innocent person in my shoes, given the services of a public defender, would be forced to accept a plea in order to escape the unconstitutional jail conditions. This is unjust and unlawful.
I welcome your help. I thank you for the work you have done for years to fight injustice.
Sincerely,
Robbin Stewart esq.
-- draft do not file
State Representative John Day
State Capitol
[Date]
Honorable Attorney General Steve Carter
5th Floor State Office Building
302 W Washington St.
Indianapolis IN 46204
Dear Mr. Carter
I am writing to formally request an Attorney General Opinion on the constitutionality of
IC 35-42-2
Chapter 2. Battery and Related Offenses
IC 35-42-2-1
Battery
Sec. 1. (a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches another person in a rude, insolent, or angry manner commits battery, a Class B misdemeanor.
A constituent, who believes he was falsely charged under the statute, has asked me to have you review the statute for constitutionality under the Indiana Bill of Rights and the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The key terms of the statute, "rude", "insolent", or "angry" are undefined.
Clearly there is a core area the legislature intended to prohibit - punches in the nose, for example. But the statute isn't so limited.
There are two problems with a vague statute. One is that it doesn't tell a reasonable person what to do or not do, and ends up chilling expressive conduct - hugs, kisses , handshakes. Since it chills speech, it should be reviewed under the O'Brien test, and since it is vague it should be reviewed under the @ test. @@@ review notes.
The other problem is that it confers unfettered discretion to police, prosecutors, and juries, to arrest, charge, and convict, for reasons other than their conduct.
In my district, many of my constituents are poor and black young men, who are disproportionately convicted of this and other offenses. Many believe that the legal system allows for unfettered bias against them, that the inadequate resources of the public defender system prevent them from getting a fair trial, that the unconstitutional prison conditions amount to a badge of slavery, and that they face injustice from the law. I have other constituents who are concerned the vague statute may be used to unfairly target gays, and be used to do an end run around Lawrence v Texas.
The statute, read literally, would seem to outlaw football and basketball, slam dancing, and other forms of cultural expression. It can only be enforced selectively, creating an appearance of bias.
Statutes should be in plain English and have a clear meaning so people know what to do and know if they are being treated unfairly.
Two specific questions:
Is consent a defense?
Is there any limiting construction that should be applied to help avoid the constitutional question?
Thanks in advance,
Sincerely,
Representative John Day.
court 13 problem - clerks are making pleas for citizens, even when citizens object.
this is a due process violation. and unauthorized practice of law.
to do: memo re the problem.
bmv issue - problem: bmv tried to change my name. i have not recieved requested assurances it won't happen again. with voter ID, could cost a person right to vote.
- demand for court order for name change is unlawful. write letter as a start. find old letter?
remaining case - signs. - send status report.
send majors v abell appendix and cover letter. draft temp restraining order?
pack
renew plate DONE
pay bill - which bill? phone electric gas make bill for roommates.
buy truck from lee.
fix car!
three things for friday: take car to shop.
pay bill.
raccoon statement - revise draft.
Public records request:
I, Robbin Stewart, esq., 227 N temple 46201, request a copy of the sheriff department's procedures regulating searches and seizures at the entrances to the city-county building.
I also request a copy of whatever court order or warrant authorizes such search and seizures.
Saturday, September 17, 2005
Friday, September 16, 2005
Tuesday, September 13, 2005
comics with aardvarks
http://kamp.keenspace.com/d/20050513.html
http://www.comics-db.com/Other_Publishers/A/Aardvark/
cerebus and other. ceterus paribus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebus
article http://www.americanpopularculture.com/journal/articles/spring_2003/rothenberg.htm
http://www.toonopedia.com/cerebus.htm
http://kamp.keenspace.com/d/20050513.html
http://www.comics-db.com/Other_Publishers/A/Aardvark/
cerebus and other. ceterus paribus?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebus
article http://www.americanpopularculture.com/journal/articles/spring_2003/rothenberg.htm
http://www.toonopedia.com/cerebus.htm
Monday, September 12, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)