Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Counselor at Law and federal witness
c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
Tucson, Arizona state
zip code exempt

Under Protest and by Special Visitation
with explicit reservation of all rights







                  UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                  JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ARIZONA


IN RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENA      )  Case No. GJ-95-1-6
SERVED ON                      )
NEW LIFE HEALTH CENTER COMPANY )  NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR
                               )  THE RIGHT TO ENJOY
                               )  THE ASSISTANCE OF
_______________________________)  COUNSEL OF CHOICE


COMES NOW  Paul Andrew,  Mitchell, Sui  Juris, Sovereign  Arizona

Citizen (hereinafter  "Counsel") and  Vice  President  for  Legal

Affairs of  New Life  Health Center  Company,  an  Unincorporated

Business Trust domiciled in the Arizona Republic (hereinafter the

"Company"), to  demand this  honorable Court  to recognize  Their

fundamental Right to enjoy the assistance of either Counsel(s) or

Co-Counsel(s) of  Their choice who are not necessarily members of

the State  Bar of  Arizona and  who are  not necessarily licensed

attorneys, for the following reasons:

     1.   The Constitutional guarantee of right to "assistance of

counsel" is not qualified.

     2.   The Constitution  of the State of Arizona, ordained and

established by  the People  for their  protection, shall  not  be

superseded or  amended by  any  act  of  the  Legislature  or  by

anything in the Constitution or laws of any State.


Notice and Demand to Enjoy the Assistance of Counsel:  Page 1 of
                                4


     3.   The Company  has the fundamental Right to the effective

assistance of Counsel of their choice, to stand by, and to advise

the Company while proceeding In Propria Persona.  People v. Hill,

(1969) 70 C.2d 678,  76 Cal.Rptr. 225, 452 P.2d 329, cert. denied

406 U.S.   971;   People v. Zamora, (1944) 66 Cal.App.2d 166, 152

P.2d 180.

     4.   Within the  unambiguous language  of the  Constitution,

the assistance  of Counsel  does not restrict it to any state bar

associations.

     5.   The Company  refuses to waive any fundamental Rights or

Immunities in order to assert another Right or Immunity.

     6.   The Right  to Counsel  has been deeply embedded in true

American tradition since the foundation of this Republic, and has

been most  recently set  forth by the United States Supreme Court

in Faretta v. State of California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975).

     Therefore, the  Accused moves the Court to grant this demand

for the  right of  assistance of Counsel or Co-Counsel, whichever

the Company  wishes to  have,  to  insure  the  Company  of  fair

proceedings and in the interests of justice, more fully set forth

in the  attached brief  in support  of the  absolute, unalienable

Right to unfettered Counsel.

     The  Company   reminds  the   Court  that  the  Company  has

previously challenged  the Court's  jurisdiction for  failing  to

allow for  effective assistance  of Counsel.   See, specifically,

COMPANY'S OPPOSITION  TO SECOND  APPLICATION FOR  ORDER  TO  SHOW

CAUSE;   PETITION FOR  ORDER  TO  SHOW  CAUSE;    AND  NOTICE  OF

CHALLENGE TO  JURISDICTION, WITH VERIFICATION, page 6 of 15, line


Notice and Demand to Enjoy the Assistance of Counsel:  Page 2 of
                                4


28, quoting  the  U.S.  Supreme  Court  as  follows:    "If  this

requirement of  the Sixth  Amendment is  not complied  with,  the

court no longer has jurisdiction to proceed."  Johnson v. Zerbst,

304 U.S. 458, 468 (1938).

     In addition, if the Court fails to notify the Company of its

fundamental "Rights  Sua Sponte" or those declared or demanded by

the Company,  then the  Court of  its own  volition denies itself

jurisdiction.


Executed on June 3, 1996


/s/ Eugene A. Burns

Dr. Eugene A. Burns, D.C., N.D.
Citizen of Arizona state
all rights reserved without prejudice


/s/ Paul Mitchell

Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state
all rights reserved without prejudice


Notice and Demand to Enjoy the Assistance of Counsel:  Page 3 of
                                4


                        PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Linda  H. Burns,  hereby certify,  under penalty  of  perjury,

under the  laws of  the United  States of  America,  without  the

United States,  that I  am at least 18 years of age and a Citizen

of one of the United States of America, that I am not currently a

Party to  this action, and that I personally served the following

document:
                      NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR
                       THE RIGHT TO ENJOY
                        THE ASSISTANCE OF
                        COUNSEL OF CHOICE

by placing  said document  in first class U.S. Mail, with postage

prepaid and properly addressed to the following individuals:

ROBERT L. MISKELL                  John M. Roll
Acapulco Building, Suite 8310      U.S. District Court
110 South Church Avenue            55 E. Broadway
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

JANET NAPOLITANO                   Clerk
Acapulco Building, Suite 8310      U.S. District Court
110 South Church Avenue            55 E. Broadway
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

Grand Jury Foreperson              Postmaster
In re: New Life Health Center Co.  U.S. Post Office
55 E. Broadway                     Downtown Station
Tucson, Arizona                    Tucson, Arizona

Judge Alex Kozinski                Evangelina Cardenas
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals     "Internal Revenue Service"
125 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 200     300 West Congress
Pasadena, California               Tucson, Arizona

Attorney General                   Solicitor General
Department of Justice              Department of Justice
10th and Constitution, N.W. !      10th and Constitution, N.W. !
Washington, D.C.                   Washington, D.C.


Dated:  June 3, 1996

/s/ Linda Burns
________________________________________
Linda H. Burns, Citizen of Arizona state
all rights reserved without prejudice


Notice and Demand to Enjoy the Assistance of Counsel:  Page 4 of
                                4


                             #  #  #


Return to the Table of Contents for

IN RE GRAND JURY SUBPOENA SERVED ON NEW LIFE HEALTH CENTER COMPANY