Time: Fri Nov 15 13:59:55 1996 To: tfs@adc.com (Tony F Sgarlatti) From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar] Subject: Advice requested regarding DL issue.. Cc: Bcc: Dear Tony: My advice: call Rich Scully at (602) 234-9640, pager: (602) 665-7522 and request information about joining Pre-Paid Legal in Oklahoma. I believe they now handle pre-existing problems. I get no financial gain from this advice (unless Rich takes me to dinner again soon). /s/ Paul Mitchell copy: Rich Scully (no computer (yet)) At 01:44 PM 11/15/96 -0600, you wrote: >A friend of mine was recently pulled over by a local cop for not >stopping his car soon enough in an intersection (it was raining), >and so the front of his car was beyond the pedestrian cross walk >(it was also in the evening and no pedestrians or cars were at >risk of injury). > >He didn't have a drivers licence since he's a state Citizen of >the California Republic domiciled in Minnesota (and has all of >his paperwork viv Richard McDonald in order), so after the cop >asked him for his license, he showed him his state Citizen ID >card. The cop then wrote him up for driving without a valid >license. He had registration and insurance on the car since >it belonged to his wife (common law marriage), and she is not >a state Citizen. Interestingly enough, the cop didn't write him >up for anything else, like failure to stop or whatever. That >offense of driving without a valid DL is a misdemeanor here in >Minnesota. > >He filed a motion to quash based on lack of jurisdiction, not >enough miniminal contacts in the state, etc. which at his >arraignment the judge said he read. He went to court >representing himself in propria personna. I was at court with >him for the arraignment, and his arguement was basically that >the court did not even have jurisdiction to try him since he's >a state Citizen. So he didn't enter a plea, and the judge had >the 'court' enter a plea *for* him of not guilty over my friends >objection. > >Then the DA wanted the charge reduced to petty misdemeanor which >also meant he wouldn't be allowed a jury trial. The judge asked >my friend if he wanted a jury trial, but my friend kept insisting >that he's still arguing the jurisdiction issue. The judge said >he's not waiving his rights to jurisdiction but he only has two >choices to his question - did he want a jury trial or a judge >to hear his case. My friend said he wanted to research it more, >and the judge then said it will be scheduled for a pre-trial >conference. There was a court stenographer there and he's >getting a copy of the transcript. > >Any advice for my friend in this matter short of hiring an attorney? >His pre-trial conference is next week, and I'm afraid the >'procedures' part of the court thing may be his downfall. He has >good arguements, but I'm not sure if the court is just taking >advantage of his naivety with how to handle himself in court, i.e., >how to argue, object, make motions, etc. Thanks. > >Tony Sgarlatti >tonys@the-truth.org >http://www.future.net/~thetruth/ > >
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail