The Honorable Supreme Court of Nevada

THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY123 PETER J. HELFRICH ) 45 PLAINTIFF ) WRIT OF MANDAMUS6 ) 78 V. ) CASE NO.: CR-341739 ) 10 JUDGE KIMBERLY WANKER ) 1112 RESPONDENT ) 13 ______141516171819 Comes now, Plaintiff PETER JASON HELFRICH, IN PROPER 20 PERSON, pursuant to Rules 94 and 97 and petitions this court to 2122 issue a Writ of Mandamus to order the Honorable Judge Wanker to 23 be compelled to accept Plaintiff Helfrich's Pro Se (thus 24 appealing her Denial) In Forma Pauperis Application(SEE 2526 Exhibits: A, B, C, D) pursuant to RULE 39. PROCEEDINGS IN FORMA 27 PAUPERIS, regarding CASE NO.: CR-34173 (SEE EXHIBIT:______). 2829 Plaintiff has the Constitutional / LEGAL right to proceed In 30 Forma Pauperis, as Defendant has previously been approved by 3132[Summary of pleading] - 1 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY Judge Tina Brisebill (SEE EXHIBIT:______), Judge Wanker 1 2 (SEE EXHIBIT:______), THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (SEE EXHIBIT:______) In Forma Pauperis status, when it suited 45 them to 'saddle' Plaintiff Helfrich with a mentally ill, 6 incompetent attorney by the name of Harold Kuehn (SEE 78 EXHIBITS:______9 ______), Harold Kuehns 'Drinking Buddy', Chris Arabia, 10 who refused to perfect Peter J. Helfrich's appeal (SEE 1112 EXHIBIT:______), and lastly, David Neely, who once 13 again without any repercussions from Judge Wanker was allowed to 1415 refuse a direct order of the court to perfect Peter J. 16 Helfrich's appeal (SEE EXHIBIT:______). Now 17 that Plaintiff is pursuing a civil matter before the court in 18 19 which crimes were committed, Plaintiff is being unlawfully 20 refused the Legal right to do so, by Judge Wanker; thus 2122 committing Obstruction of Justice, Misprision of Felony , under 23 18 USC 4 (SEE POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; as well as 2425 EXHIBITS:______), warranting the26 prayer to a higher court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, hence 27 resolving all issues. 2829303132[Summary of pleading] - 2 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY ARGUMENT IN SUPPORT OF WRIT OF MANDAMUS 1 2 To better enlighten one of the history of obvious abuses of 3 discretion and authority, Judge Wanker's bias, and refusal to 45 follow Federal, State and Constitutional law, a brief history of6 these two parties 'relationship' / 'history' should add merit to 78 this request.9 Upon an Appeal of Domestic Battery (SEE 10 EXHIBITS:______1112 ______13 ______1415 ______16 ______) 17 Peter J. Helfrich was awarded David Neely Esq. {fourth overall 18 19 Public Defender to 'jump ship', so to speak, since the initial 20 trial; third thus far that refused a DIRECT ORDER by Judge 2122 Wanker to perfect Defendant's Pro Se Appeal} [ PLEASE REFERENCE 23 DOCUMENTS TENDERED ON FILE WITH THE HONORABLE NEVADA SUPREME 2425 COURT REGARDING CASE #: ; EXHIBIT:____ ] by the 26 Honorable Judge Wanker for the sole purpose of perfecting 27 (CURRENTLY, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS MANDAMUS 'PLAINTIFF'; NOT 2829 'DEFENDANT') Defendant's already scripted appeal, to which Judge303132[Summary of pleading] - 3 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY Wanker has already commended Defendant PUBLICALLY IN COURT / ON 1 2 VIDEO for scripting. (SEE EXHIBITS:______) 3 On 8-27-2012, at approximately 10:37 am – 11am, David Neely 45 Esq. & Defendant met to discuss said aforementioned appeal brief6 in a meeting room near the Justice Court area, located at the 78 fifth Judicial Court of NYE County, located on East Basin Ave. 9 Mr. Neely refused to perfect Defendant's appeal. Mr. Neely, 10 with numerous expletives laden in his responses said such things 1112 to Defendant as: “You have absolutely no fucking clue about the 13 laws; how to write an appeal, nor do you have grounds for an 1415 appeal! I've been doing Domestic Battery cases for years. CRAZY 16 BITCHES get their asses kicked all the fucking time DUDE! All 17 the fucking time, I'm telling ya; I see these nut case bitches, 18 19 and I've read your appeal... SHE IS A FUCKING NUT JOB FOR SURE!”. 20 Mr. Neely wanted Defendant in essence to shred Defendant's 2122 appeal brief, metaphorically burn it and basically go home and 23 give up. His only “angle” was appealing on the grounds of 2425 “Jurisdiction”, as he put it, yet after skimming the brief / 26 transcripts, he said that “angle” was not going to work. 27 If this is the level of “Quality” indigent Defendant's are 2829 assigned regarding “Defense”, this experience once again (After 30 the mentally insane, “off his meds” Harold Kuehn (SEE Exhibit: 3132[Summary of pleading] - 4 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY B; Colony insurance vs. Harold Kuehn); his drinking buddy “Chris 1 2 Arabia” metaphorically took off on his 'Magic Carpet' as soon as 3 he realized Defendant was another victim of friend, Kuehn; and 45 now a man {Neely} who has yet to take a case to trial since bell6 bottoms were in style {See Exhibit C}) proves Defendant's best 78 chance for a proper appeal is once again in his own hands; and 9 gladly so. 10111213 ARGUMENT 1415 The obvious patterns of biased, Obstructions of Justice, 16 partiality, added to the fact over 50 Plaintiffs currently 17 seeking relief (potentially thousands after the Department of 1819 Justice finishes its investigations) by means of a Qui Tam suit 20 vs. Judge Wanker, Judge Brisebill, Judge Jasperson, Judge Lane, 2122 (SEE EXHIBITS:______) enforce a pattern of 23 misconduct by the entire class of corrupt Judges that arrogantly 24 believe “What happens in Pahrump is by their will, and will stay 25 26 in Pahrump”. 27 Plaintiff has the Constitutional / LEGAL right to appeal 2829 (as well as holding onto the legitimate right to pursue a civil 30 matter in a proper court 'Proceeding as Poor', in regards to the 3132[Summary of pleading] - 5 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY essence behind this Mandamus) Pro Se In Forma Pauperis, as is 1 2 his prayer (Faretta v. California: 422 U.S., 806, 95 S. Ct 2525, 3 45 L Ed. 2D 562, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 83 (1975)). Plaintiff's earned 45 distaste for such a (in)breed in NYE County of over paid, over 6 regarded Judas parasites is well noted, well proven and well 78 documented (See Exhibits:______, Letters From / and 9 to / Department of Justice). Given the circumstances, Peter J. 10 Helfrich requests his Constitutional right to have Judge 1112 Wanker's unjust ruling / DENIAL of In Forma Pauperis overturned 13 by this Honorable Court, and allow Justice to be served, by 1415 recusing her from CASE NO.: CR-34173, and having an Honorable 16 Judge from Clark County reside over CASE NO.: CR-34173. 171819202122 POINTS AND AUTHORITIES23 RULE 39. PROCEEDINGS IN FORMA PAUPERIS 2425 1. A party seeking to proceed in forma pauperis shall file a 26 motion for leave to do so,27 together with the party's notarized affidavit or declaration (in28 compliance with 28 U. S.29 C. §1746 ) in the form prescribed by the Federal Rules of 30 Appellate Procedure, Form 4.3132[Summary of pleading] - 6 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY1 See 28 U. S. C. §1915 . The motion shall state whether leave to 2 proceed in forma3 pauperis was sought in any other court and, if so, whether leave4 was granted. If the5 United States district court or the United States court of 6 appeals has appointed7 counsel under the Criminal Justice Act, see 18 U. S. C. §3006A ,8 or under any other9 applicable federal statute, no affidavit or declaration is 10 required, but the motion shall11 cite the statute under which counsel was appointed.12 2. If leave to proceed in forma pauperis is sought for the 13 purpose of filing a document,14 the motion, and an affidavit or declaration if required, shall 15 be filed together with that16 document and shall comply in every respect with Rule 21. As 17 provided in that Rule, it18 suffices to file an original and 10 copies, unless the party is 19 an inmate confined in an20 institution and is not represented by counsel, in which case the21 original, alone,22 suffices. A copy of the motion, and affidavit or declaration if 23 required, shall precede and24 be attached to each copy of the accompanying document.25 3. Except when these Rules expressly provide that a document 26 shall be prepared as27 required by Rule 33.1, every document presented by a party 28 proceeding under this29 Rule shall be prepared as required by Rule 33.2 (unless such 30 preparation is3132[Summary of pleading] - 7 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY1 impossible). Every document shall be legible. While making due 2 allowance for any case3 presented under this Rule by a person appearing pro se, the 4 Clerk will not file any5 document if it does not comply with the substance of these Rules6 or is jurisdictionally7 out of time.8 4. When the documents required by paragraphs 1 and 2 of this 9 Rule are presented to10 the Clerk, accompanied by proof of service as required by Rule 11 29, they will be placed12 on the docket without the payment of a docket fee or any other 13 fee.14 5. The respondent or appellee in a case filed in forma pauperis 15 shall respond in the16 same manner and within the same time as in any other case of the17 same nature,18 except that the filing of an original and 10 copies of a 19 response prepared as required20 by Rule 33.2, with proof of service as required by Rule 29, 21 suffices. The respondent or22 appellee may challenge the grounds for the motion for leave to 23 proceed in forma24 pauperis in a separate document or in the response itself.25 6. Whenever the Court appoints counsel for an indigent party in 26 a case set for oral27 argument, the briefs on the merits submitted by that counsel, 28 unless otherwise29 requested, shall be prepared under the Clerk's supervision. The 30 Clerk also will3132[Summary of pleading] - 8 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY1 reimburse appointed counsel for any necessary travel expenses to2 Washington, D. C.,3 and return in connection with the argument.4 7. In a case in which certiorari has been granted, probable 5 jurisdiction noted, or6 consideration of jurisdiction postponed, this Court may appoint 7 counsel to represent a8 party financially unable to afford an attorney to the extent 9 authorized by the Criminal10 Justice Act of 1964, 18 U. S. C. §3006A, or by any other 11 applicable federal statute.12 8. If satisfied that a petition for a writ of certiorari, 13 jurisdictional statement, or petition for14 an extraordinary writ is frivolous or malicious, the Court may 15 deny leave to proceed in16 forma pauperis.17 18 (Faretta v. California: 422 U.S., 806, 95 S. Ct 2525, 45 L Ed. 19 2D 562, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 83 (1975)). SENSE OF FAIRPLAY SHOCKED IS 2021 NOT DUE PROCESS (CONGRESS BARRED)(Galvan v Press, 347 US 522, 7422 S Ct 737, Groban 352, US 330, 77 S Ct 510, Kinsella v United 2324 States, 361 US 234, 80 S Ct 297, Bodie v Conneicut, 401 US 371, 25 91 S Ct 780, Ross v Moffitt, 417 US 600, 94 S Ct 2437, United 26 States v Salerno, 481 US 739, 107 S Ct 2095). 2728 DISCRIMINATION AS A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS (5TH AMENDMENT)29 (LYING V CASTILLO, 477 US 635, 106 S CT 2727, BOWLING V SHARPE, 303132[Summary of pleading] - 9 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY 347 US 497, 74 S CT 693, UNITED STATES V MORENO, 413 US 528, 93 1 2 S CT 2821). 3 NON – LAWYER PRO SE DEFENDANTS MAY NOT BE HELD TO SAME STANDARDS 45 AS PRACTICING LAWYERS (SEE HAINES V. KERNER 92 SCT 594, POWER 6 914 F2D 1459 (11TH CIR 1990) HUSLEY V. OWNES 63 F3D 354 (5TH CIR 78 1995), PUCKETT V. COX (456 F2D 233 (1972 SIXTH CIRCUIT USCA), 9 CONLEY V. GIBSON, 355 U.S. 41 at 48 (1957) “The Federal Rules 10 rejects the approach that pleading is a game of skill in which 1112 one misstep by counsel may be decisive to the outcome and accept13 the principle that the purpose of pleading is to facilitate a 1415 proper decision on the merits”. 16 18 USC 4 Misprision of Felony (current through Pub. L 112-1173 17 {see Public Laws of Current Congress}: “ Whoever, having 18 19 knowledge of the actual commissions of a Felony cognizable by a 20 court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as 2122 possible make known the same to some Judge or other person in 23 civil or military authority under the united States, shall be 2425 fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, 26 or both. Source (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 684; Pub. L. 27 103-322. title XXXIII 330016(1)(G), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2829 2147.) Historical and Revision Notes: Based on title 18, U.S.C. 30 1940 ed, 251 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, 146, 35 Stat. 1114). 3132[Summary of pleading] - 10 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY Changes in phraseology only. Amendments: 1994-Pub. L. 103-322 1 2 substituted “fined under title” for “fined not more than $500”. 3 18 USC Chapter 73, 1510: Obstruction of Criminal Investigations; 45 1514: Civil action to Restrain harassment of Victim or Witness; 6 1515: Definitions of certain Provisions / General Provisions; 78 1518: Obstruction of Criminal Investigations of Health Care 9 Offenses; 38 USC 7265 – Contempt of Authority. 10 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES 1112 13 1. Bryan A Garner, Blacks Law Dictionary, p.980, 8th Ed., St. 14 Paul, USA, 2004 1516 2. A.T. Markose: Judicial Control of Administrative Action in 17 India, p364 18 3. RK Choudhary's Law of Writs; Mamdamus 19 4. Vice-chancellor, Utkal University v. SK Ghosh, AIR 1954 SC 20 217: 1954 SCR 883 21 5. Godiand's case, referred to in Widdrington's case, 1 Lev 22 and R.v. Askew, 5 Burr 2186 23 6. Blackstone, 3 Com 100: High on Extraordinary Legal 24 Remedies, Sec. 1 25 7. See, e.g., Humane Society of the United States v. State Bd.26 Of Equalization, 152 Cal. 2728 8. Mandamus will lie for an abuse of discretion where 29 discretion has been exercised arbitrarily and capriciously 30 or where discretion has been exercised in bad faith, Peavey 3132[Summary of pleading] - 11 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY Co. V. Corcoran 714 S.W. 2D 943. In such instances the 1 2 abuse amounts, in effect, to no discretion. Mandamus will 3 lie when the abuse is clear or results in a manifest 45 injustice, Reis V. Nangle 349 S.W. 2D 943, as well as when 6 an official refuses to act when they have a duty to act and 78 refuses to do so.1. Bryan A Garner, Blacks Law Dictionary, 9 p.980, 8th Ed., St. Paul, USA, 2004 1011 9. A.T. Markose: Judicial Control of Administrative Action in 12 India, p36413 10. RK Choudhary's Law of Writs; Mamdamus14 11. Vice-chancellor, Utkal University v. SK Ghosh, AIR 15 1954 SC 217: 1954 SCR 88316 12. Godiand's case, referred to in Widdrington's case, 1 17 Lev and R.v. Askew, 5 Burr 218618 13. Blackstone, 3 Com 100: High on Extraordinary Legal 19 Remedies, Sec. 1 14. See, e.g., Humane Society of the United States v. 2021 State Bd. Of Equalization, 152 Cal22 CONCLUSION 232425 Discriminating against Plaintiff's wishes to Proceed In 26 Forma Pauperis should be abolished due to the circumstances 27 28 listed above, as well as a prayer of action to bring those 29 (I.E.: Judge Wanker) breaking the very laws they took an Oath to 3031 respect and Defend; a plea for swift action to reprimand and or 32[Summary of pleading] - 12 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY remove Judge Wanker from office, as well as seeking penalties 1 2 that fit her wrongdoings, should apply. If the appeal is denied, 3 for whatever reason, Plaintiff reserves the right to appeal to 45 the 9th Circuit and beyond, as he has the right to do so under 6 the Laws that Govern United States Citizens, under the 78 Constitution. 9101112131415161718192021 Most Respectfully Submitted, 222324 Peter Jason Helfrich 25 Signed:______26 27 Dated:______282930 3132[Summary of pleading] - 13 THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF NEVADAIN AND FOR CARSON CITY1 2 Notary:______3 Dated:______4567 CC: Washington FBI, Eric Holder / Department of Justice, Nevada 89 Attorney Generals Office, Agents of Homeland Security, Global 10 Media, and all other Government agencies currently investigation 11 Nye Counties deep seeded corruption. 121314151617181920212223242526272829303132[Summary of pleading] - 14

The Honorable Supreme Court of Nevada

Details

Download

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

Support