Vazrik A. Makarian, Sui Juris
c/o Forwarding Agent
8617 Raindrop Canyon Avenue
Las Vegas 89129
NEVADA, USA
All Rights Reserved
without Prejudice
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Case No. 01-50422
)
Plaintiffs/Appellees, ) NOTICE OF MOTION AND
) MOTION TO STAY EXECUTION
v ) OF ARREST WARRANT:
)
VAZRIK A. MAKARIAN, ) FRAP Rule 8(a)(2)
)
Defendant/Appellant. )
_________________________________)
COMES NOW Vazrik A. Makarian, Citizen of Nevada State and alleged Defendant in the above entitled matter (hereinafter “Appellant”), to move this honorable Court, pursuant to Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (“FRAP”), to stay execution of the arrest WARRANT issued by the United States District Court for the Central District of California (“USDC”), and to provide formal NOTICE to all interested Party(s) of same.
MOVING THE USDC
NOW IS IMPRATICAL
Appellant submits that the USDC has already been fully briefed with pleadings containing certified proof that He was never properly served with either a SUMMONS or INDICTMENT in the instant case.
After being given a timely opportunity to reverse this obvious error, the USDC referred Appellant to that court’s ORDER dated November 2, 2000 A.D., i.e. “pending defendant’s appearance or apprehension,” Appellant’s Ex Parte MOTION FOR ORDER DISMISSING INDICTMENT “shall be held in abeyance” [sic].
Notably, said MOTION made specific reference to Appellant’s previously filed MOTION TO VACATE INDICTMENT, in which Appellant raised eleven (11) specific averments, and related affirmative defenses.
To all of said averments and defenses, Appellees fell totally silent.
USDC FAILED TO
AFFORD RELIEF REQUESTED
The USDC is, in effect, attempting unlawfully to compel or to coerce Appellant to make a general appearance, when Appellant is under no legal or other obligation whatsoever to do so, absent proper and lawful service of SUMMONS and INDICTMENT.
An arrest warrant is decidedly not the proper or lawful way to cure defective service.
The procedures for effecting proper service are already well known to the USDC, and to Appellees. Arrest is not an option. It is not Appellant’s burden to demonstrate to the USDC, or to Appellees, the application of those rules in the instant case.
REASONS FOR
RELIEF SOUGHT
The USDC committed plain error to allege, contrary to evidence already in the record, that Appellant “failed to respond to two summonses requiring his appearance to enter a plea.” See ORDER dated November 8, 2000 A.D.
Confer at “Plain error rule” in Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition.
As such, said ORDER assumed facts not in evidence.
Appellant was
not required to make a general appearance to enter a plea, absent proper
service of SUMMONS and INDICTMENT.
In point of fact, Appellant did make several special appearances, specifically to inform the USDC that service of SUMMONS and INDICTMENT had been defective.
See Exhibits “A” and “B” attached hereto and incorporated by reference, as if set forth fully here.
Special appearances can be made in writing.
The USDC was proceeding out of order: an arrest warrant would only be justified after proper service of SUMMONS and INDICTMENT had first been effected, and even then, only after the party served had failed to appear.
INCORPORATION OF
RELATED MOTION
Appellant incorporates by reference His MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL INTERLOCUTORY ORDER, filed concurrently herewith, as if set forth fully herein.
RELIEF SOUGHT
Appellant respectfully requests that this honorable Court issue a preliminary STAY of execution of the arrest WARRANT previously issued by the USDC, pending final review of the instant MOTION and of Appellant’s related MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL INTERLOCUTORY ORDER, filed concurrently herewith.
Appellant requests said STAY regardless of how this Court rules on the latter MOTION, since the arrest WARRANT was issued contrary to law.
VERIFICATION
I, Vazrik A. Makarian, hereby verify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that the above statement of facts and laws is true and correct, according to the best of My current information, knowledge, and belief, so help me God, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746(1). See Supremacy Clause.
Dated: ______________________________________________
Signed: /s/ Vazrik A. Makarian
______________________________________________
Printed: Vazrik A. Makarian
I, Vazrik A. Makarian, hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the United States of America, without the “United States” (federal government), that I am at least 18 years of age, a Citizen of ONE OF the United States of America, and that I personally served the following document(s):
NOTICE
OF MOTION AND
MOTION
TO STAY EXECUTION
OF
ARREST WARRANT:
FRAP Rule 8(a)(2)
by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first class United States Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:
United
States Attorney
Attention: Miriam A. Krinsky
United States Courthouse
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles 90012
CALIFORNIA, USA
Dated: ______________________________________________
Signed: /s/ Vazrik A. Makarian
______________________________________________
Printed: Vazrik A. Makarian
Exhibit “A”:
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF
FROM JUDGMENT OR ORDER
June 28, 2001 A.D.
Exhibit “B”:
ORDER RE EX PARTE MOTION FOR
ORDER DISMISSING INDICTMENT
November 8, 2000 A.D.