c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776
                                         Tucson [zip code exempt]
                                                    ARIZONA STATE

                                                    July 26, 1996


               FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST


Disclosure Officer
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building
One Columbus Circle, N.E.
Washington, D.C.

Dear Disclosure Officer:

This is  a request under the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C.
552 et seq., and regulations thereunder.  This is My firm promise
to pay  fees and  costs for locating, duplicating, and mailing to
Me certified copies of the records requested below.

If some of this request is exempt from release, please furnish Me
with those  portions  reasonably  segregable.    I  am  requiring
certified copies  of the documents requested, in lieu of personal
inspection of same.

Documents requested:

     1.   Certified copy  of the solemn oath of office of John M.
          Roll (currently  employed by the U.S. District Court in
          Tucson, Arizona  state)  as  required  by  Article  VI,
          Clause 3,  of the Constitution for the United States of
          America, by 28 U.S.C. 453, and by 5 U.S.C. 3331.

     2.   Certified copy of his fidelity or surety bond.

     3.   Certified copy  of his  commission to  accept pay  as a
          federal judge.

     4.   Certified copy  of his  license to  practice law in the
          State of Arizona.


The requested  records are  not exempt  from  disclosure  because
they:

     (A)  could not  reasonably be expected to interfere with law
          enforcement proceedings;

     (B)  would not  deprive a  person of a right to a fair trial
          or an impartial adjudication;

     (C)  could not  reasonably  be  expected  to  constitute  an
          unwarranted invasion of personal property;

     (D)  could  not  reasonably  be  expected  to  disclose  the
          identity of a confidential source;

     (E)  would not  disclose techniques  and procedures  for law
          enforcement investigations  or prosecutions,  and would
          not   disclose    guidelines   for    law   enforcement
          investigations or prosecutions;

     (F)  could not  reasonably be  expected to endanger the life
          or physical safety of any individual.

                                        [see Exemption 7 in FOIA]


Moreover, the blanket FOIA exemption for the federal judiciary is
unconstitutional,  under   the  original   Thirteenth  Amendment,
because said  amendment bars  federal officers and employees from
exercising privileges  which are  not specifically  enumerated in
the Constitution.  See U.S. v. Lopez, 131 L.Ed.2d 626 (1995).

Under the  common law, and under commercial law, we are all equal
before the law.  This maxim is fundamental.

If you  are not  the correct  person  to  whom  this  Freedom  of
Information Act  Request should be directed, kindly forward it to
the correct person.

Time is  of the  essence.   If you  have any questions about your
rights and  obligations under 5 U.S.C. 552, may we recommend that
you contact  the office  of the  Attorney General  in Washington,
D.C., for immediate assistance.

Thank you  very much  for your consideration, and for your timely
obedience to  the controlling  laws in  this matter, specifically
the Freedom  of Information  Act and  the  Constitution  for  the
United States of America, as lawfully amended.


Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell

Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
amd Counselor at Law

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


                             #  #  #
      

Return to Table of Contents for

In Re Grand Jury Subpoena