Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris
Citizen of Arizona state
c/o General Delivery at:
2509 North Campbell Avenue
Tucson, Arizona state

In Propria Persona

Under Protest and Without Prejudice
By Special Visitation Only





             PIMA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED JUSTICE COURT


Paul Andrew Mitchell,      )  Case Number #CV-97-3438
          Plaintiff,       )
                           )  SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF
     v.                    )  IN SUPPORT OF CHALLENGE TO
                           )  JUROR QUALIFICATION STATUTES:
Neil and Evelyn Nordbrock, )
et al.,                    )  ARS 21-201;  ARS 16-101;
          Defendants.      )  Guarantee Clause;
                           )  Seventh Amendment
                           )
                           )
                           )
___________________________)


COMES NOW  Paul Andrew  Mitchell, Sui Juris,  Citizen  of Arizona

state, expressly  not a  citizen of  the United  States ("federal

citizen"), federal  witness, Counselor  at Law,  private attorney

general, and  Plaintiff in the above entitled matter (hereinafter

"Plaintiff"), to provide formal Notice to all interested parties,

and to  demand mandatory judicial notice by this honorable Court,

pursuant to  Rule 201(d)  of the  Arizona Rules  of Evidence,  of

this,  Plaintiff's   SECOND  SUPPLEMENTAL  BRIEF  IN  SUPPORT  OF

CHALLENGE TO  JUROR QUALIFICATION  STATUTES.    Plaintiff  hereby

provides  this   honorable  Court  with  additional  reasons  why

Plaintiff's challenge  is correct  to conclude that the juror and

voter registrant qualifications in Arizona state are demonstrably

unconstitutional, in all civil cases and in all criminal cases.


 Second Supplement to Juror and Voter Qualifications Challenge:
                           Page 1 of 5


     Plaintiff has  previously  explained,  in  verbal  arguments

already made  on the  record, that  all grand and petit juries in

Arizona state  would be necessarily unlawful, if the law(s) which

convened such  juries deliberately  and  expressly  excluded  all

People of  the male  gender, so as to require that juries consist

only of females.

     For precisely the same reason, all grand and petit juries in

Arizona  state   would  likewise  be  unlawful,  if  said  law(s)

deliberately and  expressly excluded  all People  of  the  female

gender, so as to require that juries consist only of males.

     The People  of any given gender constitute a distinct class,

and to  discriminate against  any one  of these  two classes,  in

obvious and  total preference  to the  other, is unconstitutional

and results in convening a "jury" which is not a legal body.

     Plaintiff has  previously  explained,  in  verbal  arguments

already made  on the  record, that  all grand and petit juries in

Arizona state  would be necessarily unlawful, if the law(s) which

convened such  juries deliberately  and  expressly  excluded  all

People of  the white  race, so  as to require that juries consist

only of non-white races.

     For precisely the same reason, all grand and petit juries in

Arizona  state   would  likewise  be  unlawful,  if  said  law(s)

deliberately and expressly excluded all People of the black race,

so as to require that juries consist only of non-black races.

     The People  of any  given race  constitute a distinct class,

and to  discriminate against  any one  of these  two classes,  in

obvious and  total preference  to the  other, is unconstitutional

and results in convening a "jury" which is not a legal body.


 Second Supplement to Juror and Voter Qualifications Challenge:
                           Page 2 of 5


     Plaintiff has  previously  explained,  in  verbal  arguments

already made  on the  record, that  all grand and petit juries in

Arizona state  would be necessarily unlawful, if the law(s) which

convened such  juries deliberately  and  expressly  excluded  all

People who  identify with  the Democratic Party, so as to require

that juries  consist only  of those  People who identify with the

Republican Party.

     For precisely the same reason, all grand and petit juries in

Arizona  state   would  likewise  be  unlawful,  if  said  law(s)

deliberately and  expressly excluded all People who identify with

the Republican  Party, so  as to require that juries consist only

of those People who identify with the Democratic Party.

     The People  who identify  with  any  given  political  party

constitute  a  distinct  political  class,  and  to  discriminate

against any  one of  these two  classes,  in  obvious  and  total

preference to  the other,  is  unconstitutional  and  results  in

convening a "jury" which is not a legal body.

     Finally, Plaintiff  has previously  explained, in verbal and

written arguments  already made on the record, that all grand and

petit juries  in Arizona  state would be necessarily unlawful, if

the state  law(s) which  convened such  juries  deliberately  and

expressly excluded  all People  who are  Citizens of  one of  the

Union states  by Right  of Birth (read "state Citizens"), and who

are not  also citizens  of the United States ("federal citizens")

by Right  of Election,  so as to require that juries consist only

of federal  citizens.  Confer at "Federal citizenship" in Black's

Law Dictionary,  Sixth Edition.   Confer  also at  "jus soli"  in

Black's supra.  See ARS 16-101, 21-201, the offending state laws.


 Second Supplement to Juror and Voter Qualifications Challenge:
                           Page 3 of 5


     The People  who identify with only one class of citizenship,

to the  deliberate exclusion  of the  other class of citizenship,

constitute a distinct and identifiable group, and to discriminate

against  this  one  group  by  intentionally  and  systematically

excluding them from jury service, in obvious and total preference

to federal  citizens only,  is unconstitutional  and  results  in

convening a "jury" which is not a legal body.

     The Qualifications  Clauses in  the U.S.  Constitution  have

never been lawfully amended;  they refer specifically to Citizens

of one of the several states which are united by, and under, that

Constitution.   There was  no such  thing as  federal citizenship

prior to the 1866 Civil Rights Act.  See 1:2:2, 1:3:3, 2:1:5.


                          VERIFICATION

I, Paul  Andrew Mitchell,  Sui Juris,  Citizen of  Arizona state,

expressly not a citizen of the United States ("federal citizen"),

federal witness,  Counselor at Law, private attorney general, and

Plaintiff in  the instant  case, hereby  verify, under penalty of

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

(outside) the  "United States"  (federal  government),  that  the

above statement  of facts  is true and correct, 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:  November 10, 1997


Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
_____________________________________
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris
Citizen of Arizona state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


 Second Supplement to Juror and Voter Qualifications Challenge:
                           Page 4 of 5


                        PROOF OF SERVICE

I, Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris, 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,

a Citizen  of one  of the  United States  of America,  and that I

personally served the following document(s):

      SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF CHALLENGE TO
                  JUROR QUALIFICATION STATUTES:
           ARS 21-201;  ARS 16-101;  Guarantee Clause;
                        Seventh Amendment

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:


Neil and Evelyn Nordbrock              (fax line disconnected)
c/o 6642 E. Calle de San Alberto
Tucson, Arizona state

Lawrence E. Condit                      VIA FAX TRANSMISSION
c/o 376 South Stone Avenue              to: (520) 624-8414
Tucson, Arizona state

Mr. Walter U. Weber
c/o 115 N. Church Avenue
Tucson, Arizona state

Hon. Robert J. Gibson
c/o 115 N. Church Avenue
Tucson, Arizona state


Executed on November 10, 1997:


/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
_____________________________________
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris
Citizen of Arizona state
(expressly not a citizen of the United States)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice


 Second Supplement to Juror and Voter Qualifications Challenge:
                           Page 5 of 5


                             #  #  #
      


Return to Table of Contents for

Mitchell v. Nordbrock