Sheila Terese, Wallen, Sui Juris
c/o General Delivery
Arivaca [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE
In Propria Persona
All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice
DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Sheila Terese, Wallen, ) Case No. 95-484-TUC
)
Plaintiff, ) NOTICE OF REMOVAL AND OF
) PETITION FOR ORDER
v. ) TO SHOW CAUSE:
) 18 U.S.C. 1964(a),
United States, ) 28 U.S.C. 292(b), 1331,
and Does 1-99, ) 1332, 1333(1), 1359,
) 1367(a), 1441(b), (c),
Defendants. ) 1451(2), 1631;
) FRCP Rules 9(h), 11, 38
)
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
________________________________)
COMES NOW Sheila Terese, Wallen, Sui Juris, Citizen of Arizona
state and Plaintiff in the above entitled matter (hereinafter
"Plaintiff"), to petition this honorable Court for an Order to
the United States to show cause why its alleged agents should not
be charged with criminal trespass, piracy, and other crimes upon
Her Person and Her private property, under color of law, and to
provide Notices to all interested parties of same and of Her
Removal of criminal case number 95-484-TUC (hereinafter "Criminal
Case") from the United States District Court, District of
Arizona, to the District Court of the United States, Judicial
District of Arizona.
Notice of Removal & Petition for Order to Show Cause:
Page 1 of 5
JURISDICTION
This District Court of the United States has original
jurisdiction of this action, pursuant to authorities cited in the
above caption, to wit: 18 U.S.C. 1964(a), 28 U.S.C. 1331, 1332,
1333(1), 1359, 1367(a), 1441(b) and (c), 1451(2), and 1631.
Pursuant to the definition at 28 U.S.C. 1451(2), the United
States District Court from which the criminal action is being
removed is a "State" court as defined therein, because said court
is a legislative tribunal domiciled in the District of Columbia.
Balzac v. Porto Rico, 42 S.Ct. 343, 258 U.S. 298 at 312, 66 L.Ed
627 (1921); and compare 18 U.S.C. 1964(a) ("district court of
the United States") and 1964(c) ("United States district court").
In contrast, the District Court of the United States is an
Article III court with authority to hear questions arising under
the Constitution, Laws, and Treaties of the United States,
including but not limited to the First Amendment, Fourth
Amendment, Sixth Amendment, Eighth Amendment, Ninth Amendment,
Tenth Amendment, Thirteenth Amendment, the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights. See Supremacy Clause.
INCORPORATION OF PRIOR PLEADINGS
Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all pleadings
heretofore filed or otherwise lodged in the Criminal Case,
specifically including but not limited to Her AFFIDAVIT OF
DEFENDANT DOCUMENTING CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING ARREST, and all
pleadings previously filed by "JANET NAPOLITANO" [sic] and
"JOELYN D. MARLOWE, Arizona State Bar No. 009206" [sic], who are
alleged agents of the United States who have claimed authority to
represent the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA in the Criminal Case.
Notice of Removal & Petition for Order to Show Cause:
Page 2 of 5
REASONS FOR GRANTING ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Alleged agents of the United States have invaded Plaintiff's
private property, without a warrant having been issued to search
or seize said property. Said agents also arrested Plaintiff,
without a warrant having been issued for Her arrest. The search,
seizure, and arrest were all perpetrated by said agents under
color of law, proceeding as in rem actions subject to Rule C of
the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims
(hereinafter "Supplemental Rules").
Said agents violated that portion of the Supplemental Rules
which requires a verified complaint before Plaintiff's goods and
chattels could be attached, and which also requires that no
judgment by default shall be entered except upon proof that the
garnishee has been given notice of the action. Specifically:
Rule C. Actions in Rem: Special Provisions ...
(2) Complaint. In actions in rem the complaint shall be
verified on oath or solemn affirmation. It shall describe
with reasonable particularity the property that is the
subject of the action and state that it is within the
district or will be during the pendency of the action. In
actions for the enforcement of forfeiture for violation of
any statute of the United States the complaint shall state
the place of seizure and whether it was on land or on
navigable waters, and shall contain such allegations as may
be required by the statute pursuant to which the action is
brought.
(3) Judicial Authorization and Process. ... In actions by
the United States for forfeitures for federal statutory
violations, the clerk, upon filing of the complaint, shall
forthwith issue a summons and warrant for the arrest of the
vessel or other property without requiring certification of
exigent circumstances.
Plaintiff submits that these Supplemental Rules, and others not
yet mentioned herein, were violated when Her private property was
invaded by a band of alleged agents of the United States,
proceeding under color of law and without any warrants having
been issued by either a judge or a clerk in the instant case.
Notice of Removal & Petition for Order to Show Cause:
Page 3 of 5
RESERVATION OF RIGHTS DUE TO FRAUD
Plaintiff hereby explicitly reserves Her fundamental Right
to amend this Petition, should future events and/or discoveries
prove that She has failed adequately to comprehend the full
extent of the damage(s) which She has suffered at the hands of
the Defendants, both named and unnamed, now and at all times in
the future.
REMEDY REQUESTED
Wherefore, Plaintiff hereby petitions this honorable Court
to Order the office of the United States Attorney to show cause
why the alleged agents of the United States in the instant case,
both named and unnamed in the Criminal Case, should not be
charged with criminal trespass, grand theft, unlawful arrest,
unlawful detainer, perjury, piracy, fraud, extortion, deprivation
of fundamental Rights, and conspiracy to commit all of the above,
all under color of federal law, and in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2,
241, 242, 872, 1001, 1621, 1622, and 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985, 1986.
Executed on August 20, 1996
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Sheila Wallen
Sheila Terese, Wallen, Sui Juris
Citizen of Arizona state
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell
Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness,
Counselor at Law, Counsel of Record
Notice of Removal & Petition for Order to Show Cause:
Page 4 of 5
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Sheila Terese, Wallen, 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):
NOTICE OF REMOVAL AND OF
PETITION FOR ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE:
18 U.S.C. 1964(a), 28 U.S.C. 292(b), 1331, 1332, 1333(1), 1359,
1367(a), 1441(b), (c), 1451(2), FRCP Rules 9(h), 11, 38
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:
Office of the United States Attorney
110 South Church Avenue, Suite 8310
Tucson [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE
William D. Browning, Doe No. 1
44 East Broadway
Tucson [zip code exempt]
ARIZONA STATE
Attorney General
Department of Justice
10th and Constitution, N.W.
Washington [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Solicitor General
Department of Justice
10th and Constitution, N.W.
Washington [zip code exempt]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Executed on: _____________________________
/s/ Sheila Wallen
__________________________________________
Sheila Terese, Wallen, Sui Juris
Citizen of Arizona state
All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
Notice of Removal & Petition for Order to Show Cause:
Page 5 of 5
# # #
Return to Table of Contents for
U.S.A. v. Wallen