Time: Fri Oct 31 20:47:43 1997 by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA22738 for [address in tool bar]; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 20:42:52 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 20:43:34 -0700 To: pmitch@primenet.com From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in toolbar] Subject: SLF: Testosterone is an illegal substance! Cc: supremelaw@ibm.net [This text is formatted in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] Daren James, Dean, Sui Juris c/o general delivery at: Pima County Jail #2B9 Post Office Box 951 Tucson [zip code exempt] ARIZONA STATE (See USPS Pub. 221) IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIMA STATE OF ARIZONA [sic], ) No. #CR-58925 ) Plaintiff [sic], ) APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION ) OF RIGHT AND NOTICE OF FATAL v. ) DEFECTS IN SUPERVENING ) INDICTMENT: DAREN JAMES DEAN [sic] ) Rule 201(d), Arizona Rules ) of Evidence Defendant [sic] ) ________________________________) COME NOW the People of the United States of America (hereinafter "Petitioners"), ex relatione Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S., Citizen of Arizona state, expressly not a citizen of the United States ("federal citizen"), federal witness, Counselor at Law, and private attorney general (hereinafter "Relator"), formally to apply for intervention of Right in the instant case; to demand mandatory judicial Notice by this honorable Court of this, Petitioners' NOTICE OF FATAL DEFECTS IN SUPERVENING INDICTMENT in the instant case, pursuant to Rule 201(d) of the Arizona Rules of Evidence; and, to provide formal Notice to all interested party(s) of same. Petitioners hereby itemize the fatal defects which Relator has witnessed in the document purporting to be the SUPERVENING INDICTMENT in the instant case, to wit: Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 1 of 8 1. The Superior Court of the State of Arizona, and the Superior Court of Arizona state, are not one and the same. The crucial difference between these two forums is summarized tersely on pages 2 and 3 of 20 in APPLICANT'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY FOR INTERVENTION, filed in the case of Swan Business Organization et al. v. Leon Ulan et al., Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the County of Pima, case number #315580, on or about August 27, 1997. A true and correct copy of said OPPOSITION brief is attached hereto and incorporated by reference, as if set forth fully herein. See Exhibit "A". See also 31 CFR 51.2 and 52.2. Further evidence of two forums can be found at Form II(b), WARRANT FOR ARREST (SUPERIOR COURT) SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA, ________ County [sic], and Form XXIII, NOTICE OF RIGHTS OF REVIEW AFTER CONVICTION IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ________ [sic], in Arizona Rules of Court, State and Federal, West Publishing Company (1994 edition). The Superior Court of the State of Arizona is a de facto forum convened pursuant to federal municipal law, proceeding under the presumption that Arizona is a federal territory, not a Union state. This presumption is enforceable upon the population of citizens of the United States ("federal citizens") who reside within the geographic boundaries of Arizona state, because they are subject to federal municipal law. Defendant is a Citizen of Washington state, who is not also a federal citizen, by Right of Election. Defendant is not subject to federal municipal law. The Superior Court of Arizona is a de jure forum convened pursuant to Arizona organic law, proceeding under the Tenth Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 2 of 8 Amendment and under other notable provisions of the supreme Law, which admitted Arizona into the Union of several states which are united by, and under, the Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended ("U.S. Constitution"). Defendant is a Citizen of one of the United States of America, and both Arizona state and Washington state honor the U.S. Constitution as the supreme Law of the Land. See Supremacy Clause. 2. A fatal misnomer is evident in said SUPERVENING INDICTMENT, due to the obvious use of an unlawful Nomme de Guerre (name of war) to identify a fictitious, non-existent defendant, instead of Defendant's Proper and true name. Petitioners hereby lodge Their formal objection, and provide formal Notice to all interested party(s), protesting the unlawful use of said Nomme de Guerre falsely to identify Mr. Daren James, Dean, in place of His Proper and true appellation. Misnomer is a plea in abatement. Said mistaken identification is a "misnomer" which can be, and herein is, lawfully abated by means of the instant Notices, made under formal protest and with explicit reservation of all Rights expressly guaranteed to Defendant by the Constitution for the United States of America, as lawfully amended (hereinafter "U.S. Constitution"). See Supremacy Clause; and Article III, Section 3, Clause 1, to wit: Treason against the United States [sic], shall consist only in levying War again them [sic], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them [sic] Aid and Comfort. [emphasis added] Petitioners hereby also make Their notorious protest of the presence in this honorable Court of a gold-fringed American flag, which is evidence further still, above and beyond the Plaintiff's misuse of an unlawful Nomme de Guerre, of martial rule imposed Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 3 of 8 unlawfully upon, and without the consent of, the Sovereign People, of which Defendant is a Member in good standing by virtue of His birth in Washington state. See Right of Election. Petitioners hereby deny the existence of any valid contracts, either verbal or written, either expressed or implied in fact, whereby Defendant might have waived any of His fundamental Rights secured to Defendant by the federal and state constitutions, and formally offer to prove same. Waivers of fundamental Rights will never be presumed, ever. See Ohio Bell v. Public Utilities Commission, 301 U.S. 292. Waivers of fundamental Rights must be knowing, intentional, and voluntary acts, done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and likely consequences. See Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 742 at 748 (1970). Deprivation of fundamental rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the U.S. Constitution is a criminal violation of 18 U.S.C. 242. See also 18 U.S.C. 241. A practice condemned by the Constitution cannot be saved by historical acceptance and present convenience. [U.S. v. Woodley, 726 F.2d 1328, 1338 (1983)] [emphasis added] It is obviously correct that no one acquires a vested or protected right in violation of the Constitution by long use, even when that span of time covers our entire national existence and indeed predates it. [Walz v. Tax Commission of New York City,] [397 U.S. 664, 678 (1970), emphasis added] The custom of continuing arbitrary emergency declarations, so as to effect the appearance of an unbroken state of emergency, has the unavoidable consequence of levying War against the several States of the Union and is, therefore, unconstitutional. See 12 U.S.C. 95(a), (b); Art. III, Sec. 3, Cl. 1; 18 U.S.C. 242. Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 4 of 8 3. The Arizona Revised Statute, which Defendant is accused of violating, is blatantly unconstitutional, solely by virtue of the fact that the chemical, which Defendant is accused of illegally possessing, is a naturally occurring substance created by the human body. Such a statute renders the entire male population, presently inhabiting the United States of America, to be in illegal possession of a prohibited substance. This result is absurd. Reductio ad absurdum. Moreover, the law does not recognize impossibilities. Lex non cogit impossibilia. Accordingly, the alleged SUPERVENING INDICTMENT in the instant case should be quashed, the instant case dismissed, and the Defendant released immediately from custody into freedom, which is Defendant's fundamental Right in these United States of America. Further detention of Defendant constitutes a clear and dangerous violation of Defendant's fundamental Right to due process of law. See Fifth Amendment. 4. The Arizona juror and voter qualifications statutes are defective for exhibiting prohibited discrimination against all state Citizens, who are not also federal citizens by Right of Election. This question has now been placed properly and timely before the Pima County Consolidated Justice Court in the case of Mitchell v. Nordbrock et al., case number #CV-97-3438. The matter is also before the United States Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, in St. Louis, Missouri state ("8th Circuit"), in the cases of U.S.A. v. Gilbertson and Gilbertson v. U.S. et al. For the convenience of this honorable Court, the pertinent pleadings now filed in Gilbertson's appeal to the 8th Circuit can be obtained from Internet URL: http://supremelaw.com. Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 5 of 8 REMEDIES REQUESTED All premises having been duly considered, Petitioners hereby request formal leave to intervene by Right in the instant case, for all the reasons stated above. In the event that this honorable Court should grant Petitioners leave to intervene, Petitioners immediately thereupon and hereby move this honorable Court for an unconditional release of the Defendant and an immediate dismissal with prejudice of the instant case. In the alternative, assuming leave to intervene is granted, Petitioners hereby move this honorable Court to ORDER the instant case transferred to the Superior Court of Arizona state, pursuant to the authorities cited above, and to ORDER the Defendant released on His own recognizance, pursuant to the Tenth Amendment, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, enacted with explicit Reservations by the United States Congress. VERIFICATION I, Paul Andrew, Mitchell, B.A., M.S., B.A., M.S., Citizen of Arizona state, expressly not a citizen of the United States ("federal citizen"), federal witness, Counselor at Law, and private attorney general, 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; Guarantee Clause; Tenth Amendment. Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 6 of 8 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): APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION OF RIGHT AND NOTICE OF FATAL DEFECTS IN SUPERVENING INDICTMENT: Rule 201(d), Arizona Rules of Evidence by placing one true and correct copy of said document(s) in first class U.S. Mail, with postage prepaid and properly addressed to: Daren James, Dean [hand-delivered] Pima County Jail #2B9 Post Office Box 951 Tucson [zip code exempt] ARIZONA STATE Attorney General [hand-delivered] State of Arizona c/o 400 West Congress, Ste. 316 Tucson [zip code exempt] ARIZONA STATE Pima County Public Defender [hand-delivered] c/o 32 North Stone Avenue Tucson [zip code exempt] ARIZONA STATE Executed on November 1, 1997: /s/ Paul Mitchell ______________________________________________ Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris Citizen of Arizona state, federal witness, Counselor at Law, and private attorney general (expressly not a citizen of the United States) All Rights Reserved without Prejudice Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 7 of 8 Exhibit "A": APPLICANT'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO STRIKE NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPLY FOR INTERVENTION Swan Business Organization et al. v. Leon Ulan et al. Superior Court of the State of Arizona [sic] in and for the County of Pima [sic] Case Number #315580 Application for Intervention/Notice of Indictment Defects: Page 8 of 8 # # # =========================================================================== Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01 B.A.: Political Science, UCLA; M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02 tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03 email: [address in toolbar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04 website: http://supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05 ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best 06 Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone 07 Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this 08 _____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09 As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall 10 not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11 ======================================================================== 12 [This text formatted on-screen in Courier 10, non-proportional spacing.] 13
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail