This writ was written after Chee Burnsides had no standard in a courtroom. He took ex parte information from law enforcement, did not adhere to the law, and sentenced someone to jail who did not have representation, nor a prosecutor in the courtroom.
Chee Burnsides is used to being Judge, Jury, and Executioner. In 2006, he tased, and shot dead an accused in handcuffs, in his custody. See post on this site.
The writ asked the 9th Circuit to stop the prosecution for chalking a sidewalk, since it is free speech. As Americans have seen in 2011 the US Constitution does not apply anymore.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Cause No. 10-36086
District of Montana Cause No. 9:10-cv-00049-DWM
Michael E. Spreadbury
Hamilton, MT 59840
Self-represented Plaintiff and Appellant
MICHAEL E. SPREADBURY, )
Plaintiff and Appellant ) WRIT OF PROHIBITION
v. ) IN RE:
CHRIS HOFFMAN et. al. ) MICHAELE.SPREADBURY )
Defendants and Appelleee )
__________________________)
Comes now, Spreadbury pleads Writ of Prohibition before Honorable Court. Plaintiff Spreadbury put in position by Defendants where great injustice and irreparable harm will result if writ is denied. Appeal cannot cure action in lower court, acting without jurisdiction. Request is made in good faith by Spreadbury.
Relief Sought
Spreadbury seeks 9th Circuit Court to enjoin Defendant Ravalli County from prosecuting TK-2011-1426 in lower court without jurisdiction as described herein.
Issues Presented
Spreadbury presents issue of lower court prosecuting without probable cause, jurisdiction; irreparable damage to Spreadbury if convicted. Spreadbury wrote on public sidewalk with Chalk, charged with crimes. Prior deferred Sentence for asking librarian for help in public without threat yielded 1yr. probation for Felony Intimidation MCA§ 45-5-203; Defendants deprive Spreadbury freedom of speech in continuous harm. Great Injustice, irreparable harm, without appeal remedy, lower court without jurisdiction; parameters met for Writ of Prohibition in TK-2011-1426 Ravalli Co. Montana:
Lifetime felony conviction, possible 10 year prison sentence for:
1. Asking a librarian for help in public without threat
Cause No. DC-09-154 21st Montana 21st Judicial District [State Court].
2. Writing with Chalk on sidewalk as crime TK-2011-1426
Reason Writ should be Issued:
Spreadbury is within case and controversy with Ravalli County Montana for deprivation of rights Article III US Constitution. In aforementioned, Spreadbury pled for injunctive relief to District court. Bias toward Spreadbury: Defendant law student, clinic attendee at US District Court for Montana, Missoula Division, paid influence by Montana Law School for US District Judge Malloy, US Magistrate Lynch, clinic director required recusal 28 USC § 455 et. seq. Defendants deprive established rights of Spreadbury with 4 unlawful criminal charges since 2007 protected in Amendments to US Constitution. Spreadbury has been subjected to 3 unlawful arrests, §1983 case pending in this circuit. Career, livelihood interference by Defendants pled in aforementioned Gabbert v. Conn 131 F. 3d 793 (1997). Lower Court without jurisdiction, irreparable harm, prosecutor bias, no reparable relief through appeal available to Spreadbury, Writ of Prohibition ripe before this court.
Facts of Current Case Before Court
Case and Controversy of Spreadbury v. Hoffman et. al. is before this court as Cause No. 10-36086 for 42 USC §1983, civil rights inter alia. Within the 2nd Amended complaint, Spreadbury prays for the following injunctive relief:
1. Count 8—Ravalli County Attorney Office (RCAO)
Prosecutor Fulbright now elected County Attorney, admits to Defense Counsel: “If it were any other person but Spreadbury, charges would be dismissed. (in Appendix B Opening Brief of Plaintiff)”.
Fulbright did not adhere to discovery rules, speedy trial provisions at common law, has personal interest in Spreadbury’s unlawful conviction.
Angela Wetzsteon prosecuted Spreadbury as unsupervised law student, now employed as Ravalli County prosecutor, personal interest in conviction.
Spreadbury pleads in ¶109 2nd Amended complaint: “RCAO has initiated action without probable cause against Spreadbury, more than reasonable belief it will continue….unless preliminary injunctive relief enjoined.”
Fulbright, Wetzsteon have personal interest in obtaining conviction, bias.
2. Count 9--Ravalli County Justice Court
Justice of the Peace in Ravalli County allowed unsupervised law student to prosecute law, denied motion to uphold Spreadbury’s 6th Amendment protected in US Constitution (in Appendix B Opening Brief of Plaintiff). Spreadbury believed judiciary of Ravalli County would act with malice, did act with malice towards Spreadbury July 22, 2011 in arraignment for charges without probable cause, equal protection to protected interest in Amendment 5,14 US Constitution; lower court without jurisdiction.
Spreadbury pleads in ¶120 2nd Amended Complaint of aforementioned conspiracy of Hamilton (MT) Police Department, Ravalli County Attorney Office (RCAO), Ravalli County Sheriff Office (RCSO), Ravalli County Judiciary will put Spreadbury in jeopardy of future constitutional deprivations. This Writ of Prohibition manifests this belief as reality.
Facts of Current Controversy
Spreadbury exercised right to free speech, protected 1st Amendment US Constitution to write with chalk on public sidewalk June 29, 2011. No less than 15 peace officers from Hamilton City Police Department, Ravalli County Sheriff encircled, and detained Spreadbury. Spreadbury cooperated with officers, and remained calm. In challenge to unlawful detention, Spreadbury respectfully informed officers if no charge filed, practice deprived 4th Amendment right to be free from seizures by government. Ravalli County Deputy caught up with Spreadbury and asked if he had written “all of the chalking”. Spreadbury answered in affirmative and Deputy ordered Spreadbury to stop. Charge of Disorderly Conduct, Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 45-8-101 and Criminal Mischief Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 45-6-101, both misdemeanors charged. On face of Citation is written “writing on sidewalk with chalk” (Appendix A).
Chalk not permanent damage, no disorderly conduct effected by Spreadbury, witnessed by County Attorney Fulbright, Deputy Wetzsteon, State Public Defenders June 29, 2011.
Third annual “Daly Days” Chalk Festival held by Ravalli County Montana day after Spreadbury arraignment before Judge Burnsides, substitute Ravalli County Justice Court JP from Darby, Montana City Court.
Spreadbury plead not guilty in arraignment July 22, 2011to both charges without assistance of counsel, prosecution not present at arraignment. Judge Burnsides made aware of Spreadbury disability status, documented by Social Security Administration. Judge executed necessary paperwork, court restrictions, adjourns hearing. Outside official hearing, Spreadbury informs Deputy, few feet away of Chalk Festival in appropriate voice. Judge Burnsides receives ex parte communication from Deputy about communication with Spreadbury not related to case. Judge Burnsides recalls Spreadbury, finds Spreadbury guilty of contempt, without representation, although Justice Court contempt precluded as hearing adjourned, Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 3-10-401. Judge Burnsides ordered the unlawful arrest of Spreadbury, a disabled person per Americans with Disability Act (ADA) without representation, due process, probable cause (jurisdiction) protected in Amendment 14 US Constitution.
At Ravalli County Detention Center, Sheriff Hoffman, main defendant in aforementioned created instruction list, specific treatment of Spreadbury: no clothes, no toilet, no privileges, isolated confinement, withhold prescribed medications, mental health evaluation recommended general population; Hoffman over-rode with “policy or custom” depriving Spreadbury right not to be treated with cruel, unusual punishment Monell v. NYC Dept. of Social Services 436 US 658 (1978), Amendment 8, US Constitution. Ravalli County Deputy in confinement taunted/withheld Spreadbury prescribed medications by more than 24 hours; detention staff attempted to under-medicate Spreadbury with prescribed medication in Ravalli County custody.
Brief in Support
Spreadbury properly pleads for equitable, injunctive relief from Honorable Court in form of Writ of Prohibition in aforementioned as court below lacks jurisdiction, great injustice, irreparable harm will result if writ is not issued US v. Brooklier 685 F. 2d 1162 (9th Cir., 1982).
Traditional use of writ in aid of appellate jurisdiction both at common law and in the federal courts has been to confine an inferior court to a lawful exercise of its prescribed jurisdiction.
Roche v. Evaporated Milk Assn. 219 US at 26 (1943) citing Interstate Commerce Commission v. United States ex. rel. Cambell 289 US 385 (1933).
Spreadbury pleads to Honorable Court: Ravalli County, prosecutors in aforementioned established prior bias, willingness to deprive established right, prayer for equitable, injunctive relief ripe before this court, well established precedent met to implement Writ of Prohibition. Spreadbury aware issue of writ is matter of discretion with this court Pacific Car & Foundry Co. v. Pence 403 F. 2d 953 (9th Cir., 1968). Denial of writ leaves Spreadbury no appellate remedy for lack of jurisdiction, bias at Ravalli County Justice Court from no probable cause for Disorderly Conduct, Criminal mischief June 29, 2011by prosecutor Fulbright with personal interest in obtaining conviction of Spreadbury Rest 2d Torts §666. Act of writing on sidewalk without communicating credible threat, obscene language protected [no obsene language written on sidewalk] Amendment 1, US Constitution.
Issue of writ prevents Judge Burnsides from all manner of errors, including departure from natural rules of natural justice, misconstruing substantive law Pulliam v. Allen 466 US at 533 (1984). Issue of jurisdiction for Ravalli County Court, “michiefs of misconstruction” against Spreadbury prevented by prohibition requested herein Pulliam at 534. Judge Burnsides former Ravalli County Deputy, prior contact with Spreadbury; prohibition for bias of prior knowledge, conflict of interest, current unlawful judicial conduct prevented by writ Ibid at 535. Honorable court has availability of collateral injunctive relief in exceptional cases as two Ravalli County Justices announce recusal, Judge Burnsides fails to lawfully adhere to proper Juris Prudence, contain bias to Spreadbury as question of lower court jurisdiction arise Ibid.
Relief is constitutionally required, necessary to avoid irreparable harm to Spreadbury Pulliam at 539. Spreadbury has filed in the aforementioned before this court for relief 42 USC §1983 inter alia. Section 1983 causes of action excellent exception to the anti-injunction statute allowing Federal Courts to intervene for Federal rights pled by Spreadbury Pulliam v. Allen 466 US at 541 (1984). Spreadbury has pled for equitable, injunctive relief against Defendant Ravalli County actors; injunctive relief to protect parties before this court for unconstitutional action under color of law from all branches of government: Executive, Legislative, Judicial Mitchum v. Foster 407 US at 242 (1972).
A writ is not directed against a Judicial officer, but the nature of the thing to be done Marbury v. Madison 5 US at 170 (1803). Where Judge Burnsides directed by law to do a certain act affecting the rights of Spreadbury issue of Writ of Prohibition is proper Ibid at 171. When jurisdiction of lower court doubtful, no other legal remedy, Spreadbury subject to unlawful prosecution, lower court lacking jurisdiction from no probable cause, writ is proper Smith v. Whitney 116 US at 173 (1886). Honorable court has jurisdiction to issue Writ of Prohibition 28 USC § 1291 Ibid at 175. The Court may restrain the exercise of judicial function on court about to exceed its jurisdiction Smith v. Whitney 116 US at 176 (1886).
Writ defined, Montana Code Ann. MCA§ 27-27-101 International Brotherhood of Elec. Workers AFL-CIO Local 1638 v. Montana Power Co. 280 Mont. 55 (1996):
A Writ arrests the proceedings of any tribunal…exercising judicial functions when such proceedings are without or in excess of the jurisdiction of such tribunal.
Spreadbury is appropriately attaching writ to Ravalli County, not private party, court marshal in the aforementioned.
Before a Writ of Prohibition may be granted Spreadbury must demonstrate that the acts of public officials are clearly unlawful under MCA§ 27-27-101 Kimble Properties v. Dept. of State Lands 231 Mont. 54 (1988). Court below, Ravalli County Justice Court without jurisdiction of criminal charge TK-2011-1426 against Spreadbury without probable cause, unlawful at common law Id.
As Defendant Ravalli County effects malicious prosecution on Spreadbury with intent to deprive Spreadbury equal protection of the laws or is otherwise intended to subject Bretz, Cline, Spreadbury to denial of constitutional right “too striking to ignore” Bretz v. Kelman 773 F. 2d at 1031 (9th Cir., 1985) citing Cline v. Brusett 661 F. 2d at 112 (9th Cir., 1981). A thirty year history of deprivation in the State of Montana, in color of law, civil conspiracy involving Montana State actors, including the Montana Attorney General, Montana Chief Justice, ranking Montana US Senator: provided Presidential appointment in 2008 to University of Montana Law School Dean Edwin Eck to allow Defendant law student Angela Wetzsteon’s violation of Montana Student Practice Rule in conspiracy to deprive Spreadbury equal protection of the laws, malicious prosecution at common law that interfered with Spreadbury’s profession at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) August 8, 2007 Gabbert v. Conn 131 F. 3d 793 (9th Cir., 1997). Defendant Law Student Wetzsteon, unsupervised as Defendant Fulbright, Defendant Corn failed to appear at Spreadbury’s trial in absentia August 8, 2007 for TK-2006-3068 without probable cause, in violation of inalienable right Art. II s. 3 Montana Constitution: healthy environment, protect property, Amendment 6 US Constitution for speedy trial, right to confront witnesses. Defendant Wetzsteon presented tampered evidence from the Ravalli County Sheriff Department outside discovery provisions, prompting Defendant Fulbright to say to Spreadbury’s retained counsel “If it were anyone else but Spreadbury, the case would be dismissed (in Appendix B Opening Brief of Plaintiff).”
Accordingly, Writ of Prohibition should issue to end litigation and save needless expense where respondent court could not render valid judgment because of lack of jurisdiction State ex. rel. Redle v. District Court in and for Missoula Co. 102 Mont. 541 (1936). Writ of Prohibition is a clear and indisputable right to relief when a lack of all means to redress wrongs Ibid.
Defendant Bill Fulbright, Ravalli County Attorney utilized Rest 2d Torts §666 effect of advice of counsel on existence of probable cause to charge Spreadbury with criminal act without probable cause Ravalli CountyTK-2011-1426. Fulbright has personal interest in obtaining Spreadbury’s conviction, established bias in prosecuting Spreadbury.
Law enforcement at scene of Chalk on Sidewalk did not know how to charge Spreadbury, called Fulbright Rest 2d Torts §666 for advice of counsel. Charges without probable cause deprive Spreadbury equal protection, denial of constitutional right of due process, equal protection Amendment 14 US Constitution. Ravalli County Deputy wrote “writing on sidewalk with chalk” on Citation (Appendix A) for Disorderly Conduct, Criminal Mischief.
The Arizona Court of Appeals held that a citation was insufficient to support lower court finding of probable cause, establish Spreadbury committed offense of Disorderly Conduct, Criminal mischief [Ravalli CountyTK-2011-1426]; protected activity of writing with chalk on public sidewalk Amendment 1, US Constitution, Otel H. v. Barton 93 P. 3d 512 AZ App. (2003). Citation did not contain any factual allegations that crime was committed, no affidavit to prove facts, conclusion of law Spreadbury committed criminal act Ibid. Whatever procedure a state may adopt, it must provide fair and reliable determination of probable cause (herein and in Felony Intimidation DC-09-154 in the 21st Montana Judicial District) as a condition for any significant pre-trial restraint of liberty (Appendix A, B) US Amendment 4, Gerstein v. Pugh 420 US 103 (1975). Spreadbury subject to 3 weeks pre-trial detention Montana 21st District DC-09-154; 19 hour lockdowns pre-trial, inmate # 311635 Missoula County Detention Center November 9 2009 to December 3, 2009. Writ to Supreme Court State of Montana was denied in DC-09-154 (Appendix D), sentencing Judge Harkin “did not want case out of Montana” or transferred out of state at hearing October 15, 2010 due to it being “...a local issue.” State of Montana ranks 48th in continental US for Justice, [US Justice Dept. 2007]. Spreadbury had no choice to plead due to jury tainting by Defendant Newspaper in Spreadbury v. Bitterroot Public Library et. al. 9:11-cv-00064-DVM-JCL US District Court for the State of Montana Missoula Division.
Spreadbury pleads irreparable harm, large civil conspiracy in color of law, no jurisdiction of Ravalli County Justice Court in TK-2011-1426, no appellate remedy due to immediate risk of revocation of deferred sentence, conviction of felony, prison sentence for protected act of free speech requesting help from Librarian in public, chalk on public sidewalk (Appendix A, D) exercised by Spreadbury in Ravalli County Montana. Issue of Writ of Prohibition proper, meets standards since US Supreme Court precedent established in 1803.
Respectfully submitted to the court
Dated this ___ day of August, 2011.
________________________________
Michael E. Spreadbury, self-represented Plaintiff and Appellant.
Note: Form 8, Certificate of Compliance on next page
Certificate of Service on page thereafter.
