Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page

Motion to continue this arraignment until June 1 to enable defendant to seek counsel.

I ask to continue this arraignment two weeks until Tuesday June 1 to enable me to seek counsel. I will ask counsel to review my papers and advise me regarding arraignment.

When I was a child I was run over by a car twice. I fell from the 2^nd floor. Those 3 head injuries cause me some problems. In the year 1997 I was falsely accused of a sexual crime. I was then factually innocent. The sex registration act was declared unconstitutional. Here is a link to the opinion/ case declaring the law unconstitutional. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/5441.html On February 23 of this year the federal court of appeal overturned the opinion of the Judge Victoria regarding the unconstitutionality of the registration act - but my case is better than the that case.

On April 29, 2004 I got out of jail. Right away I went to register. My wife was with me. The officer said I needed a picture I.D. After being in jail for 90 days I didn't know were it was and took me a few days to find my driver license. The following Monday May 3, 2004, I went to the police station by myself to register. I had my driver license in hand. They took my driver license. Then they asked me why didn't I register before January 15^th - before I went to jail. I told them that I didn't understand the law. Indeed, I thought that the law was overturned by Judge Victoria last year. On Tuesday, January 27, 2004, I presented 3 motions on Judge Alston’s court. I went to Alston because Judge Newcombe was busy. The 3 motions were:

1 A motion to revoke Jennifer Barns’s request for testing. The court may not have realized that this was not a court ordered testing except to the extent that the court granted the request of Jennifer Barnes, a request that was without my consent.

Judge Alston then unfairly raised my bail to $100,000 - excessive bail. Judge Alston put me in jail until I agreed to plead guilty in order to get out of jail. That was on 27 January. Then about a month later, on February 23^rd, Judge Victoria’s opinion was overruled. So now I know.

My relative by marriage, Arthur Schupback, visited Judge Alston to inquire as to the excessive bail. The judge told him it was none of his business and to “stay out of it”.

The registration act cause me to suffer grievous harassment My neighbor saw me on the internet due to this law. He once stood outside my house yelling at me. He called police to my house many times. Once we went to court and the Judge Newcombe told him to leave me alone.

Police came to my house many times to harass me and pound on my door inquiring about my sex offender status. One of the police who harassed me at my house took it upon himself to follow me home one day. With another officer he broke the windows in my van while I was taking pictures of them. He then lied, saying that I closed the door on his arm. He kept my camera and the pictures.

I, Douglas Palaschak, declare the following under penalty of perjury: I have 20 years experience as an Attorney specializing in bankruptcy, constitutional law, traffic cases, and cases pertaining to the struggle of the individual human against the bureaucracy. I am an expert in the standards of effectiveness of appointed counsel. I wrote an improved standard/ defendant bill of rights. Here is a link to my improved standard: http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/5635.html

I had a previous case regarding Michigan’s registration law. Michigan’s law is defective in that it does not permit the authorities to tell another jurisdiction the degree of risk for the alleged sex offender. In the previous case, the alleged offender moved to Arizona to live with his girlfriend. What the alleged offender did is not even a crime today due to a modernization of Michigan’s penal code. However, because Michigan does not share information about the crime (or even rank the severity of the crime) the Arizona authorities had no way of knowing. Therefore, under Arizona law, they were required to rank the alleged offender as medium even though this alleged offense would be no offense at all under today’s law. The Tempe police visited her apartment complex and ordered them to evict the alleged offender and his girlfriend. The apartment evicted them. They sued. The apartment complex settled. I don’t know what is the status with regard to the other defendants. The plaintiffs are Jennifer Simmer and Todd Kitching.

I have reviewed Ron’s case. He is a victim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Ron has been right; his lawyers are wrong and the have been dreadfully incompetent, negligent, and ineffective. On Tuesday, January 27, 2004 at 1 pm Michigan time, I again telephoned the office of Attorney Jennifer Barns. I spoke with Secretary Terry. I notified her that Ronald Fox would appear that day before Judge Alston. Secretary Terry said that she was happy that Ron was firing Barnes “because he needs some help”. Obviously the antagonism toward Ron by his own lawyer was apparent even to the secretary there. I am informed by Ron that Judge Alston and the court staff simply left the court when Ron tried to present his 3 motions. When I telephoned the court recorder she confirmed what I had heard from others: There was no record of Ron’s aborted hearing on his motion. Nor was there a ruling on his motions. I was outraged to hear that Judge Alston raised the bail to $100,000 - without any reason. There was no bail hearing scheduled. Ron’s due process was denied. Ron only got out of jail by pleading guilty. This was an extracted plea. Moreover it was an attempt to influence a witness in a federal case. The obvious purpose is to preclude Ron from seeking redress against the police who broke the windows in his van and harassed him on 20 occasions at Ron’s residence.

Today Ron simply asks for a continuance so that he can obtain effective assistance of counsel.

Broadly speaking a defendant enjoys the right to make decisions in his case. Faretta v California (1975) 422 U.S. 806. Here is a link to the Faretta case: http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/faretta.html

In Griffin v Illinois (1956), 100 L Ed 891, 351 US 12, 79 S Ct 585, 55 ALR2d 1055 http://www.circuitlawyer.8m.com/griffin.html , Justice Douglas, speaking for a unanimous court, said that a defendant deserves due process at every stage of the criminal proceeding.

“Consequently at all stages of the proceedings the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses protect persons like petitioners from invidious discriminations.” - Justice Douglas in Griffin v Illinois 1956.

I ask that you grant me a continuance so that I can have Due Process for my arraignment in two weeks. - Ron Fox

I, Gail Fox, declare the following under penalty of perjury: On Tuesday, May 18, 2004 I served this motion at the office of the prosecutor. Thereafter I filed it at the criminal filing window. It was (circle one) rejected/ accepted and filed stamped.