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

To the prosecutor: Please take notice that I do hereby withdraw my plea. At the venue designated in the caption, or at such other time and the court shall order, I will ask the court to set this matter for a hearing on my motion to dismiss this case.

My plea was extracted by 90 days of false imprisonment and an illegal bail of $100,000. The bail setting was without jurisdiction, malicious and an abuse of discretion by blind judge Alson intended to punish me for having set a motion that day.

I did not assault anybody; I was assaulted by the Don Aldrich who came to my house to harass me about being on the sex offender list. His smashing of my van windows was merely a continuing pattern of his being “out to get me” which is actionable under section 1983. I will be filing a section 1983 suit again soon.

I have sent for the files in the underlying case to prove my factual innocence regarding the case underlying the registration case.

I need more time than the average case because I am at the same time handling these two related cases plus a federal case for violation of my civil rights.

I have a file coming to me from the county where the alleged crime happened in 1997.

It would be a denial of Due Process for me to make an uniformed plea. I need effective assistance of counsel at all stages of the proceeding.

I would like for my counsel to be fully prepared and fully knowledgeable about the underlying alleged crime before I make a plea.

I brought my suppression motion with me on the day in January went Judge Alston without jurisdiction increased my bail to $100,000.

In order to get out from under an onerous bond of $100,000 I pled guilty. I am not guilty. I will be moving to withdraw my plea.

The police stop in this case was retaliation for my having filed a section 1983 complaint. Donald Aldrich who broke my van window is the same guy who came to my house 20 times to harass me regarding my being on the sex offender list.

When I was a child I was run over by a car injuring my head. Then later as a child I was run over by another car injuring my head. As an adult I fell from the 2^nd floor - on my head. Those 3 head injuries cause me some problems. I did not learn to read until age 23 after finally being instructed by special teachers who understood my problem. In the year 1997 I went to Gramma’s funeral in St. Ignace county and while there I was falsely accused of a sexual crime. I was then factually innocent.

The sex registration act was declared unconstitutional. That is my opinion based on my reading and based on many discussions with lawyers. A Michigan federal court declared it unconstitutional on June 3, 2002. Here is a link to the opinion/ case declaring the law unconstitutional. http://www.lawyerdude.netfirms.com/5441.html On February 23, 2004 (almost 2 years later) the federal court of appeal overturned the opinion of Judge Victoria Roberts regarding the unconstitutionality of the registration act - but my case is better than the case of Daniel Fullmer.

On Tuesday, January 27, 2004, I presented 3 written motions on Judge Alston’s court. Judge Alston is blind and could not read the motions himself. It was in Judge Alston’s court because when my lawyer set the hearing the clerks kept it a secret from him that Judge Alston is blind. 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.

Two of those motions are mostly moot now, but the suppression motion was simply ignored. I had a right to review that on appeal by extraordinary writ prior to my plea. That right was jeopardized by the court’s failure to even file the motion. However, I did give it to the court recorder. The court recorder and the judge left the room. They made no record of their having scorned me and my motions.

Judge Alston then unfairly raised my bail to $100,000 - excessive bail. This case was not on for a bail review. 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 - but I contend that the sex offender registration law is unconstitutional. My case is different and my lawyer has argued more and is better issues than the lawyer who lost his case at the court of appeal.

Arthur Schupback (a relative of my father by my father’s remarriage) visited Judge Alston to inquire as to the excessive bail. The clerk intercepted Art and refused to let him talk to the judge. She told him it was none of his business and to “stay out of it”.

Within 48 hours of my having been jailed by Judge Alston my lawyer faxed papers to the higher court only to be told by a newbie lawyer/clerk that the court recorder in Judge Alston’s court has already told this lawyer/clerk all about the case. This lawyer/clerk said that she would

I am a peaceful person. I always show up in court. There was no reason for that bail except to make me plead guilty to get out of jail after 90 days.

I am dealing with two cases simultaneously here. The two cases have the common thread of being the product of a policeman “out to get me” . Grace Olech v Village of Willowbrook, et. al. (1998 7th circuit) www.lawyerdude.8m.com/5126.html 160 F.3d 386 and Esmail v. Macrane (7^th Circuit 1995) 53 F.3d 176 both hold that ”out to get you" is actionable against a government.

The same policeman who broke out my car windows is the one who was at my house 20 times to harass me for being on the sex offender list.

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

I may or may not apply to appear pro hac vice in this case but any person may apply as next friend - as I did - for an extraordinary writ as a remedy for excessive fail imposed by a judge who was not authorized to raise bail. Judge Alston was not authorized to raise bail. He gets his authorization by a motion from either side - except at the arraignment. I was flabbergasted at the outrageous and illegal actions of Judge Alston and his court recorder - who told me that she was a court reporter - and their co-conspirator clerk/lawyer at the next higher court.

I have come to know Ron quite well through numerous emails ( sometimes 3 or more in a single day) and telephone calls. I have talked to several members of his family. I can find nobody who has anything bad to say about Ron. He is a hard worker, kind, generous to a fault (having lost money by letting a man use Ron’s credit card to buy paint). He is not a violent person nor a sex offender. Ron studies constitutional law and sends me some case or quote nearly everyday. He feels strongly that he has suffered abuse and neglect in his legal cases and I agree with him.

Art Schupback has complained to the office of the Attorney General regarding this outrageous bail of $100,000 used to extract a plea from Ron. Ron pled after 90 days of being unable to raise $10,000 to pay a bondsman and having insufficient collateral to back up a bail bond. As soon as I find out where to send a complaint about Judge Alston I will be complaining also. We will also be filing in federal court under the “out to get me “ theory of Grace Olech v Village of Willowbrook, et. al. (1998 7th circuit) www.lawyerdude.8m.com/5126.html 160 F.3d 386 and Esmail v. Macrane (7^th Circuit 1995) 53 F.3d 176. Both that ”out to get you" is actionable against a government. I make this statement to corroborate Ron’s story and to point out that Ron’s 2 cases stem from harassment triggered by stigma imposed by Ron’s picture having appeared on the internet in the registration site.

From what Ron has told me, his underlying sex case from 1997 is void due to constitutional infirmities.

He told me that he sent some files to me regarding the window smashing case and/or the 1997 underlying sex case.

I, Gail Fox, declare the following under penalty of perjury: On Thursday, June 10, 2004 I served this motion #6465 at the office of the prosecutor. Thereafter I filed it at the criminal filing window. It was (circle one) rejected/ accepted and filed stamped.