Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Bonding

Expand Messages
  • JCP
    Somewhere someone had mentioned of a successful process to Bond somebody out of Jail using their Birth Certificate. Is this valid? Who s process is this?
    Message 1 of 3 , Jan 30, 2007
      Somewhere someone had mentioned of a successful process to Bond somebody out of Jail using their Birth Certificate.
      Is this valid?
      Who's process is this?
      Whomever posted it, could you please repost?
       
      I have a friend that needs to get out of the can. He's there on hearsay evidence and those who made the complaint have NO credibility. They have brought Fraud to the Court with false testimony. My friend cannot afford the bail or council. His arraignment is in March... he sits there in anguish...
       
      I seen him today. He said he was told by the prosecutor that he is guilty until proven innocent. WHEW !!!!
       
      Can just anyone construct a Habeas Corpus for him? Can I do that? (Any examples?)
       
      Any suggestions out there?????
       
      Thanx...
    • Pro Se
      **this hab was prepared by a certified paralegal in P.A. it was used for someone who was jailed for traffic fines - traffic tickets - summary in nature, they
      Message 2 of 3 , Jan 30, 2007
        **this hab was prepared by a certified paralegal in P.A.
        it was used for someone who was jailed for traffic fines - traffic tickets - summary in nature, they were NOT Crimes nor criminal Yet they were tried in the criminal div. of the court of common pleas...does anyone smell fraud?
        THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE & will need to be modified to use in the state or commonwealth of REPUBLIC  where u are...
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        _______ COUNTY, ____________JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        ______________________PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No._________________
        ______________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the_________________County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
        _______________________________________
        WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AD TESTIFICADUM
         
        ___________ Judicial district
        ____________________ county, ss.:
         
         
        THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
        To _________________, Warden of the__________________Correctional Facility, Greeting:
        We Command You, that the body of ____________, Sui Juris, under your custody detained, as it is said, by whatsoever name be may be detained, under safe and secure conduct you have before the Judges of our Court of Common Pleas, Courtroom No. ____, in _______ county, at __________________________________, Pennsylvania, on the ____ day of ____, 20__, A.D., at _____ o'clock __m., to testify the truth according to his knowledge in a certain cause in our said Court depending, and then and there to be tried, wherein_____________, Sui Juris, is the Petitioner and the Warden is the respondent, and further abide the order of our said Court in the premises.
        And that immediately after said______________________Sui Juris, shall give his testimony, you return him to the place where he was detained.
        And have you then and there this writ.
        WITNESS, the Honorable ____________________, President Judge of our said Court, at _______________________, this ___ day of July, 20___ A.D.
        Allowed by the Honorable _____________________, Judge of said Court.
         
         
         
        Seal
         
        __________________________
        Prothonotary.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        _____________ COUNTY, ______ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        ________________, PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No.___________________
        _______________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the ___________________ County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
        _______________________________________
        Affidavit
        Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel.
        __________________________, Sui Juris, Pro se,
        vs. SS.
        ______________, Keeper of the_________________
        County Prison.
        To the Honorable ___________________, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, for _________ county, ______ judicial district:
        That he is detained or confined unjustly by _________________, keeper of the county prison of _____________________county, in the said prison for supposed summary criminal matter which is set forth in the warrant of commitment, a copy whereof is hereto annexed and marked "Exhibit A", and is being unlawfully restrained of his liberty.
        That he is detained for allegedly violating a NON CRIMINAL provision of the Vehicle Code for ___ days. That the prosecuting witness - who engaged in unauthorized practice of law without a license - stated in open court under oath that the Petitioner did not violate any duly enacted ordinances of __________________Township, local authority, his employing agency and governing body. Therefore, the facts and the law of the case demand immediate release from confinement, as the police officer cannot administer and enforce provisions of the Vehicle Code pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. Sections 6102 (a) and (b).
        WHEREFORE, the Petitioner prays that a writ of habeas corpus be granted and awarded for his relief, under the seal of the said Court of Common Pleas, directed to the said ______________________, commanding him to have the body of the petitioner before your Honor immediately, to do, submit to, and receive whatsoever your Honor may consider right in that behalf, and likewise to certify specifically and fully the true causes of his commitment and detainer and when he was committed.
        And he will ever pray, etc.
        "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. ____________________________ Seal
        _______________________, Sui Juris.
        Petitioner, Pro se.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        __________ COUNTY,_________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        ____________, PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No.________________
        ________________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the ____________________ County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
         
        PETITION ASSERTING ILLEGAL CONFINEMENT UNDER THE ______ CODE ENFORCED AND ADMINISTERED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES OUTSIDE THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF_____________ TOWNSHIP / or borough PURSUANT TO 75 Pa.C.S.A. SECTIONS ____________
        TO THE HONORABLE, JUDGES OF THE SAID COURT:
        Petitioner, __________________________, Sui Juris, by pro se alleges:
        JURISDICTION AND VENUE.
        The action currently before this court, was initiated by police officer(s)__________________, Badge No.______ an employee with the__________________________ Police Department, ____________________________________, Pennsylvania, a municipal corporation and political sub-division of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. That __________________, Pennsylvania is within the county's bailiwick. That jurisdiction and venue is proper in this court. That the conduct, actions or omissions of the following State Actors is actionable under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act [53 P.S. Sections 5311.101 et seq.
        PLEASE TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE: The courts of common pleas are courts of original jurisdiction having broad powers, including the authority to issue "every lawful writ." See Pa. Const. Art. 1, sec. 14, and Art. V., Sec. 5 (b); 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 912 (Purdon 1981). Furthermore, the Pennsylvania Rules of Court, in particular, Chapter 1700 Habeas Corpus, Rule 1701, Habeas Corpus Venue is an applicable rule, pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6502 (b).
        1. That he was sentenced by Judge_________ on _______, 20__ for a provision of the Vehicle Code, a mandatory minimum, for a period not to exceed 90 days. Petitioner was immediately remanded to the ___________________County Correctional Facility.
        2. That Police Officer(s)________________, Badge No._____, (hereinafter "Police Officer"), from ___________________boro/ township was the prosecuting witness who initiated this abuse of process via "TRAFFIC CITATIONS". The allegations charged the Petitioner with numerous violations of the Vehicle Code, title 75 Pa.C.S.A.
        3. The Police Officer stated in open court hat the Petitioner did not violate any duly enacted ordinances of his governing body on the record. In fact, the Police Officer placed an "X" in the box next to the word "STATUTE" in block 26, on all traffic tickets. The line next to the word statute indicated "VC", meaning Vehicle Code. See annexed hereto (some of the traffic tickets) and marked Exhibits "B" and "C".
        4. The Police Officer has no duty or authority under the Laws of Pennsylvania to administer and enforce the Vehicle Code pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6102 (a). These specific duties and powers are granted to the "Department", meaning the Department of Transportation of this Commonwealth, definition cited in Section 102 of the Vehicle Code and 67 Pa. Code Section 211.1. Therefore, the arresting Police Officer is outside the scope of his employment and the Statutory provisions and has no immunity in law for damages caused by his usurped power and duty. The District Attorneys Office and the Judge were all apprised of these facts, as the records speak for themselves. Ignorance of the law is no excuse!
        5. The Police Officer did not cite any duly enacted ordinances of his governing body, _______________boro/ township, pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6102 (b). Therefore, this confinement is unlawful and unconstitutional.
        6. The trial court denied the Petitioner's "Motion to Dismiss...." on the grounds it had no merit and it was frivolous. Therefore, the Judge's actions were deliberate and intentional, conduct, under the color of State/any law. Denial of 'Due Process Rights'.
        7. There is no written waiver of a jury trial in the under lying criminal matter. Denial of Constitutional Rights, both Federal and State.
        8. That the Judge did not conduct an extensive colloquy on the record as it pertained to a knowingly, intelligent and voluntary waiver of legal counsel. Denial of Constitutional Rights, both Federal and State.
        9. That the Petitioner is unlawfully imprisoned, detained, confined, and restrained of his liberty based on the allegations set forth on the record by the Police Officer of _______________boro / township, the local governing body. The Petitioner is in the custody of the keeper of the county prison in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
        10. That the said pretended ordinance(s) are null and void, in that, the petitioner was not charged with any duly enacted ordinances of _____________________ township.
        11. That the imprisonment, detention, confinement, and restraint are illegal and the illegality thereof consists in the following:
        That the only pretext or cause of arrest and detention of the Petitioner are based on violations of the Vehicle Code, in which, the Police Officer cannot enforce and administer, unless by, "...[only] duly enacted ordinances of their local governing bodies ." 75 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6102 (b).
        That the commitment order was issued by Judge_______________ for violations of the Vehicle Code, on ________________________
        12. That the Petitioner is _______________________________________
        13. The Petitioner is indigent and relies solely on ____________________________________per month. These funds feed, clothe and pay for his transportation needs, amongst other legitimate costs, like phone fees, mailings, postage fees, etc.
         
         
        WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that a writ of habeas corpus may issue, directed to said _______________________, keeper of the _______________________ county prison commanding that he have the body of the said __________________, Sui Juris, together with the cause of Petitioner's imprisonment and detention, before the said Court, to do and receive what shall then and there be considered concerning the said_______________________, Sui Juris, in pursuance of the statute/ordinance in such case provided.
        Date:_____________________ Respectfully submitted,
        "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. Seal
        ________________________, Sui Juris.
        Petitioner, Pro se.
         
        VERIFICATION.
        The undersigned does hereby verify that the statements contained herein the foregoing instrument(s) are made in good faith, that they are true and correct, and not misleading to the best of my knowledge, belief, and information, pursuant to unsworn falsifications to authorities, 18 Pa.Crimes Code Section 4904.
         
         
        Date:___________________ ______________________
        _____________________________, Sui Juris.
         
        PROOF / CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE.
        The undersigned, in his proper person hereby certifies that on the below said date, he caused to be served upon the following person(s), a true and correct copy of the attached foregoing instrument(s) in the manner indicated:
        VIA HAND DELIVERY BY AGENT:
        Warden_____________________
        ____________________ Street
        _________________
        Judge___________________
        ______________ Street
        _____________________
        District Attorneys Office
        200 N. River Street
        Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711
        VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL:
        Frank O'Neill, Esquire
        Agent for PennDot
        200 State Building, B-2
        100 Lackawanna Avenue
        Scranton, PA 18503
        Date:__________________
        "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. Seal
        Petitioner, In Proper Person.
        ______________________, Sui Juris.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        __________ COUNTY, _______ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        _________________________, PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No.____________________
        _______________________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the______________________County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
        _______________________________________
        Motion to Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis,
        The "Great Writ of Liberty" Via this Petition for a
        Writ of Habeas Corpus.
        AND NOW COMES, the Petitioner/Movant, by pro se, and timely requests that this Honorable Court grant the Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, due to his economic hardship, in the interest of justice and right, as justice will not be for sale, denied, or delayed, to anyone. As quoted in the Magna Carta, at Chapter 40, on June 15, 1215, A.D., at Runnymede, granted by King John, of England to the barons. Pennsylvania Constitution, Article I, Section 11, and the "Equal Protection clause", of the Federal Constitution, and 28 U.S.C. Section 1915.
         
        Date: Respectfully submitted,
        "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. Seal
        Petitioner/Movant, Pro se.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        ________ COUNTY, ________ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        ____________________________PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No.__________________
        ____________________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the__________________ County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
        _______________________________________
         
        ORDER.
        AND NOW, this ___day of _______, A.D., 20______, upon due and careful consideration of the Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the waiver of payment of costs and fees is GRANTED.
         
        seal of court BY THE COURT:
         
        _______________________, J.
        Court of Common Pleas
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        _________ COUNTY, _______ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        _________________, PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No._____________________
        ___________________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the __________________County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
        _______________________________________
        BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
        "THE GREAT WRIT OF LIBERTY"
         
         
        INTRODUCTION:
        The Petitioner is submitting this Petition as of Right, of his own Right, in his proper person. As, he has a constitutional right to speak in his own words, on paper. Farretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, (1975).
        That the Petitioner's pleadings are not to be held to the same stringent standards as licensed attorneys, as long as the court can reasonably read the pleadings and use common sense in the relief being sought, despite failure to cite proper legal authority, poor syntax and sentence construction, confusion of legal theories, and unfamiliarity with pleading requirements. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972); Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 102 S.Ct. 700, 70 L.Ed.2d 551 (1982).
        SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT:
        That the Petitioner was cited for alleged Vehicle Code violation(s) by police officers and not the Department of Transportation. When the Department of Transportation is charged with the duty to administer the provisions of Title 75, see 75 Pa.C.S. Section 6102 (a). The local authorities of Butler township have no power and duty to administer and enforce the Vehicle Code pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6102 (b), unless by, "...[only] duly enacted ordinances of their governing body.", IN WHICH, THEY DID NOT FILE ANY CHARGES UNDER DULY ENACTED ORDINANCES. (Emphasis added).
        LEGAL ARGUMENT:
        "The writ of habeas corpus was transplanted to the American colonies as common law and was frequently invoked before the War of Independence. The roots of the writ date back before Magna Carta, and it was established by the Seventeenth Century as the appropriate process [remedy] for checking illegal imprisonment. In every American jurisdiction it remains as a bright star in the fixed constitutional constellation, but yet it is constantly being subjected to the ever-changing flow and sometimes ravage of judicial precedent, as exemplified in Stone v. Powell, 428 U.S. 465, 96 S.Ct. 3097, 49 L.Ed.2d 1067 (1976); Rose v. Lundy, 455 U.S. 509, 102 S.Ct. 1198, 71 L.Ed.2d 379 (1982); and McCleskey v. Zant, 499 U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 1454, 113 L.Ed.2d 517, (1991). Voltaire once remarked that "[l]aws change more often than travelers change horses," and so it is in the area of postconviction relief." (quoted by BOBBY LEE COOK, March 6, 1992) in the Foreword of Federal and State Postconviction Remedies and Relief, Wilkes, Federal & State Postconviction Remedies and Relief (1992 Ed.), (1-1 et seq.
        "[I]f a man be in prison...the law doeth give remedy....There is a habeas corpus that the judges cannot deny." Sir Edward Coke (Mar. 21, 1628), quoted in Popofsky, "Habeas Corpus and 'Liberty of the Subject': Legal Argument for the Petition of Right in the Parliament of 1628," 41 Historian 257, 265 (1979). Wilkes, supra at (1-1 et seq.
        "The writ of coram nobis appears to be the wild ass of the law which the courts cannot control. It was hoary with age and even obsolete in England before the time of Blackstone, and courts who attempt to deal with it 'become lost in the mist and fog of the ancient common law.'" Anderson v. Buchanan, 292 Ky. 810, 168 S.W. 48, 55 (1943) (Sims, J., dissenting) (citation omitted). Wilkes, supra at (1-1 et seq.
        "[T]he ancient writ of error coram nobis rose phoenix-like from the ashes of American jurisprudence through benign intervention of the Supreme Court in United States v. Morgan, 346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed 248 (1954)." United States v. Balistrieri, 606 F.2d 216, 219 (7th Cir. 1979). Wilkes, supra at (6-1.
        "Postconviction review of criminal cases has traditionally been by the centuries-old writs of coram nobis and habeas corpus. Though these common law writs have been adapted for the hearing of constitutional claims in American courts, their origins lie in the distant past, and the nature of the remedies was shaped by English legal history rather than by the needs of a modern judicial system." Note, "State Criminal Procedure and Federal Habeas Corpus," 80 Harv.L.Rev. 422, 427 (1966) Wilkes, supra at (3-1.
         
        "Plaintiff must exhaust all required administrative remedies before bringing claim for judicial relief." Robinson v. Dalton, 107 F.3d 1018 (C.A.3 (Pa.) 1997).
        The doctrine of "exhaustion of administrative remedies" applies where a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an administrative agency alone, and judicial interference is withheld until the administrative process has run its course. U.S. v. Radio Corp. of America, 79 S.Ct. 457, 358 U.S. 334, 3 L.Ed.2d 354 (U.S. Pa. 1959).
        The court of Common Pleas cannot entertain summary criminal matters pursuant to the Pennsylvania Constitution, 1776. This/these quasi-criminal offense(s) are to be heard in the court of quarter sessions of the peace, pursuant to Article V, Section 1. Courts of common pleas are to entertain civil matters only, however, the Constitution allows for the legislature to create inferior tribunals from time to time, in which, it [legislature] has done, see 42 Pa.C.S. Section 301. Unified Judicial System. These courts are creatures of statute, and in direct violation of the Original Article V. Section 1's, Separation of Powers Doctrine, in a tripartite government guaranteed to each state by the Federal Constitution at Article IV, Section IV, Clause 1.
         
        CONCLUSION
        Based upon the foregoing authority, the writ of habeas corpus should issue forthwith.
        Date:___________ "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. Seal
        Petitioner/Movant, Pro se.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN/FOR
        _________ COUNTY, _____ JUDICIAL DISTRICT,
        __________ PENNSYLVANIA.
        Commonwealth Ex rel.: : Case No.___________________
        _________________________, Sui Juris,
        Petitioner, Pro se,
        vs. :
        Keeper of the_____________________ County Prison,
        COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,
        A Political Corporation, t/d/b/a Department of
        Transportation "PennDOT", et al., :
        Respondents.
         
        AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR LEAVE
        TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
         
        TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF THE SAID COURT:
        The Petitioner above said hereby petitions this Court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and represents:
        1. I am the Defendant in the above matter and because of My financial condition am unable to pay the fees and costs of prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding.
        2. I am unable to obtain funds from anyone, including My family and associates, to pay the costs of litigation and to do so, would cause undue burden and further economic hardship on Myself and them, as well.
        3. I represent that the information below relating to My ability to pay the fees and related costs is true and correct to the best of My knowledge, belief and information:
        (a) Name: __________________________, Sui Juris.
        Address: __________________________, Pennsylvania commonwealth,
        united States of America.
        Social Security Number: N/A (See Privacy Act of 1974; 5 U.S.C. Section 552 (a))
        (b) Employment:
        If you are presently employed, state
        Employer: N/A;
        Address: _________________________________
        _________________________________
        Salary or wages per month: ____________________.
        Type of work: ______________________________.
        If you are presently unemployed, state
        Date of last employment: N/A.
        Salary or wages per month: ___________________.
        Type of work: ______________________________.
        (c) Other income within the past twelve months
        Business or profession: N/A.
        Other self-employment: N/A.
        Interest: N/A.
        Dividends: N/A.
        Pension and annuities: N/A.
        Social Security benefits: Receive ______ Federal Reserve Notes each month
        Disability payments: N/A.
        Unemployment compensation and supplemental benefits: N/A.
        Workman's compensation: N/A.
        Public assistance: N/A.
        Other: _________________________________________________________
        ________________________________________________________________.
        (d) Other contributions to household support
        (Wife) (Husband) Name: N/A.
        If your (Wife) (Husband) is employed, state
        Employer: N/A.
        Salary or wages per month: N/A.
        Type of Work: ___________________________.
        Contributions from children: N/A.
        Contributions from parents: N/A.
        Other contributions: N/A.
        (e) Property owned
        Cash: ____________________________.
        Checking account: _________________________________.
        Certificates of deposit: __________________________________.
        Real estate (including home): __________________________________.
        Motor vehicle: Make __________________ Year 19____.
        Cost _________ Amount owed _________.
        Stocks; bonds: ______________________________________________.
        Other: ________________________________________________________.
        (f) Debts and obligations
        Mortgage: __________.
        Rent: _________.
        Loans: _______________________________________________________.
        Electricity: ________ per month.
        Water: ________ per month.
        Oil: ________ per month.
        Gas: _______ per month.
        Phone: ________ per month.
        Sewer: ________ per month.
        Medical expenses: ________ per month.
        Prescriptions: ________ per month.
        Dental expenses: ________ per month.
        Eye expenses: ________ per month.
        Health Insurance: ________ per month.
        Automobile Insurance: ________ per month.
        Student Loan: ________ per month.
        Fire Insurance: ________ per month.
        Maintenance expenses: ________ per month.
        Laundry: ________ per month.
        Hygiene expense: ________ per month.
        Other: _________________________________________________________.
        (g) Other persons dependent upon you for support
        (Wife) (Husband) Name: ___________________________.
        Children, if any:
        Name: ____________________________ Age: _____.
        Name: ____________________________ Age: _____.
        Name: ____________________________ Age: _____.
        Name: ____________________________ Age: _____.
        Other persons:
        Name: __________________________________.
        Relationship: ______________________________.
        4. I understand that I have a continuing obligation to inform the court of improvement in My financial circumstances which permit Me to pay the costs incurred herein.
        5. I verify that the statements contained made in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of My knowledge, belief, and information. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. Section 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
        Date: _______________ "Without Prejudice"
        __________________________
        Petitioner, Pro se.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        _____________________, Sui Juris.
        _______________
        ______________________
        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
        FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
        united States of America ex rel.:
        ________________________, Sui Juris, :
        Petitioner, Applicant, Case No:______________________
        (To Be Supplied By Clerk)
        vs. :
        _________________, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
        THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PETITION FOR
        T/D/B/A PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT : COMMON LAW
        OF TRANSPORTATION, "PennDOT", WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
        and : STATE CONVICTION
        Applicants in Present Custody
        _______________, KEEPER OF THE Rule 2 (a), 28 U.S.C. 2254
        _________________________ COUNTY PRISON.
        Respondents. :
        ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
        WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR APPLICANT IN PRESENT CUSTODY FOR SUMMARY CONVICTIONS UNDER ATTACK
        1. Name and location of the court in which entered the judgment of conviction under attack: Court of Common Pleas,_______________ ____________________________________________________, Pennsylvania.
        2. Date of judgment of conviction was entered:________________
        3. Case number:____________________
        4. Type and length of sentence imposed: _______Days immediately in the ___________________ Correctional Facility; Fines and costs of $__________________ plus applicable assessments.
        5. Are you presently serving a sentence imposed for a conviction other than the conviction under attack in this motion? Yes No
        6 Nature of the offense involved (all counts): Driving While License was Suspended DUI Related,75 Pa.C.S.A. 1543 (B); Operating a Vehicle Without Valid Inspection, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 4703 (A); Failed to Yield for Emergency Vehicle, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 3325 (A); No Rear Lights, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 4303 (B); Required Financial Responsibility, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 1786 (f); Certificate of Registration 1301 (A); Speeding, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 3362 (A) (1).
         
         
         
         
        7. What was your plea?
        (Check One) _ Not Guilty _Guilty _ Nolo Contendere
        8. If you entered a plea of guilty to one count or indictment, and a not guilty plea to another court or indictment, give details: N/A
        9. If you entered a plea of guilty pursuant to a plea bargain, state the terms and conditions of the agreement:
        10. Kind of trial (Check One) _Jury XX Judge Only
        11. Did you testify at trial? Yes XX No
        DIRECT APPEAL
        12. Did you appeal from the judgment of conviction? XX Yes No
        13. If you did appeal, give the name and location of the court where the appeal was filed, the result, the case number and date of the court's decision (or attach a copy of the court's opinion or order). Superior Court of Pennsylvania, however, by the time briefs are filed and a judicial determination is made my sentence will be over, as I may be incarcerated for____ days. My sentence began immediately on _______________________.
        14. If you did not appeal, explain briefly why you did not.
        (a) Did you seek permission to file a late appeal? Yes No
        POST - CONVICTION PROCEEDINGS
        15. Other than a direct appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence, have you previously filed any petitions, applications, or motions with respect to this judgment in any federal court? Yes XX No
        16. If your answer to 15 was "Yes," give the following information:
        (a) FIRST petition, application or motion.
        1) Name of court
        2) Nature of proceeding
        3) Claims raised
        4) Did you receive an evidentiary hearing on your petition, application
        or motion? Yes No
        5) Result
        6) Date of Result
        7) Did you appeal the result to the State appellate court having jurisdiction?
        Yes No
        If you did appeal, give the name of the court where the appeal was filed, the result, the case number, citation and date of the court's decision (or attach a copy of the court's opinion or order):
        8) If you did not appeal, briefly explain why you did not:
        (b) As to any SECOND petition, application or motion, give the following information:
        1) Name of court
        2) Nature of proceeding
        3) Claims raised
        4) Did you receive an evidentiary hearing on your petition, application
        5) Result
        6) Date of result
        7) Did you appeal the result to the State appellate court having jurisdiction? Yes No
        If you did appeal, give the name of the court where the appeal was filed, the result, the case number, a copy of the court's opinion or order):
        8) If you did not appeal, briefly explain why you did not:
        (c) As to any THIRD petition, application or motion, give the following information:
         
        1) Name of court
        2) Nature of proceeding
        3) Claims raised
        4) Did you receive an evidentiary hearing on your petition, application or
        motion? Yes No
        5) Result
        7) Date of result
        8) Did you appeal the result to the State appellate court having jurisdiction?
        Yes No
        If you did appeal, give the name of the court where the appeal was filed, the result, the case number, citation and date of the court's decision (or attach a copy of the court's opinion or order):
        8) If you did not appeal, briefly explain why you did not.
        CLAIMS
        17. State concisely every claim that you are being held unlawfully for. Summarize briefly the facts supporting each claim. If necessary, you may attach extra pages stating additional claims and supporting facts. You should raise in the application all claims for relief in which relate to the conviction under attack.
        In order to proceed in federal court, you ordinarily must exhaust the administrative remedies available to you as to each claim on which you request action by the federal court.
        CLAIM ONE:
        Ineffective assistance of defense counsel
        1) Supporting Facts: (Without citing legal authorities or argument state briefly the facts in support of this claim.)
        Petitioner is indigent and without sufficient means to obtain competent legal counsel. Public defender's office refused to aid in defending Petitioner in this matter. Judge ____________________- was aware of this.
         
        2) Did you seek administrative relief as to claim one? Yes XX No
        If your answer is "Yes," describe the procedure followed and the result. If your answer is "No," explain why you did not seek administrative relief.
        Petitioner, Applicant was without legal representation at all pertinent stages of this alleged criminal process. The trial court failed to do an extensive colloquy on the record regarding a waiver of counsel. Moreover, the Commonwealth failed to provide adequate information in order for the Petitioner, Applicant to prepare an adequate defense. Petitioner was also denied a trial by jury in this matter in derogation of Article 3, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Federal Constitution. The Unified Judicial System just rolled right over the top of this Petitioner, Applicant.
        I have administrative grievance to redress the challenges raised herein as the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is not compelled to abide by judgment and order of the court.
        CLAIM TWO:
        Lack of Original Primary Jurisdiction over the Locus in quo, first instance.
        1. Supporting Facts: (Without citing legal authorities or argument state briefly the facts in support of this claim). Pursuant to Part V, Administration and Enforcement, Chapter 61, Powers of the Department and Local Authorities, specifically, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 6102 (a) and (b). The police officer, Ptlmn.__________________ Badge No.________, has no duty and/or power to enforce the Vehicle Code. Therefore, he is outside the scope of his employment. The arresting police officer (_______________, et al.) did not enforce any duly enacted ordinances of his governing body. The Department, PennDOT is charged with the duty to administer the provisions of 75 Pa.C.S. Jurisdiction was challenged throughout the whole state process, but to no avail. Judges____________ denied the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as frivolous and without merit in law and fact. A writ of habeas corpus was filed on________and denied by Judge__________ On __________ the Petitioner's Motion for Leave to File an Appeal as In Forma Pauperis was denied by Judge________________, as well.
        See, Attached Memorandum of Law with Incorporated Points and Authorities.
        2) Did you seek administrative relief as to claim two? X Yes No
        If your answer is "Yes," describe the procedure followed and the result. If your answer is "No," explain why you did not seek administrative relief.
        Petitioner, Applicant filed pretrial motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and an amended motion, but to no avail.
        I have administrative grievance to redress the challenges raised herein. Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) is not compelled to abide by judgment order of the court.
        CLAIM THREE:
        The Judicial Department has Lack of Subject Matter jurisdiction over the alleged prohibitive conduct, first instance - want of Commerce Nexus.
        1.Supporting Facts: (Without citing legal authorities or argument state briefly the facts in support of this claim).
        The executive administrative agency, PennDOT is charged with the power and duty to administer and enforce the provisions of the Vehicle Code pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. 6102 (a). It, agency cannot re-delegate its powers and duties to another municipality or county agency, see 75 Pa.C.S.A. 102 Definitions of Department and Local Authorities, also, see, 67 Pa.Code 211.1. The judicial branch of government has usurped authority and power, first instance, and therefore, has violated the 'separation of powers doctrine'. The Petitioner, Applicant as an individual has a federal protected right to travel freely on the public streets and highways without permission by the State via license or payment of any fees for the enjoyment of said right.
        See, Attached Memorandum of Law with Incorporated Points and Authorities.
        2) Did you seek administrative relief as to claim three? X Yes No
        If your answer is "Yes," describe the procedure followed and the result. If your answer is "No," explain why you did not seek administrative relief.
        Petitioner, Applicant filed a writ of habeas corpus on ________, indicating that the police officer violated the Sunday Laws of Pennsylvania – if they arrested the Petitioner on a Sunday…for alleged violations of the Vehicle Code (75 Pa.C.S.). The writ of habeas corpus was denied by Judge_____________ This abuse of criminal process was for alleged non-jailable traffic [COMMERCE] infractions and a jailable offense. Warrants of arrest came out for failure to respond to traffic citations. The warrants of arrest were more than sixty (60) days old and lacked the oath or affirmation of probable cause in derogation of the Fourth Amendment of the Federal Constitution, as well as, the Pennsylvania Constitution. Trial court has run afoul, as this is unlawful policy, custom and usage throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
        I have administrative relief to redress the challenges raised herein. PennDOT is not compelled to abide by judgment order of the court, first instance.
        CLAIM FOUR:
        Misapplication of State Law, where such is unenacted for noncommercial
        purposes and private use of the public streets and highways
        1. Supporting Facts: (Without citing legal authorities or argument state briefly the facts in support of this claim)
        Petitioner, Applicant has been irreparably injured and harmed by this usurped abuse of power. Furthermore, the local authorities throughout the Commonwealth continually enforce and administer the Vehicle Code when they absolutely have no duty and power to enforce it, unless, ONLY by duly enacted ordinances of their governing bodies pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. 6102 (b). Therefore, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is in violation of State and Federal Racketeering, Influence, Corruption, Organization Laws. It is axiomatic, that 'Ignorance of the law excuses no one', as the Commonwealth uses the Traffic Citation scam as a source of revenue. The local police departments, District Justices, District Attorneys Office and the Courts are all involved in this unlawful and illegal conduct in which abuses the criminal process and violates the fundamentals of due process and the equal protection the law affords.
        See, Attached Memorandum of Law with Incorporated Points and Authorities.
        2) Did you seek administrative relief as to claim four? X Yes No
        If your answer is "Yes," describe the procedure followed and the result. If your answer is "No," explain why you did not seek administrative relief.
        I have administrative grievance to redress the challenges raised herein. PennDOT is not compelled to abide by judgment order of the court.
        18. Do you have any petition, application, motion or appeal now pending in any court, either state or federal, regarding the conviction under attack? XX Yes No
        If "Yes," state the name of the court, case file number (if known), and the nature of the proceeding:
        19. State briefly why you believe that the remedy provided by 28 U.S.C. §2254 (Motion to Vacate Sentence) is inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of your conviction:
        Petitioner, Applicant honestly believes that because the Legislative Court/Tribunal (creature of statute, 42 Pa.C.S.A. 301) wherein the issues now complained of arose, lacks the Constitutional and Legislative authority to entertain and to adjudicate the issues herein and hereinafter, thus a §2254 Motion is inadequate and inappropriate.
        WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Applicant prays that the court grant him such relief to which he may be entitled in this proceeding.
        ______________________________
        ________________________, Sui Juris.
         
         
        DECLARATION & affirmation
        The undersigned declares & affirms that he/she is the applicant in this action, that he/she has read this Petition and that the information contained in the application is true and correct pursuant to the laws of the united States of America.
        DATED at_____________________ County Prison on__________________
        "Without Prejudice"
        L.S. ____________________________ Seal
        ____________________________, Sui Juris.
        Applicant, Petitioner, Pro se.
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
         
        ____________________, Sui Juris.
         
         
        IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
        FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
        united States of America ex rel.:
        _____________________, Sui Juris, :
        Petitioner, Applicant, Case No:_____________________
        (To Be Supplied By Clerk)
        vs. :
        _____________________, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR
        THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PETITION FOR
        T/D/B/A PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT : COMMON LAW
        OF TRANSPORTATION, "PennDOT", WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
        and : STATE CONVICTION
        Applicants in Present Custody
        ________________, KEEPER OF THE Rule 2 (a), 28 U.S.C. 2254
        _________________ COUNTY PRISON.
        Respondents. :
        ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
         
        MEMORANDUM OF LAW
        BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
        "THE GREAT WRIT OF LIBERTY"
        INTRODUCTION:
        The Petitioner is submitting this Petition as of Right, of his own Right, in his proper person. As, he has a constitutional right to speak in his own words, on paper. Farretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, (1975).
        That the Petitioner's pleadings are not to be held to the same stringent standards as licensed attorneys, as long as the court can reasonably read the pleadings and use common sense in the relief being sought, despite failure to cite proper legal authority, poor syntax and sentence construction, confusion of legal theories, and unfamiliarity with pleading requirements. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 92 S.Ct. 594, 30 L.Ed.2d 652 (1972); Boag v. MacDougall, 454 U.S. 364, 102 S.Ct. 700, 70 L.Ed.2d 551 (1982).
        SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT:
        That the Petitioner was cited for alleged NON CRIMINAL Vehicle Code violation(s) by police officers and not the Department of Transportation. When the Department of Transportation is charged with the duty to administer the provisions of Title 75, see 75 Pa.C.S. Section 6102 (a). The local authorities of __________ township have no power and duty to administer and enforce the Vehicle Code pursuant to 75 Pa.C.S.A. Section 6102 (b), unless by, "...[only] duly enacted ordinances of their governing body.", IN WHICH, THEY DID NOT FILE ANY CHARGES UNDER DULY ENACTED ORDINANCES. (Emphasis added). The traffic citations indicate on their face that in Box 26, Statute was checked and not ORDINANCE. That "PA Title 75 Vehicle Code and Section and Subsections" were provided by the local police officer a.k.a. LOCAL AUTHORITY
        Legislature may delegate or grant only those legislative powers which are constitutionally permitted, Denbow v. Borough of Leetsdale, 729 A.2d 481, 556 Pa. 567 (1999).
        Legislature cannot constitutionally delegate power to make law to any other branch of government or to any other body or authority, Sullivan v. Com., Dept. of Transp., Bureau of Driver's Licensing, 708 A.2d 481, 550 Pa. 639 (1998).
        Legislature is constitutionally restrained from delegating their legislative power to any other branch of government or to any other body or authority. Const. Art. 2, Sec.1, Common Cause/Pennsylvania v. Com., 710 A.2d 108.
        The legislature may delegate policymaking authority to an administrative agency, so long as the legislature makes the basic policy choices and establishes adequate standards which will guide and restrain the exercise of the delegated administrative functions, Whitlatch v. Com., Dept. of Transp., Bureau of Driver Licensing, 715 A.2d 387, 552 Pa. 298, certiorari denied 119 S.Ct. 1068,143 L.Ed.2d 71.
        Legislature may delegate policymaking authority to administrative agency, so long as the legislature makes basic policy choices and establishes adequate standards which will guide and restrain the exercise of the delegated administrative functions, Sullivan v. Com., Dept. of Transp., Bureau of Driver's Licensing, 708 A.2d 481, 550 Pa. 639 (1998).
        EXPRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS.
        Expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Co. Litt 210a. Mention of one thing implies exclusion of another, Fazio v. Pittsburg, Rys. Co., 321 Pa. 7, 182 A. 696, 698. The local authorities were precluded from administering and enforcing the provisions of the Vehicle Code (75 Pa.C.S., specifically. Unless, 'only by duly enacted ordinances of their governing bodies.' See, 75 Pa.C.S.A. Sections 6102 (a) and (b).
        LEGAL ARGUMENT:
        Custodial and Non-custodial Detentions Trigger the Fourth Amendment
        Warrantless entry into an individual's home to arrest him for a violation of a civil traffic offense violated the Fourth Amendment. Non-jailable traffic offenses under the Vehicle Code are civil in nature, see Welsh v. Wisconsin, 466 U.S. 740, 80 L.Ed.2d 732, 104 S.Ct. 2091 (1985). To date, there has not been a verified Civil Complaint filed in this case, therefore, the court/judge is clearly absent any and all jurisdiction and no longer has immunity.
        "Though the police are honest and their aims worthy, history shows they are not appropriate guardians of the privacy which the Fourth Amendment protects." Jones v. U.S., 362 U.S. 257, 273 (1959).
        Judge Beck, as have others, classified contact between citizens and police as "mere encounters, non-custodial detentions, and custodial detentions", noting that "both non-custodial and custodial detentions are seizures of the person that trigger the Fourth Amendment protection, Com. v. Brown, 388 Pa. Super. 187, 565 A.2d 177 (1989); Com. v. Thompson, 6 D. & C.4th 358 (1990).
        An on-view traffic stop and/or arrest does not involve a breach of peace, Com. v. Leet, 6 D.& C.4th 106.
        Therefore, based upon the foregoing, the Petitioner has been damaged by this irreparable legal injury. Damages were set at $25,000.00 for 23 minutes. The 23 minutes was the total time [Trezevant] spent in jail, because he refused to sign the traffic ticket during the traffic stop, non-custodial detention, in which, triggered the Fourth Amendment of the Federal Constitution, see Trezevant v. City of Tampa, 741 F.2d 336 (11th Cir. 1984). Also, see, U.S.C.A. Cons. Amends. 4, 5, 7, and 14.
        A peace officer has no official power to arrest beyond the territorial boundary of the state, city, county or bailiwick for which he is elected or appointed, Irwin v. State Department of Motor Vehicles, 10 Wash.App. 369, 517 P.2d 619.
        The police officer did not see a misdemeanor committed in his presence, nor did he have felony warrants. Not only does a misdemeanor have to be committed in the presence of a peace officer, but in addition, it MUST be a breach of peace, see State v. Lutz, 85 W.Va. 330.
        Common Law and Common Law Rights to Freely Travel
        The Pennsylvania commonwealth adopted the Common Law of England, in 1777, and it is codified at 1 Pa.C.S. Section 1503. See, 7 P.L.E. 128, et seq. Sections 1 through 5, inclusive, Common Law. (1959).
        The laws of England are threefold: common law, customs, and decrees of parliament. Common Law Maximum.
        A Common Law Maxim indicates that a "good judge is always to have equity before his eyes."
        The right to travel freely on the public highways and other instrumentalities of interstate commerce, from state to state, is a federally protected right. U.S. v. Guest , 383 U.S. 745, 16 L.Ed.2d 239, 86 S.Ct. 1170, n.16, n. 19, n. 20.
        Blackstone's Commentaries are accepted as the most satisfactory exposition of the common law of England, Bloom v. State of ILL., 391 U.S. 1944, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 L.Ed.2d 522; Bishop v. U.S., D.C. Tex., 334 F. Supp. 415, 418.
        Where the Uniform Commercial Code (U.C.C.) does not address an issue, one should refer to the common law for guidance, Elizzarras v. Bank of El Paso, 631 F.2d 366.
        Common right. Right derivative from common law. Strother v. Lucas, 37 U.S. (Pet. 410, 437, 9 L.Ed 1137.
        Common Law. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Gates, D.C.Kan., 594 F.Supp. 36, 38.
        That the Petitioner did not waive any rights, [Common Law Rights], and the record does not indicate otherwise. See, Com. v. Fine, 17 Monroe L.R. 25 (1955).
        The RIGHT of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which the city may prohibit or permit at will, but a COMMON RIGHT which he has under the RIGHT to life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579.
        The RIGHT to travel is a well-established COMMON RIGHT that does not owe its existence to the federal government or State government for that matter. It is recognized by the Courts as a natural RIGHT....A restraint imposed by the government upon this liberty, therefore, must conform with the provisions of the Fifth Amendment that, "No person shall be...deprived of...liberty...without due process of law." Schactman v. Dulles, 96 App.D.C. 287; 225 F.2d 938, 941.
        The highways and streets are constructed for the use of the public. All members of the public have an UNALIENABLE RIGHT to make use of them. Lawyer v. Pacific Co., 37 Cal. Jur.3d 161.
        "....While sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies [PennDOT] of the government, SOVEREIGNTY ITSELF remains with THE PEOPLE, (Schwika, Private Inhabitant), by whom and for whom, all government exists and acts." Lee v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356.
        People of a state are entitled to all rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Lansing v. Smith, 21 Fed. 89. Moreover, the King [government] is not law, [Rex Lex], in America, the Law is King, [Lex Rex]!
        It is a contempt of court to sue in a fictitious plaintiff's name under the common law, see 4 Blackstone's Comm. 134. Black's Law Dictionary, Revised 4th Edition (1968) at p. 752. The Commonwealth is a fiction of law, Fictitious Plaintiff, in this instant matter.
        There has been created a fictional Federal "state within a state". ( See, also, 31 C.F.R. Part 51.2, which also identifies a fictional State within a state). Howard v. Commissioners of Sinking Fund, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S.Ct. 465, 440.
        The People of a state are the sovereign, not the corporate entity!
        City having right to regulate use of its streets by motor vehicles for hire may issue licenses, a license being permission. Ex parte Schutte, 118 Tex.Cr.R. 182, 42 S.W.2d 252, 255. (Emphasis added) Notice the language indicates for hire, a business is a privilege and a regulateable activity.
        John Adams, the Second President of the United States of America stated: "You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe." However, the Corporate State and its agents and employees think, and act otherwise under the auspices of some kind of quasi-judicial immunity or perhaps the corporate veil!
         
        .
        "No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege and issue a "license" and a fee for it." Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 318 U.S. 105 (1962).
        "If the state does convert a liberty into a privilege and issues a license and a fee for it, you can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right with impunity." Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 U.S. 262 (1962).
        Statutory Laws
        The Motor vehicle Code is a statutory scheme. The Laws of Pennsylvania of 1903 were the first laws adopted by Pennsylvania regarding the use of Motor Vehicles, see Act 202. The Legislative History begins here.
        The effect is a continuance and not a repeal of the statute. Where an act expressly repeals another act and provides a substitute for the act repealed and the substitute is found unconstitutional, the earlier act remains in full force and effect, Mazurek v. Insurance Co., 39 Pa. 33, 37.
        These decisions are applications of the general rule of statutory construction:
        "Whenever a law is repealed and its provisions are at the same
        time re-enacted in the same or substantially the same terms by the
        repealing law, the earlier law shall be construed as continued in
        active operation. All rights and liabilities incurred under such earlier
        law are preserved and may be enforced." ***
        ***Statutory Construction Act, 1937, May 28, P.L. 1019, 46 P.S. , s. 582.
        STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION; 1Pa.C.S.A. Section 1922(1)
        The legislature's express language in the statute means what it says. It is an absurdity for the judiciary and attorneys to read into the law to make it fit their scheme of exacting fines from the People. This is what happens when one group of People controls everything in government. One would believe that a legal cartel or legal monopoly is at large against constitutional proscription, Com. v. Hagan, 539 Pa. 609, 616, 654 A.2d 541, 545 (1995) ("in construing statutes, we presume the legislature did not intend an absurd result"). Again, the power is reserved to the People, via the National Constitution, the Tenth Amendment. U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 10, and not with the evil and corrupt powers to be. The legislature cannot delegate power it does not have, or it would be usurped power, outside the constitutional provisions, therefore, constituting legal nullities.
        Once the legislature constitutionally delegates its power to another agency, the administrative agency cannot re-delegate that power to another agency/municipality, as in this matter sub judice, specifically, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 6102 (a).
        DEFINITIONS
        In order to understand the correct application of the statute in question, we must first define the terms used in connection with this point of law. As will be shown, many terms used today do not, in their legal context, mean what we assume they mean, thus resulting in the misapplication of statutes in the instant case.
        AUTOMOBILE AND MOTOR VEHICLE
        There is a clear distinction between an automobile and a motor vehicle. An automobile has been defined as:
        "The word 'automobile' connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for
        the transportation of persons on highways." American Mutual
        Liability Ins. Co. vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200.
        While the distinction is made clear between the two as the courts have stated:
        "A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other
        than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons
        for which remuneration is received." International Motor Transit
        Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120.
        The term 'motor vehicle' is different and broader than the word
        'automobile'. City of Dayton vs. DeBrosse, 23 NE.2d 647, 650; 62
        Ohio App. 232.
        The distinction is made very clear in Title 18 U.S.C. 31:
        "Motor vehicle" means every description or other contrivance
        propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial
        purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or
        passengers and property.
        "Used for commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or
        property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other considerations,
        or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or
        other undertaking intended for profit.
        Clearly, an automobile is private property in use for private purposes, while a motor vehicle is a machine, which may be used upon the highways for trade, commerce, or hire.
        TRAVEL
        The term "travel" is a significant term and is defined as:
        "The term `travel' and `traveler' are usually construed in their
        broad and general sense...so as to include all those who
        rightfully use the highways viatically (when being reimbursed for
        expenses) and who have occasion to pass over them for the purpose
        of business, convenience, or pleasure." [emphasis added] 25
        Am. Jur. Highways, Sec. 427, p.717.
        "Traveler - One who passes from place to place, whether for
        pleasure, instruction, business, or health." Locket vs. State, 47
        Ala. 45; Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914 ed., p. 3309.
        "Travel - To journey

        (Message over 64 KB, truncated)
      • Tracy Lyles
        I don t know any place that s going to take that for a bond. You can try to find a place that takes 5% on the bond if you can t pay that, then he will sit.
        Message 3 of 3 , Jan 31, 2007
          I don't know any place that's going to take that for a bond. You can try to find a place that takes 5% on the bond if you can't pay that, then he will sit. They will give him a Public Defender if he can't afford and attorney. There were some questions on here to ask the attorney chek the archives and use them. Other than that send him some commissary cause he will be in there until trial. He has a few more months to go. He can get into the law library which I suggest and do some legal work himself.

          JCP <jpes@...> wrote: Somewhere someone had mentioned of a successful process to Bond somebody out of Jail using their Birth Certificate.
          Is this valid?
          Who's process is this?
          Whomever posted it, could you please repost?

          I have a friend that needs to get out of the can. He's there on hearsay evidence and those who made the complaint have NO credibility. They have brought Fraud to the Court with false testimony. My friend cannot afford the bail or council. His arraignment is in March... he sits there in anguish...

          I seen him today. He said he was told by the prosecutor that he is guilty until proven innocent. WHEW !!!!
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.