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

Definition of the legal term "forthwith."

Expand Messages
  • Email41@aol.com
    Does anyone have a dissertation on the legal term, forthwith? I am presently engaged in a court issue where the attorney for the state is commanded,
    Message 1 of 6 , Apr 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Does anyone have a dissertation on the legal term, "forthwith?"

      I am presently engaged in a court issue where the attorney for the state is commanded, "...shall forthwith prepare an information based upon such complaint..." Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 2.05.

      A sworn complaint did not appear in the court records until after two appearances and approximately 6 weeks duration of time. There has never been an information filed into the court and now it has been approximately 70 days since the accusation was made of a Class C Misdemeanor violation.

      Bouvier's 1856 states: FORTHWITH. When a thing is to be done forthwith, it seems that it must be performed as soon as by reasonable exertion, confined to that object, it may be done. This is the import of the term; it varies, of course, with every particular case. 4 Tyr. 837; Styles' Register, 452, 3.

      Law.com states: forthwith adv.a term found in contracts, court orders and statutes, meaning as soon as it can be reasonably done. It implies immediacy, with no excuses fordelay.

      I am wondering if any court would accept 70 days from the accusation and 40 days from the filing of a sworn complaint as reasonable for the command "shall forthwith?"

      Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 12.02 Misdemeanors: An indictment or information for any misdemeanor may be presented within two years from the date of the commission of the offense, and not afterward.

      I wonder if a judge would attempt to argue the ridiculous position that "forthwith" could include 2 years of time? It seems to me that the refusal of the state attorney to file an information is an artifice to deprive me of my fundamental and
      substantive rights of due process.

      Any ideas?

      shalom,
      email41




      **************
      Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
      (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
    • (888)BailMan
      Perhaps a motion to dismiss on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction due to the DAs non compliance with the statute. Then if your motion is denied, be prepared
      Message 2 of 6 , Apr 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Perhaps a motion to dismiss on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction due to the DAs non compliance with the statute. Then if your motion is denied, be prepared to take the issue up on a writ FORTHWITH!

        Hope this idea helps.

        Bret

        On Apr 3, 2008, at 12:00, Email41@... wrote:

        Does anyone have a dissertation on the legal term, "forthwith?" 

        I am presently engaged in a court issue where the attorney for the state is commanded, "...shall forthwith prepare an information based upon such complaint..." Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 2.05.



      • Moisha Pippik
        I can tell you the definition in the Black s Law 4th Deluxe: Forthwith: Immediately; without delay, directly, hence within a reasonable time under the
        Message 3 of 6 , Apr 3, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          I can tell you the definition in the Black's Law 4th Deluxe:
           
          Forthwith: Immediately; without delay, directly, hence within a reasonable time under the circumstances of the case; promptly and with reasonable dispatch.  Within such time as to permit that which is to be done, to be done lawfully and according to the practical and ordinary course of things to be performed or accomplished.  The first opportunity offerred.
          I have highlighted what fits my belief as to what is going on with your situation. 
           
          Here is where I believe you stand.  You are a problem for the court, because you are not consenting by requiring the information.  The information is what creates the case, not the case creating the information.  Now, with this said, the DA or someone who purportedly represents the plaintiff(probably STATE OF TEXAS), needs you to contract by some sort of consent/agreement, voluntarily, with or without consideration. 
           
          If you will focus on what it is they are trying to get you to do, which is agree with them, then you have taken at least half the challenge away from yourself.  Be careful with all mail sent to you, and how you respond to such mail(offers from the court).  It is business, and you are deemed to know the law. 
           
          You need to clearly identify your position to the court/DA/judge/clerk.  NO CONSENT TO THESE PROCEEDINGS, OFFER TO CONTRACT DECLINED!!!!!!!

          Email41@... wrote:
          Does anyone have a dissertation on the legal term, "forthwith?"

          I am presently engaged in a court issue where the attorney for the state is commanded, "...shall forthwith prepare an information based upon such complaint..." Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 2.05.

          A sworn complaint did not appear in the court records until after two appearances and approximately 6 weeks duration of time. There has never been an information filed into the court and now it has been approximately 70 days since the accusation was made of a Class C Misdemeanor violation.

          Bouvier's 1856 states: FORTHWITH. When a thing is to be done forthwith, it seems that it must be performed as soon as by reasonable exertion, confined to that object, it may be done. This is the import of the term; it varies, of course, with every particular case. 4 Tyr. 837; Styles' Register, 452, 3.

          Law.com states: forthwith adv.a term found in contracts, court orders and statutes, meaning as soon as it can be reasonably done. It implies immediacy, with no excuses fordelay.

          I am wondering if any court would accept 70 days from the accusation and 40 days from the filing of a sworn complaint as reasonable for the command "shall forthwith?"

          Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 12.02 Misdemeanors: An indictment or information for any misdemeanor may be presented within two years from the date of the commission of the offense, and not afterward.

          I wonder if a judge would attempt to argue the ridiculous position that "forthwith" could include 2 years of time? It seems to me that the refusal of the state attorney to file an information is an artifice to deprive me of my fundamental and
          substantive rights of due process.

          Any ideas?

          shalom,
          email41




          ************ **
          Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
          (http://travel. aol.com/travel- guide/united- states?ncid= aoltrv0003000000 0016)


          You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost.

        • Frog Farmer
          ... To go forth he needs it with him! ... Sounds like a waiver occurred. ... Sounds like somebody accepted it and permitted them to move forward without
          Message 4 of 6 , Apr 4, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            Email41@... wrote:

            > I am presently engaged in a court issue where the attorney for the
            > state is commanded, "...shall forthwith prepare an information based
            > upon such complaint..." Tex. Crim. Proc. Code Art. 2.05.

            To go "forth" he needs it "with" him!

            > A sworn complaint did not appear in the court records until after two
            > appearances and approximately 6 weeks duration of time.

            Sounds like a waiver occurred.

            > I am wondering if any court would accept 70 days from the accusation
            > and 40 days from the filing of a sworn complaint as reasonable for the
            > command "shall forthwith?"

            Sounds like somebody accepted it and permitted them to move forward
            without it.

            > It seems to me that the refusal of the state attorney to file an
            > information is an artifice to deprive me of my fundamental and
            > substantive rights of due process.
            >
            > Any ideas?

            Writ of Mandate, with the alternatives offered being PRODUCE or DISMISS!

            Regards,

            FF
          • Email41@aol.com
            ... Sounds like a waiver occurred. I m not sure if a waiver occured, however, what actually occured according to my knowledge is that I demanded a sworn
            Message 5 of 6 , Apr 8, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              > A sworn complaint did not appear in the court records until after two
              > appearances and approximately 6 weeks duration of time.

              Sounds like a waiver occurred.


              I'm not sure if a waiver occured, however, what actually occured according to my knowledge is that I demanded a sworn complaint to be presented at each special appearance. At both appearances there did not exist a sworn complaint in the court record. The complaint was sworn after my second demand. I do this intentionally to ensure on the record of my demand for due process inaccordance with the Tx. Code of Crim. Proc. Rules. I believe this establishes the record of the violation of my right to due process and automatically brings jurisdictional challenges to the alleged case.


              > I am wondering if any court would accept 70 days from the accusation
              > and 40 days from the filing of a sworn complaint as reasonable for the
              > command "shall forthwith?"

              Sounds like somebody accepted it and permitted them to move forward
              without it.


              I suspect that the presiding judge (a Texas Ranger who resigned his office to run for the County Judge's office, was not elected and now occupies the Muni Judge's office) accepted it. The attorney for the STATE OF TEXAS has never appeared at any tribunal nor on paper in this alleged case.


              > It seems to me that the refusal of the state attorney to file an
              > information is an artifice to deprive me of my fundamental and
              > substantive rights of due process.
              >
              >     Any ideas?

              Writ of Mandate, with the alternatives offered being PRODUCE or DISMISS!


              I thought your common strategy was to enter a higher court and sue for a Writ of Prohibition. I have some understanding of the concepts but I have never done this petition before. Would I have to sue for the Writ when they are unable to answer the Writ of Mandate (Mandamus or is that something different)?


              Regards,

              FF





              **************
              Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
              (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
            • Frog Farmer
              ... I forget, why was a second appearance necessary or made? Without a sworn complaint, what gives jurisdiction there? ... I can understand it occurring
              Message 6 of 6 , Apr 8, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                > I'm not sure if a waiver occured, however, what actually occured
                > according to my knowledge is that I demanded a sworn complaint to be
                > presented at each special appearance. At both appearances there did
                > not exist a sworn complaint in the court record.

                I forget, why was a second appearance necessary or made? Without a
                sworn complaint, what gives jurisdiction there?

                > The complaint was
                > sworn after my second demand. I do this intentionally to ensure on the
                > record of my demand for due process inaccordance with the Tx. Code of
                > Crim. Proc. Rules. I believe this establishes the record of the
                > violation of my right to due process and automatically brings
                > jurisdictional challenges to the alleged case.

                I can understand it occurring because I once put off arraignment 9 times
                in nine months, but they never succeeded and finally "dismissed"
                something that didn't even exist to be dismissed, a CASE.

                > Sounds like somebody accepted it and permitted them to move
                > forward
                > without it.
                >
                > I suspect that the presiding judge (a Texas Ranger who resigned his
                > office to run for the County Judge's office, was not elected and now
                > occupies the Muni Judge's office) accepted it.

                I meant, it looks like YOU accepted it too.

                > The attorney for the
                > STATE OF TEXAS has never appeared at any tribunal nor on paper in this
                > alleged case.

                There you go, "alleged case". Haven't you had enough yet? Who is
                milking this thing, and why?

                > I thought your common strategy was to enter a higher court and sue for
                > a Writ of Prohibition.

                Back in the old days I did do that, but now I know it is ALL show, all
                smoke and mirrors, so I don't play. I disqualify everyone ASAP/IMOC and
                explain that my time on Earth is short and I'm finished pretending and
                playing and I don't mind if they play with the bewildered populace and
                I'll even have fun with them, but I cannot take it seriously or spare
                their game any time or resources. Most appear to understand.

                > I have some understanding of the concepts but I
                > have never done this petition before. Would I have to sue for the Writ
                > when they are unable to answer the Writ of Mandate (Mandamus or is
                > that something different)?

                Writ of Mandate (English word) is the same as Mandamus (Latin word). It
                is a writ that commands that a ministerial duty be performed. The duty
                has to be identified and articulated.

                A Writ of Prohibition is the opposite - it commands that an act NOT take
                place.

                CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE
                SECTION 995-999a

                995. (a) Subject to subdivision (b) of Section 995a, the indictment
                or information shall be set aside by the court in which the
                defendant is arraigned, upon his or her motion, in either of the
                following cases:
                (1) If it is an indictment:
                (A) Where it is not found, endorsed, and presented as prescribed
                in this code.
                (B) That the defendant has been indicted without reasonable or
                probable cause.
                (2) If it is an information:
                (A) That before the filing thereof the defendant had not been
                legally committed by a magistrate.
                (B) That the defendant had been committed without reasonable or
                probable cause.
                (b) In cases in which the procedure set out in subdivision (b) of
                Section 995a is utilized, the court shall reserve a final ruling on
                the motion until those procedures have been completed.

                996. If the motion to set aside the indictment or information is
                not made, the defendant is precluded from afterwards taking the
                objections mentioned in Section 995.

                997. The motion must be heard at the time it is made, unless for
                cause the court postpones the hearing to another time. The court may
                entertain such motion prior to trial whether or not a plea has been
                entered and such plea need not be set aside in order to consider the
                motion. If the motion is denied, and the accused has not previously
                answered the indictment or information, either by demurring or
                pleading thereto, he shall immediately do so. If the motion is
                granted, the court must order that the defendant, if in custody, be
                discharged therefrom; or, if admitted to bail, that his bail be
                exonerated; or, if he has deposited money, or if money has been
                deposited by another or others instead of bail for his appearance,
                that the same be refunded to him or to the person or persons found by
                the court to have deposited said money on behalf of said defendant,
                unless it directs that the case be resubmitted to the same or another
                grand jury, or that an information be filed by the district
                attorney; provided, that after such order of resubmission the
                defendant may be examined before a magistrate, and discharged or
                committed by him, as in other cases, if before indictment or
                information filed he has not been examined and committed by a
                magistrate.

                998. If the court directs the case to be resubmitted, or an
                information to be filed, the defendant, if already in custody, shall
                remain, unless he or she is admitted to bail; or, if already admitted
                to bail, or money has been deposited instead thereof, the bail or
                money is answerable for the appearance of the defendant to answer a
                new indictment or information; and, unless a new indictment is found
                or information filed before the next grand jury of the county is
                discharged, the court shall, on the discharge of such grand jury,
                make the order prescribed by Section 997.

                999. An order to set aside an indictment or information, as
                provided in this chapter, is no bar to a future prosecution for the
                same offense.

                999a. A petition for a writ of prohibition, predicated upon the
                ground that the indictment was found without reasonable or probable
                cause or that the defendant had been committed on an information
                without reasonable or probable cause, or that the court abused its
                discretion in utilizing the procedure set out in subdivision (b) of
                Section 995a, must be filed in the appellate court within 15 days
                after a motion made under Section 995 to set aside the indictment on
                the ground that the defendant has been indicted without reasonable or
                probable cause or that the defendant had been committed on an
                information without reasonable or probable cause, has been denied by
                the trial court. A copy of such petition shall be served upon the
                district attorney of the county in which the indictment is returned
                or the information is filed. The alternative writ shall not issue
                until five days after the service of notice upon the district
                attorney and until he has had an opportunity to appear before the
                appellate court and to indicate to the court the particulars in which
                the evidence is sufficient to sustain the indictment or commitment.










                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Regards,
                >
                > FF
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > **************
                > Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.
                > (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-
                > states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.