Re: [tips_and_tricks] Re: outlaw judge
Thanks, I appreciate the advice, I'll hold off on the grand jury until this is resolved. In this instance, it will be a trial de novo, everything starts over at zero. However in this case, I should have (theoretically) a better chance to prove the judge ignored the law. My motion to dismiss was vast and extensive in facts of law and precedent, it left no wiggle room. The only way it could be denied is by another corrupt judge, which is in the realm of possibility. If that is the case, then I can easily take that "error" to the court of appeals, which doesn't play around and has already ruled (and set precedent) that an oath of office is required. If it makes it that far, then statewide precedent will be set again, and every case this prosecutor has ever handled will be null and void. That will be my victory.
On Sat, 9/20/08, tthor.geo <tthor.geo@...> wrote:
I do not know how Texas 'courts' are structured.
IF California is any indication, the first 'court [trial level] ONLY
is conducted to establish the FACTS of the case. The appellate level
is where one 'argues' the law as applied to those facts [a step most
*pro pers* ignore/forego] . The appellate level is also where you can
establish precedent [help for others in a similar situation]. You
need to start researching the Rules for Appeals [probably in your
State-level Rules of Court].
Your planned expedition to the Grand Jury is way premature [and will
be viewed as 'vindictive/ 'vexatious' ; guess who honchos the grand
Jury?] until you have established [at the appellate level] that the
judge actually did something illegal [not just error(s) of