Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
C/O Message Address
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT[1]
DIVISION ______
______TERM
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.,]
]No.
Appellant/Petitioner,]
]EMERGENCY
Against]MANDATORY
Superior Court, State of California, ]INJUNCTION
County of Butte]
][CCP § 525]
Respondent]
]
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,]
By their attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, ]
District Attorney for the COUNTY OF BUTTE]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
]
COUNTY OF BUTTE, by their Attorney, ]
Michael L. Ramsey, District Attorney for ]
the COUNTY OF BUTTE, Ms. Susan Sloan, a.k.a. ]
fiction “SUSAN SLOAN”]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
The California Department of Corrections]
Respondent]
______]
FOR THE THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT: To the honourable presiding Justice and the honourable associate Justices of the Court of Appeal of the State of California, for the Third Appellate District, GREETINGS:
1.)I am Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., your petitioner in this matter, the greatly aggrieved and damaged party acting In Propria Persona, Sui Juris in this lawful cause of action. A white, free Christian male adult, a natural born, common law state Citizen of New York, not welfare enumerated, and not embarrassed by the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution.
2.)Respondent’s are in fact:
A.)The COUNTY OF BUTTE.
B.)The County of Butte, District Attorney, Michael L. Ramsey et als.;
C.)The California Department of Corrections.
D.)The COUNTY OF BUTTE, CONSOLIDATED COURTS.
E.)Ms Susan Sloan.
F.)THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
3.)Injunction. A court order prohibiting someone from doing some specified act or commanding someone to undo some wrong or injury. A prohibitive, equitable remedy issued or granted by a court at the suit of a party complainant, directed to a party defendant in the action, or to a party made a defendant for that purpose, forbidding the latter from doing some act which he is threatening or attempting to commit, or restraining him in the continuance thereof, such act being unjust and inequitable, injurious to the plaintiff, and not such as can be adequately redressed by an action at law. A judicial process operating in personam, and requiring judicial process operating in personam, and requiring person to whom it is direct to do or refrain from doing a particular thing. Gainsburg v. Doge, 193 Ark. 473, 101 S.W.2d 178, 180. Generally , it is a preventive remedy, aimed at future acts, and is not intended to redress past wrongs. Snyder v. Sullivan, Colo., 705 P.2d 510, 513. Fed.R.Civil P. 65.
CCP.§ 525“An injunction is a writ or order requiring a person to refrain from a particular act. It may be granted by the court in which the action is brought, or by a judge thereof; and when granted by a judge, it may be enforce as an order of the court.”
“An ‘injunction’ requires the defendant to refrain from a particular act.” Neumann v. Moretti (1905) 146 C 31, 79 P. 512.
“An ‘injunction’ is a personal decree. It operates on the person of the defendant by commanding him to do or desist from certain action.” Comfort v. Comfort (1941) 17 C2d 736, 112 P.2d 259.
4.)Your petitioner comes to this lawful judicial powers court, for an immediate emergency injunction to issue direct against respondent’s whom have fraudulently and unlawfully in overt violation to the oath of office and in direct arrogance and insolence to the concise rule of law as mandated by the Constitution for the state of California (1849) and the Constitution for the state of New York, 1777, and the Constitution for the United States (1787-1791).
5.)This tribunal, acting under the aegis of the good and wholesome laws of the state of California as enumerated by the Constitution for the state of California (1849), must provide substantive due process of law, and palpable redress of grievances to your petition who demands this Emergency Injunction as a last resort in which to stop the criminal and/or unlawful acts and/or omissions in this matter placing your petitioner in immediate and irreparable harm and jeopardy, with no palpable redress at law. Aforesaid Court of Appeals, of the State of California, Third Judicial District owes your petitioner a duty to obey the concise rule of law, and their oath of office, and as your petitioner’s public servants, must provide instant remedy at law against respondent’s acts and/or omissions in this matter which have factually led to a miscarriage of justice and is a clear and present danger to the safety, liberty, rights health and property of your petitioner.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Whereas, your petitioner comes before Almighty God and this judicial powers court to supplicate an immediate Order for Injunction be placed against respondent’s in the following manner:
A.)This court must stop all “parole” and the Department of Corrections in implementing “parole” as I have factually been kidnapped and have spent more time than said alleged criminal sentence specifies falsely and unjustly imprisoned without due process of law, for a misdemeanor; and this court expunge said “parole” as it is in excess of discretion and without lawful jurisdiction or basis at substantive law.
B.)That this court immediately place an injunction against the County of Butte, District Attorney, Michael L. Ramsey et als., to stop and desist all attempts to arrest your petitioner who now seeks palpable redress of law, substantive due process of law, and lawful redress of grievances and demands stability to access the courts to the respondent’s detriment and legal jeopardy.
C.)That this court must act in good faith, with no bad faith to your petitioner as this Emergency Injunction comes as a proper remedy at law.
D.)That this court must act and grant this Emergency Injunction within 48 Hours, and give written response of said affirmation to your petitioner at the above mentioned address.
E.)If said court does not grant this lawful demand for Emergency Injunction, then; it must in the first instance, provide written response of its failure and it must provide me with a comprehensive written law in which it used substantive law in its findings of Ultimate Facts and Conclusions of Law it used in which to deny said Emergency Injunction.
Your petitioner has expended more time unjustly, falsely, and maliciously incarcerated then for what respondent’s sentence enjoins, (as it is only factually a misdemeanor) and thereby, this court as a matter of law, must stop respondent’s continued, and malicious acts and/or omissions in this matter so that your petitioner may prosecute and appeal this matter at law, and bring a substantial question of law, to the Supreme Court for judicial determination as a remedy at law.
DATED:January 12, 2001______Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
C/O Message Address
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
C/O Message Address
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT[2]
DIVISION ______
______TERM
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.,]
]No.
Appellant/Petitioner,]
]EMERGENCY
Against]MANDATORY
Superior Court, State of California, ]INJUNCTION
County of Butte]ORDER
][CCP § 525]
Respondent]
]
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,]
By their attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, ]
District Attorney for the COUNTY OF BUTTE]
Respondent’s]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
]
COUNTY OF BUTTE, by their Attorney, ]
Michael L. Ramsey, District Attorney for ]
the COUNTY OF BUTTE, Ms. Susan Sloan, a.k.a. ]
fiction “SUSAN SLOAN”]
Respondent’s]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
The California Department of Corrections]
Respondent’s]
______]
For good cause having been shown, on the application of petitioner, under exigent circumstances for an immediate emergency mandatory injunction to issue in the first instance, directed for aforesaid Respondent’s, it is hereby ORDERED, that the motion is granted and the petitioner may be set unconditionally free, upon his own recognizance in order that he may appeal the unjust conviction, with no lawful supporting court order coming from the BUTTE COUNTY CONSOLIDATED COURT system “Superior Court”, rendered on or about September 28, 2000 with sentencing set on or about October 31, 2000.
It is hereby ORDERED, that the aforementioned respondent’s cease and desist and that said motion of petitioner be granted so that petitioner may seek a remedy at law against said respondents:
1.)All “parole” attacks or requirements against petitioner cease.
2.)All court appearances instituted by Respondent’s cease and desist (motion by respondent’s hearing set for January 25, 2000.).
3.)That the County of Butte District Attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, et als.; removed himself from this matter, as he has factually been disqualified due to his unjust, and unlawful acts and/or omissions under petitioners California Penal Code § 1424 motion which has in fact carried as a matter of law; and thereby, he factually has no station to address any further issues in any further proceedings at law.
4.)That petitioner be immediately set unconditionally free to prosecute his Appeal against the fraudulent “conviction” of respondent’s, and his Constitutional challenge of the aforesaid fraudulent ‘conviction’ of Penal Codes §§ 270 and 166(a)(4) as a remedy to lawful redress of grievances.
5.)That the California Department of Corrections cease and desist aforementioned “parole” action against petitioner rescind and expunge petitioner’s CDC number fraudulently coerced as a menace without lawful court order and to which he in fact never did volunteer or consent for.
6.)All attempts by Respondent’s to arrest your petitioner. That said “Warrant” be expunged as a matter of law as petitioner has in fact exceeded the time limits for alleged ‘crime’ and in fact, said ‘alleged’ crime is not a felony.
DATED: January 12, 2001
______
Signature of PRESIDING JUSTICE
COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
SEAL:
______
COURT CLERK
COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT[3]
DIVISION ______
______TERM
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.,]
]No.
Appellant/Petitioner,]
]
Against]REQUEST FOR STATEMENT
Superior Court, State of California, ]OF DECISION
County of Butte][CCP § 632]
][CRC Rule 29.5]
Respondent][CRC Rule 232 et seq.]
]
By their attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, ]ULTIMATE FACTS
District Attorney for the COUNTY OF BUTTE]AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]ON EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
]
COUNTY OF BUTTE, by their attorney, ]
Michael L. Ramsey, District Attorney for ]
the COUNTY OF BUTTE, Ms. Susan Sloan, a.k.a. ]
fiction “SUSAN SLOAN”]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
______]
FOR THE THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT: To the honourable presiding Justice and the honourable associate Justices of the Court of Appeal of the State of California, for the Third Appellate District, GREETINGS:
Your Petitioner, Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., In Propria Persona, Sui Juris, who appeared by special appearance by the aforesaid motion in the above-entitled action, in a matter which in the BUTTE COUNTY CONSOLIDATED COURTS, “Superior Court” went to trial from September 25, 2000 to September 29th, 2000 a trial factually lasting more than one day (see Code Civ. Proc. § 632) with sentencing set by disqualified “judge” Gerald Hermansen on October 31, 2000; petitioner hereby demands that the court issue a statement of decision in writing, returnable to me; explaining the factual, lawful and legal basis and findings of fact and conclusions of law, for its decision regarding the following decision on applied motion; in its controverted issues: [Note: This statement of decision does not have to be completed if this court grants the motion or document so submitted by petitioner.]
1.)Your petitioner, who brings this motion of an Emergency Mandatory Injunction, brings said motion in good faith, with no bad faith to aforementioned court, and thereby, demands an answer at law; as silence is hereby impermissible, and unacceptable and as hereby noted, a direct violation of law. Thereby, this judicial powers court, owes your petitioner a duty at law, to inform me fully of the applied law used to deny aforementioned motion at law on its Ultimate Facts and Conclusions of Law.
2.)Upon what lawful grounds was the Injunction denied?
3.)What was the venue of this court which led to this Injunction’s denial?
4.)What was the specific jurisdiction of this court which led to this Injunction’s denial?
5.)What was the term at law for the above mentioned court, and its judges?
6.)Who was the specific “judge” (or “judges”) who denied aforesaid injunction? [Please remit names, when duly elected, the date; and date of lawful oath of office; and bond number(s)].
7.)In the above submitted motion, how was the controverted issue adjudicated within alignment of the concise rule of law as enumerated by the Constitution for the state of California (1849)?
8.)What is the precise Article and section which this court used as enumerated by the Constitution for the state of California (1849)?
9.)If any other statute or cite of law was used, what is the exact verification in law where said statute or cite is in precise alignment with the Constitution for the state of California (1849)?
DATED: January 12, 2001______
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.—AT LAW
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT[4]
DIVISION ______
______TERM
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.,]
]No.
Appellant/Petitioner,]
]PROPOSAL AS TO CONTENT OF
Against]STATEMENT OF DECISION
Superior Court, State of California, ]
County of Butte][CCP § 632]
][CRC Rule 29.5]
Respondent][CRC Rule 232 et seq.]
]
By their attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, ]ULTIMATE FACTS
District Attorney for the COUNTY OF BUTTE]AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
]ON EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
]
COUNTY OF BUTTE, by their attorney, ]
Michael L. Ramsey, District Attorney for ]
the COUNTY OF BUTTE, Ms. Susan Sloan, a.k.a. ]
fiction “SUSAN SLOAN”]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
______]
I, Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., the accused and greatly damaged and aggrieved party in this matter, who appeared and did lawfully submit this motion for due consideration to the above mentioned action and tribunal, hereby demands that this court issue a statement of decision explaining the factual and legal bases for its decision regarding the following controverted issues:
1.)The Respondent’s who enjoin this court and are co-members and officers of this court thereof, owe me, Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., your petitioner a duty at law.
2.)That the factual and legal bases for the court’s decision regarding the controverted issue of denial of this Emergency Mandatory Injunction be explained as follows:
a.)What concise facts did this court base it’s decision?
b.)What was the venue of the court which made this decision?
c.)What was the lawful jurisdiction of the court which made this decision?
d.)Was the court in a common law venue and jurisdiction with a rule of law consistent therewith?
e.)Was the court in an admiralty venue and jurisdiction with a rule of law consistent therewith?
f.)Was the court in a corporate venue and jurisdiction with a rule of law consistent therewith?
g.)Was the court in a military venue and jurisdiction with a rule of law consistent therewith?
h.)Was the “judge” or “judges” properly sitting with a proper and lawful oath and affirmation as mandated by the rule of law? Yes or No?
i.)Was the “judge” or “judges” properly bonded as mandated and required by the concise rule of law? Yes or No?
j.)What was aforesaid court “judge” or “judges” bond number(s)?
k.)Was the “judge” or “judges” of good moral character? Yes or No?
l.)Was the “judge” or “judges” sitting in good behavior? Yes or No?
3.)What was the concise rule of law used in this decision, as enumerated by the Constitution for the state of California (1849), which allowed the denial of aforesaid injunction?
4.)What was the article and section depended upon in the Constitution for the state of California (1849)?
5.)If any other statute or cite of law was used, what is the exact verification in law where said statute or cite is in precise alignment with the Constitution for the state of California (1849)?
Dated: January 12, 2001______
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.—AT LAW
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES FOR CCP § 632 MOTION
CCP § 525
CCP § 632
Cal. Rules of Ct. Rule 232, et seq. and Rule 29.5
Constitution of California (1849), Article I, Section 8.
In re Marriage Katz (1991) 234 Ca. App. 3d 1711
Ingredient Communication Council, Inc., v. Lungren (1992) 2 Cal.App. 4th 1480
Midwest Television, Inc., v. Scott, Lancaster, Mills & Atha., In. (1988) 205 Cal.App. 3d 442
Whittington v. McKinney (1991) 234 Cal. App. 3d 123
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.
C/O Message Address
Fifteenth Judicial District
6190 Skyway
Paradise, California
(530) 877-1265
In Propria Persona, Sui Juris
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT[5]
DIVISION ______
______TERM
Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr.,]
]No.
Appellant/Petitioner,]AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF
]EMERGENCY
Against]MANDATORY
Superior Court, State of California, ]INJUNCTION
County of Butte]
][CCP § 525]
Respondent]
]
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,]
By their attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, ]
District Attorney for the COUNTY OF BUTTE]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
]
COUNTY OF BUTTE, by their Attorney, ]
Michael L. Ramsey, District Attorney for ]
the COUNTY OF BUTTE, Ms. Susan Sloan, a.k.a. ]
fiction “SUSAN SLOAN”]
]
Real Party in Interest(or unknown)]
The California Department of Corrections]
Respondent]
______]
Comes now, your petitioner, Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., In Propria Persona, Sui Juris, who under exigent circumstances knowing the penalties for perjury, and before Almighty God, hereby deposes and says:
1.)I am Robert Lindsay; Cheney Jr., acting as my own counsel, In Propria Persona, Sui Juris, and am the petitioner/appellant in this matter, the accused, greatly aggrieved and damaged party in this matter.
2.)This emergency Injunction are needed due to the fact that the COUNTY OF BUTTE, through its attorney, Michael L. Ramsey, et als., is in fact, using law for a purpose not intended at law.