First-Class Mail® - Certified Mail™ Label Number: 70132630000221180033
Expected Delivery Day: Thursday, July 24, 2014
________________________________________________________________
Expected Delivery Day: Thursday, July 24, 2014
Delivered, July 28, 2014 , 8:30 am, WASHINGTON, DC 20543
Scott S. Harris, Clerk of the Court
Supreme Court of the United States
One First Street N.E.
Washington, DC 20543-0001
Re: A repeated constitutionally and
lawfully un-abridge-able petition for Writ of Certiorari regarding the facially
IN-valid court order[1] in the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals cases 07-2614, 08-1823, 10-1947, 11-2425, 12-2435, 13-2200 and 14-1470 David Jeep
v. Government of United States that “a four-year-old[2]” could understand
Dear Mr. Harris,
I stress, as always, “Time is
of the essence.” I am impoverished and have been homeless for
6.70 years in this 11.17 year effort.
“How did strict scrutiny for
inalienable “reckonable” rights ever result in anything less than STRICT
LIABILITY?”
“The germ of destruction of our
nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body - working like
gravity by night and day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and
advancing it's noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction,
until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and
will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we
separated." --Thomas Jefferson
If there is anything further I can do for you in this regard, please let me know.
Thank you in advance.
“Time is of the essence”
David G. Jeep
enclosure
a. “A humble pro se
EMERGENCY PETITION for a WRIT OF CERTIORARI, 11.17 years of deprivation,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES”
b. In forma pauperis petition
in the Supreme Court
cc: My Blog - Tuesday,
October 15, 2013, 9:32:16 AM
[1] The assertion of a misdemeanor traffic violation does
not provide probable cause for a ex parte restraining order. Clearly
based on the original SERVED handwritten petition dated 11-03-03 as provided
hear, THERE WAS A COMPLETE
ABSENCE OF JURISDICTION for the stated charge.
“Consequently, it (the judge’s order) can be facially invalid only if it was
issued in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction." Stump v.
Sparkman,435 U.S. 349, 356-57, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978) (citation
omitted).” Id.” PENN v. U.S. 335 F.3d 790 (2003).
[2] Attorney Joe Miller
(Denzel Washington REPEATED ASSERTION in “Philadelphia”): Now, explain it to me like
I'm a four-year-old.
No comments:
Post a Comment