Monday, July 21, 2014

Cover Letter Writ of Certiorari 14-1470 David Jeep v. Government of United States

First-Class Mail® - Certified Mail™ Label Number: 70132630000221180033
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 07-261408-182310-194711-242512-2435, 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

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.

Post a Comment