IN THE SUPREME
COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO
No.__________________
Underlying DV-12-234, DM-12-610, CV-12-1307,
DV-12-10816 & New Mexico Supreme Court Disciplinary Board
STATE OF NEW MEXICO ex rel.
DAVID DERRINGER,
Petitioner,
v.
JUDGE ALISA HADFIELD & JUDGE ALAN MALOTT
DISTRICT
JUDGES OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL
DISTRICT
COURT OF NEW MEXICO, COMMISSIONER
COSGROVE/AGUILAR
& ATTORNEY ALAIN JACKSON,
Respondents,
PETITION
FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL
Submitted
by_______________________________________________________
David Derringer Pro-Se
Box
7431
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194
PETITION
FOR WRIT OF SUPERINTENDING CONTROL/INJUNCTION/OR MANDAMUS AT THE COURT’S
DISCRETION
Petitioner states:
a)
Grounds for Jurisdiction of Supreme Court by extraordinary writ NMRA Rule
12-504.
Petitioner is the homeless and
destitute Pro-Se Defendant (divorce Respondent) in the cases entitled Barrie
Lee Derringer v. David Brian Derringer, [DM-12-610 Rel. DV-12-234] and
the Plaintiff in CV-12-1307 David
Derringer v. NAI Maestas and Ward et al, and the Plaintiff in
CV-12-10816 David Derringer v. Alain
Jackson et al in the Second Judicial District Court, County of
Bernalillo, State of New Mexico, over which Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar and Judge
Hadfield are presiding in DV-12-234 and Judge Hadfield is presiding in DM-12-610,
and Judge Malott is presiding in CV-12-1307 consolidated with CV-12-10816, in
which attorney Alain Jackson is attorney for the Petitioner in DV-12-234 and
DM-12-610 and Defendant in CV-12-10816 consolidated with CV-12-1307. Wallace v. David Hayse, in his Official
Capacity as Judge in Fayette District Court, United States Court
of Appeals, Sixth Circuit August 6, 1993 No. 93-5382.
In DV-12-234
there was never any summons served against David Derringer in clear
jurisdictionally defective and fundamental errors, and yet this “foundation” of
DM-12-610 has continued in persecution and judicial terrorism against David
Derringer over 1 ½ years taking also illegally all 1st, 2nd,
4th, 5th, 6th 13th and 14th
Amendment rights. DM-12-610 is based in proven perjury and fraud of Barrie
Derringer and has mis-used the jurisdictionally defective and fundamental
errors of DV-12-234 to defy Constitution and NM Statutory laws NMSA 45-2-804,
NMSA 40-4-3, NMSA 30-18-1, NMSA 30-25-1 and other NM statutes, in violation of
all case laws, and violations of the Constitution, and in doing “criminal acts”
against David Derringer of perjury, fraud, falsification of court records,
conspiracy against rights, and deprivation of rights under color of law,
including keeping David Derringer from
making income by “profession” of David Derringer as registered NM
Outfitter/Hunter #32 by
illegally violating all Constitution 2nd Amendment, and US Supreme
Court No. 10-1521 to unlawfully keep David Derringer from ownership and use of
firearms in violation of the “Supremacy Clause”, even without David Derringer
never having any conviction, police record, without any domestic violence
arrest or criminal complaint, or other means to stop possession of firearms.
Judge Hadfield uses DV-12-234 as a means
to protect the former assault and battery and conversion and loss of
consortium, interference with a legal marriage contract and alienation of
affection of matters intertwined of CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816 of Defendants,
including the tort persecution of David Derringer by willful and malicious and
negligent infliction of a STD venereal disease of Herpes HSV by Barrie
Derringer and the cover-up of this tort by all justices and Defendants, as well
as the cover-up of the other 10 persons involved on February 4, 2012 of the
assault and battery and conversion against husband David Derringer, and
“conspiracy” of all parties, justices and attorneys involved of violation of all
laws, rights, and Constitution against David Derringer. Attorney Alain Jackson has been involved in all of this
fraud in violation of NMRA 16-804 as well as instigation and facilitation of
$8,542.01 of insurance fraud claims of “vandalism” against the Derringer 2005
Chevy Silverado against GEICO; all known and involved with Judge Hadfield. Attorney Alain Jackson has committed perjury and fraud and
misrepresentation of facts to the court, well known and confirmed by the NM
Disciplinary Board with no action taken to stop these violations of law and the
Code of Professional Conduct. On June 17, 2013 Judge Hadfield makes a Minute Order expressly
intended to cover-up the GEICO insurance fraud by Barrie Derrigner, Alain Jackson and Judge Hadfield. There is a direct possibility as
probable that Judge Hadfield seeks to illegally incarcerate David Derringer so that David Derringer is killed in jail. U.S. v. Cuesta, C.A. 5
(Fla.) 1979 597 F.2d 903 cert denied 100 S. Ct. 451, 444 US 964, 62 L.Ed.2d 377
cert denied 100 S.Ct. 452, 444 US 964, 62 L.Ed.2d 377 “with conspiracy to
obstruct justice, one aspect of the conspiracy charged was a plan to murder a
person who was providing information, so long as the evidence showed that the
prospective murder victim was a source of the information.” Certainly,
intimidating David Derringer with fraudulent claims in a Minute Order of June
17, 2013
that the truck must be produced that the Petitioner now already has and has
testified to same in court record on June 4, 2013 are illegal and a willful plan of
some very bad intent against David Derringer. Attorney Alain Jackson motioned
Judge Hadfield to violate her Oath and deny David Derringer due process and
equal protection to stop litigation over the divorce actions, and in direct response,
without any extraordinary or exceptional circumstances mandated by NMRA Rule
1-126(A), Judge Hadfield grants a “bifurcated divorce” in direct response as a
way to stop all due process by Respondent David Derringer. Judge Hadfield
continues with additional orders, changing Final Judgment, hearings,
persecution, and additional judgments well after all appeals have been taken,
without her jurisdiction, when appeals are in the higher NM Court of Appeals
No. 32,113, No. 32,326, No. 32,587 and ongoing further appeals. Terrel v.
Duke City Lumber Co., 86 N.M. 405, 524 P.2d 1021 (Ct. App. 1974)
aff’d in part and rev’d in part, 88 N.M. 299, 540 p.2d 229 (1975). Judge
Hadfield then responds to attorney Alain Jackson’s open court record requests
in DM-12-610 February, 2013 to “stop all further appeals of David Derringer”
by Judge Hadfield not filing written orders in which to appeal from, and an
order to the court clerks not to allow David Derringer to file any further
court pleadings or other court papers, effectively stopping all appeals, due
process, equal protection and doing obstruction of justice to stop all use of
the United States Court system. Judge Hadfield refused to allow proper discovery by
David Derringer, and now persecutes David Derringer by preventing any filing by David Derringer of court papers including “docketing
statement” to pursue appeals, and destroyed the court papers by hiding them as
“exhibits” when it was mandated such pleadings be filed of court record. David
Derringer has motioned both Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar and Judge Hadfield to
recuse for cause at least 6 times, has filed at least 7 complaints with Chief
Justice Ted Baca and New Mexico Judicial Standards, and has filed at least 4
complaints with the New Mexico Disciplinary Board against attorney Alain
Jackson, and has filed previously a Petition for Writ of Superintending Control
with this New Mexico Supreme Court against Judge Hadfield and has had numerous
conversations and has complained to the FBI over these outrageous acts of
sedition and treason and violations of Oath and Canon, [federal criminal
felonies under US Code Title 18 Sections
241, 242, 1503] and there has been no redress except to further persecute and
deny David Derringer’s legal use of the courts to hide this public corruption. Judge Hadfield currently refuses to recuse for
cause and refuses to allow any different justice to hear such motion and
refuses to obey NMSA 38-3-3 to change the venue and refuses to allow a
different justice to hear that motion, thus “imprisoning” David Derringer to the corruption of the New Mexico court system without any available
escape. In related and also
jurisdictionally defective DM-12-610 due to extreme Constitutional
deprivations, and underlying graft and public corruption Judge Hadfield has
held hearings, issued new orders contradicting the Final Judgment of November
15, 2012 and issued orders intimidating and criminally threatening the
Respondent to stop exercising his rights to due process or be “incarcerated”. US v. Risken, 788 F.2d
1361 cert denied107 Supreme Court 329, 479 US 923, 93 L.Ed.2d 302 “18USCA 1512,
which prohibits any party from intimidating or harassing another party in order
to influence testimony at official proceeding, does not require that party
harassed or intimidated be witness at proceeding.”
Judge Malott has violated all case laws
regarding loss of consortium, alienation of affection, and interference with a
legal marriage contract, to protect Defendants in CV-12-1307 Maestas and Ward,
and purposefully then “consolidated” CV-12-10816 to do the same, refuses to
recuse for cause and refuses to change the venue for justice to be served.
Judge Malott refuses to allow Plaintiff David Derringer to gain all proper
parties before the court of the other 10 persons involved on February 4, 2012
in assault and battery and conversion against David Derringer in violation of
NMRA Rule 1-019, and refuses to allow Plaintiff David Derringer proper
discovery, in order to protect these persons believed to be additional employees
of NAI Maestas and Ward Corporation. In both conspiracy and in tandem with
focused end results against all law and against David Derringer’s legal rights,
Justices Hadfield and Malott have combined their illegal efforts to violate all
Constitution, Statutory New Mexico laws, all appurtenant case laws, and refuse
to recuse under any set of circumstances, including Judge Malott’s clear violations
of NMSA 38-3-9, and each “refuse” to change the venue of all cases without
hearing held, in total violation of NMSA 38-3-3, and each violates all
provisions of Oath, Canon, and the Code of Judicial Conduct in clear
persecution and “imprisonment” of David Derringer within their courtrooms,
circumstantial evidence clear and convincing that each of Judge Hadfield and Malott
have been bribed by money or political influence of pressure by the
international “Defendant” NAI Maestas and Ward Commercial Real Estate
Corporation and CEO’s, who are still the employer of Barrie Derringer aka
Barrie Crowe, despite law suits by former husband David Derringer at the time
of the marriage. Without any possible jurisdiction, Judge Hadfield now makes an Order encompassing the
time frame of February 4, 2012 to protect both Barrie Derringer and
Maestas and Ward of the conversion and assault and battery against David Derringer, when Judge Hadfield never had a case before her until February
8, 2012. Both
David Derringer’s known facts with personal evidence as “husband David
Derringer”, and circumstances, prove that Barrie Derringer is intertwined,
under cult control and threatened by Maestas and Ward to do acts of illegal
“accounting” of the multi-million dollar corporation, believed to be money
laundering, and wherein despite “private” suit against Barrie Crowe, aka Barrie
Derringer, she is represented by the corporate law firm of Oliver and Price of
Maestas and Ward. Salmeron v. Highland Sports Sales, Inc., 248 F. Supp.2d 1035, 1037 (DNM 2003), (3) the need to correct clear error or
manifest injustice.
Under
the mandates of Canon 3(D)(1) the NM Sup. Ct. has to both remove Justices
Hadfield and Malott from the bench, and order an FBI and Department of Justice
investigation of public corruption and bribery of judges, and disbar attorney
Alain Jackson under Canon 3(D)(2) for extreme extortion, violations of the Code
or Professional Conduct and facilitation insurance fraud with Barrie Crowe
against GEICO insurance regarding the Derringer 2005 Chevy Silverado.
In DV-12-234
there was never any service of summons upon David Derringer mandating it be instantly dismissed
with prejudice. Neither Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar or Judge Hadfield never had jurisdiction due to a
fundament error no summons served. Trujillo v. Goodwin, 2005-NMCA-095, 138 NM 48, 116 P.3d 839
“service of summons-the District Court has no jurisdiction to issue binding judgment against a party not
served summons in accordance with the rule who does not waive the defects
of service.”; Abarca v. Hanson, 106 NM 25, 738 P.2d 519 (Ct. App. 1987) Service of process
of summons is procedural and Supreme Court rule on service of process
controls.” Summons was never served and yet the trial court has
continued to persecute the Respondent as has now been going on for over 1 ½
years. Clark v. LeBlanc, 92 NM 672,
593 P..2d 1075 (1979) “Two functions are
served by service by personal delivery
of the papers within the state: (1) it shows that defendant has an appropriate
relationship to the state and is within the power of the court generally; and
(2) it gives the defendant notice of the
proceeding against him.” Toumajian v. Frailey, 135 F.3d 648 “In action before federal court, the
necessary and constitutional predicate for any decision is determination that
court has jurisdiction, that is, the power, to adjudicate dispute; foundational
support for all of court’s rulings flows from that power, and if that power is
missing, court is not in position to act and its decisions cannot generally be
enforced.”; W.G. v. Senatore,
18 F.3d 60 “Neither court by exercising its inherent equitable discretion, nor
parties by entering into stipulation, can confer jurisdiction where none has
been authorized.” Repeatedly, both Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar and Judge
Hadfield in both DV-12-234 and related DM-12-610 exercise changing prior
orders, holding hearings, making new orders and judgments and ignoring the
jurisdiction of the New Mexico Court of Appeals and New Mexico Supreme Court.
In this instant matter, of DV-12-234 it has been jurisdictionally defective and
in fundamental error since the illegal hearing on February 21, 2012, in which
the Respondent noted to the court that he had never been served any summons,
and did not waive his right to be served summons, making the entire case void,
unenforceable and mandatory to be dismissed in its entirety. Instead of
succumbing to the lack of jurisdiction, both Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar continue to make illegal rulings in
this case. Chavez v. County of Valencia, 86 N.M. 205, 521 P.2d
1154 (1974) “Attack on subject-matter jurisdiction may be made at any time in
the proceedings. It may be made by a collateral attack in the same or other
proceedings long after the judgment has been entered.” Judge Hadfield takes this case that has been on
appeal since May, 2012 in NM Ct. App. No. 32,326 and rams through without any
jurisdiction additional Constitutional deprivations of 1st, 2nd,
4th, 5th, 6th, 13th and 14th
Amendment rights. This is in total known defiance of the New Mexico Court of
Appeals rulings of No. (NO. 24,101), (NO. 27,959),
(NO. 30,380), (NO. 30,591), (NO. 31,303), and (NO. 32,271) as
well as outrageous acts of sedition and treason of the Constitution 1st
Amendment. Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 US 88 (1971) “intent to deprive of equal
protection, or equal privileges and immunities....The conspiracy, in other
words must aim at a deprivation of the equal enjoyment of rights secured by the
law to all.”; Wisdom v. Kopel,
95 N.M. 513, 623, P.2d 1027 (Ct. App. 1981) “Jurisdictional issue may be raised
in collateral attack after the judgment has been entered.” Both the Commissioner and Judge Hadfield then
contrive an Order that instantly converts the civil matter to a ‘criminal’
conviction of 30 days in jail against David Derringer deferred with illegal
claims that David Derringer cannot post legal public record court pleadings on
the Internet, and does so without fundamental jurisdiction of no service of
summons of the civil matter, but outrageous acts of no criminal complaint, no
Miranda rights, no rights to an attorney or jury, no criminal trial, and yet
claims a sentence of record with no criminal trial, absolute violations of the
evidence even in the civil hearing and Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar and Judge
Hadfield have “convicted and sentenced” David Derringer in the Order of April
15, 2013, DV-12-234, illegally held while the NM Ct. App. has jurisdiction
under No. 32,326. In such written order David Derringer was claimed to have
been convicted without trial, Miranda rights, attorney, jury of criminal harassment,
for claims of illegally placing court record public record pleadings on the
Internet by way of Google blogs, and “sentenced” to 30 days in jail deferred if
David Derringer does not exercise his legal Constitutional 1st
Amendment rights again. U.S. v.
Wilson, C.A. 4 (W. Va.) 1986 796 F.2d 55, on remand 640 F. Supp.
238 cert denied 107 S. Ct. 896, 479 US 1039, 93 L.Ed.2d 848 “Statute
proscribing harassment (Title 18 U.S.C. Section 1512) is not limited to conduct
that actually dissuades testimony, and the success of an attempt to do so or
the possibility thereof is irrelevant.”
The acts
involved here by the Respondents of this Petition defeat justice, defeat the
Constitution, and conduct tyranny, oppression, imprisonment, and sedition and
treason against David Derringer and have done “millions” of dollars of personal
damages, and civil rights damages of Constitutional deprivations against David
Derringer; acts so severe in violation that it should shock the conscience of
any judiciary. Rogers v. City of Little Rock, 152 F.3d 790, 797 (8th Cir. 1998) “the
behavior of the governmental officer is so egregious, so outrageous, that it
may fairly be said to shock the contemporary conscience.” ; Beverly Health and Rehabilitation
Services Inc. v. Feinstein, 103 F.3d 151, 322 US App DC 245 Rehearing
denied 118 S. Ct. 65, 139 L.Ed.2d 27 “Courts decide cases within their
jurisdiction rather than asserting jurisdiction because they believe that
substantive claim ought to be considered.” Exposure of these and other unlawful
activities is done until some element of the Government takes corrective
action. Prei, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures 508 U.S. 49, 113 S.Ct. 1920, 1925, 123 L. Ed.
2d 611 (1993). On June 25, 2013, David Derringer has talked at length to the
APD about these activities and each officer indicated that Judge Hadfield could
not have changed a civil matter into an Order of criminal harassment and
sentencing without a criminal complaint, trial, Miranda rights, attorney and
jury, and that with court proof of the vehicle being in possession of the
Petitioner, Judge Hadfield could not have written a fraudulent order indicating
that David Derringer would be incarcerated if he did not produce the vehicle
that is known that he no longer has. State ex rel Stratton v. Sinks, 106 N.M. 213, 220, 741 P.2d 435, 442 (Ct. App. 1987); Phelps v. Hamilton, 122 F.3d 1309, 1323 (10th Cir. 1997). “manifest
error of law is clearly present.”
Criminal intent was indicated is coming from the justices directed at David Derringer and the insurance fraud is proven by
court records and witnesses in which Judge Hadfield is involved with “knowledge” as an
accessory. Order should issue to somehow make justices “accountable” and stop
the threats, intimidation and possible murder plans against David Derringer, even though David Derringer has exposed public corruption of the
officials.
Barrie
Derringer has always needed, “emotional and mental evaluations” and at all
times David Derringer was refused any court order for actions that would help the
situation or marriage. Barrie Derringer has admitted under Oath to being
suicidal, and “blood testing” for Barrie Derringer for infectious STD venereal
disease Herpes II HSV and illegal drug testing with Barrie’s background of
cocaine, marijuana and other controlled substances was only rational for any
court. Barrie Derringer has admitted to
physical domestic violence against David Derringer by Barrie Derringer hitting David Derringer repeatedly in the face, and yet all
protection has been for the Petitioner and the Defendants, regardless of the
criminal acts against the Respondent. There have always been underlying
problems going on with Barrie Derringer of mental and emotional disorders of
being bi-polar, PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) after a disaster of
December 23, 2011 house fire killing 5 pets, and addictions to prescribed
medications of OPIATE derivatives of five of the worst
medications of Percocet, Vicodin,
acetomenefin with codeine, oxycodene, and hydrocodene; all of which
have codeine derivatives of opium, only a small difference of terminally
addictive heroin, with the possibility also of Barrie Derringer going back to a
life including cocaine, marijuana (or other addictive and illegal drugs) and
excessive alcohol that was in her former life since she was 18 and with twice
past biker husband for 30 years of Charles Beverley, before she met and married
David Derringer.
In this
matter, from all above Respondents there is a “conspiracy against rights” and
in a “deprivation of rights under color or law” and “obstruction of justice”. This
matter has direct and vicious violations against David Derringer that include 1st,
2nd, 4th, 5th ,6th , 13th,
and 14th Amendments, Title 42 Sections 1981, 1982, 1983, 1985 and
1986, and Title 18 Sections 241 and 242 and 1503, and 1512 and violations of
Title 28 Section 1655, with “intimidation” and “obstruction of justice”
operating in this court, as well as multiple criminal acts under NMSA Section
30. There is clearly there no impartiality here in this Court, thus violating
NMRA 1-088.1(D).
The
Constitution of the State of New Mexico, Article VI 3 provides in pertinent
part, “The Supreme Court...shall have a superintending control over all
inferior courts..” NMRA 12-504.A.
authorizes this Court to issue an extraordinary writ to require the Respondents
to recuse themselves and to resign from the bench and attorney service, so that
justice can properly be served in accordance with all of the laws of this state
and in fact the acts of the Respondent are so severe as to mandate a criminal
investigation of public corruption. It
is abundantly clear that there is abuse of discretion to stay on cases when
bribery is the motive, and that the NM Judicial Standards and the NM
Disciplinary Board are entirely ineffective or corrupt themselves. A quote from
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Tom C. Clark in Mapp V. Ohio,
367 U.S. 643, 81 S. Ct. 1684, 6 L. Ed. 2d 1081 (June 19, 1961), as follows:
“Nothing can destroy a government more quickly than its failure to observe its
own laws, or worse, its disregard of the charter of its own
existence. As Mr. Justice Brandeis, dissenting, said in Olmstead v. United States,
277 U.S. 438, 485 (1928): "Our
Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it
teaches the whole people by its example. . . . If the Government becomes a
lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law
unto himself; it invites anarchy."” (Emphasis added).
Circumstances Making Petition Necessary and Proper.
The conduct of the Respondents are of
justices and and an attorney that in total discharge of duties and in
violations of Oath, Canon, Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon, Code of
Professional Conduct and extreme and blatant violations of Constitution, New
Mexico Statutory laws enacted by the New Mexico Legislature and violations of
all case laws. These violent and corrupt individuals have taken tyrannical
control of the US Court system even denying filings and use
of the courts by an American citizen. This also totally violates the Supremacy
Clause of the US Constitution Article VI. This court has jurisdiction to
exercise its power of superintending control to “...prevent irreparable
mischief...” State ex rel. Anaya v. Scarborough, 75
N.M. 702, 706, 410 p.2d 732 (1966). Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 101 Supreme Court 1908, 68
P.Ed.2d 420 (1981). These Respondents know that the Constitution was formed
before their public and officer of the court positions. Civil Rights 13.4(2)
“is accountable via 1983 action..in a position of responsibility, knew or
should have known of misconduct and yet failed to prevent future harm.”
With existing Constitution and all former case laws and statutes of this state
and nation, the Petitioner David Derringer will prevail, as a matter of law, even
if this matter has to go to the United States Supreme Court. In the interim,
these unethical and criminal “Respondents” have ruined the life of David
Derringer, done irreparable Civil Rights deprivations, destroyed the Derringer
marriage and done “reckless endangerment” to a mentally and emotionally
unstable Barrie Derringer that suffers from depression that could lead to a
suicide or other physical damages or death. David Derringer has been forced to sue others in
this matter with now the cover-up corruption of the court intending to defeat
these legal suits in violation of all laws. If this matter has to go to the
United States Supreme Court it would result in “...great, extraordinary or
exceptional hardship, costly delays and unusual burdens of expense.” State
ex rel. Anaya v. Scarborough, 75 N.M. 702, 706, 410 p.2d 732
(1966). The Petitioner has been conspired against by the Respondents in this
matter to destroy his life, marriage and indeed
to control and defeat the entire judicial system of our American
government. All Respondents involved here “swore to God” in clear blasphemy and
perjury to gain their positions only to attack and subject citizens to
deprivations and oppression. In re
Aquinda, 241 F.3d 194; In
re Williamson, 43 BR 813.
a)
Real Party in Interest
The Respondents Alisa Hadfield and Alan Malott are District Court Justices, who are
acting in the discharge and corruption of their official duties, and engaged in
criminal acts both state and federal against David Derringer and GEICO insurance co., and the
attorney Alain Jackson is a corrupt conspirator and facilitator of all of the
actions. The real parties in interest in
this entire matter are Barrie Lee Derringer, and the Defendants of CV-12-1307
and CV-12-10816.
a)
Grounds Upon Which This Petition is Based
The Respondents Judges and attorney
Alain Jackson “have knowledge” of all of the serious criminal acts and deprivation of
Constitutional rights occurring here as well as willful obstruction of the
entire United States system of justice. All parties are well aware of
Constitutional 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th,
6th, 13th and 14th Amendment violations,
statutory violations and all violations of all case laws against David
Derringer and all know of the rights of David Derringer to justice that
involves statutory rights of recusal, change of venue and other means for
justice to be served; all violated in a conspiracy by all Respondents of this
Petition. All Respondent also know that their actions involve themselves and
the State of New Mexico in violations of the Supremacy
Clause of the US Constitution Article VI. This entire matter is likely involved
with money laundering, bribery of justices and public officials and attorneys,
and very possibly involved in “cocaine” and likely other illegal and controlled
substances, as is very prevalent in the New Mexico system of public officials. US v. Barrera-Moreno,
951 F.2d 1089; Kunkel v. US, 113 S. Ct. 417, 506 US 957, 121 L.Ed.2d 340; Ruis v.
US, 113 S. Ct. 985, 506 US 1055, 122 L.Ed.2d 137 “Government’s
failure to be aware of and stop use and distribution of cocaine”.
Clearly, the
Supremacy Clause Article VI has been violated. Where the state is not in
compliance with the federal regulations because of judicial constructions that
circumvent or undermine the legislative intentions of the act, and because no judge can infringe upon the
Constitutional rights of United States Citizens, it can be presumed that
those rights are protected under the federal mandates, including all
Amendments. All US Courts are bound by the “supremacy clause” that mandates actions
to be taken against justices that illegally prevent filing of court papers,
blocking appeals, discharge of Constitution and all laws, and refusal to allow
cases to be rendered in a venue where justice can be served. On June
6, 2005, the
United States Supreme Court ruled that.. The Supremacy Clause unambiguously
provides that if there is any conflict between federal and state law, federal
law shall prevail...” in Gonzales v. Raich, No. 03-1454 SEE United
States v. Colorado Supreme Court, No. 98-1081, 10th USCA. These
justices in conspiracy with the Commissioner and attorney Alain Jackson and the attorneys of the Defendants
in CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816 have conspired to defeat the United States court system of our government by
controlling and regulating without law every use of the courts and disregard of
the Constitution and all laws. Alexander v. Delgado, 84 NM 717,
507 P.2d 778 (1973); State v. Sedillo, “it appears that the
Supreme Court necessarily decided the issues underlying the claim” in US
Supreme Court No. 08-1521 in 2010. Stoneking v. Bank of America, 132 NM 79, 43 P. 3d 1089. “Under
Article VI of the Constitution, the laws of the United States “shall be the supreme law of the
land..any thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary
notwithstanding”. US Constitution Article VI Cl.2 “The
Supremacy Clause prohibits the application of state laws which conflict with
federal laws.” Home Mortgage Bank v. Ryan, 986 F.2d 372, 375 (10th Cir.
1993).” This places not only this court in duty under Canon 3(D)(1)(2), but
mandate to involve the FBI and the Department of Justice to investigate and
initiate prosecution with the US Attorney the “public corruption” as white
collar crimes occurring here. Martinez
v. Winner, 771 F.2d 424 opinion modified on denial of rehearing
778 F.2d 553, cert granted, vacated; Tyus
v. Martinez, 106 Supreme Court 1787, 475 US 1138, 90 L.Ed.2d 333 on
remand 800 F.2d 230 “A judge is not only entitled, but also has a duty to take
all lawful measures reasonably necessary to prevent the occurrence of a crime
in his courtroom.” Clearly, both DM-12-610 and DV-12-234, both in
jurisdictional and fundamental error and in blatant Constitutional deprivations
are mandated to be dismissed with prejudice with no divorce granted for Barrie
Derringer and both CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816 are mandated to be moved to a
venue where justice can be served. US v. Guest, US Ga. 1966, 86
S.Ct. 1170, 383 US 745, 16 L.Ed.2d 239 “This section (Title 18 Section 241)
pertaining to conspiracy against rights of citizens encompasses due process and
equal protection clauses of USCA Constitution Amendment 14 and is not
unconstitutionally vague.” The Respondents have defeated the right of David Derringer to a fair trial and due process by “judicial
terrorism”.
3)
Relief Sought:
For the foregoing reasons, it is
respectfully petitioned that this Court issue its Alternative Writ of
Superintending Control directing the Respondents to show cause why they should
not be required to recuse and vacate the bench and attorney service, relinquish
control, dissolve and dismiss both DV-12-234 and DM-12-610; and to move
CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816 to a venue where justice can be served. Due to
extreme court public corruption that entails tainting, destruction, and
corruption of court records, blocking appeals, blocking illegal filings,
refusal to obey statutory laws to recuse and change venue and Constitutional
deprivations, involving violations of Oath, Canon, Code of Judicial Conduct,
Code of Professional Conduct and both state and federal felony criminal
violations, an order is mandated under Canon 3(D)(1)(2) to remedy this problem
that also entails investigation by the FBI and the US Department of Justice
over the public corruption so blatant here.
Respectfully
Submitted by___________________________________________
David Derringer Pro-Se, Box 7431, Albuquerque, New
Mexico 87194
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I
hereby certify that I sent by first class mail 8 copies of this Petition to:
New Mexico Supreme Court
237 Don Gaspar Avenue
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
I
hereby also certify that I sent by first class mail a copy of this Petition to:
Respondent Judge Alisa Hadfield, Judge
Alan Malott, and Commissioner Cosgrove/Aguilar and to attorney Alain Jackson and to the
New
Mexico Attorney General
Att:
litigation division
Box
1508
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504
I
further certify that I sent a copy of this pleading to:
Attorney
for Barrie Derringer real party of interest and to Alain Jackson himself:
Alain Jackson
423 6th St. NW
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102
I
hereby certify that I mailed a copy of this pleading to
Attorney
Floyd Wilson for Defendant Barrie Crowe, and Defendants Debbie and Irwin Harms and Defendants of CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816:
Floyd Wilson
12480 Hwy. 14 North. Ste.
105
Cedar Crest,
NM 87008
And to the attorney for Geraldine and Warren Crowe of CV-12-1307 and CV-12-10816:
Alicia Santos of O’Brien & Padilla P.C.
6000 Indian School Road NE Suite 200
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87110
No comments:
Post a Comment