State of Hawaii v. Trump
MOTION to Intervene ("Tertius Interveniens Notice of Lack of Standing of State of Hawaii to Challenge President's Executive Order (Travel Ban)); (FRCVP Rule 20(a)(2)(B) & 28 USC 1397)" - by Intervenor Eric Richard Eleson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Certificate of Service, # 8 Mailing Documentation) (emt, )
12f. Ground SEVEN:
ILLEGAL USE OF VOID(OUT OF STATE)ALLEGED CONVICTION TO
SUBJECT PETITIONER TO UNCONSTITUTIONAL PUNISHMENT AND
MISAPPLICATION OF ALLEGED STATUTE,IN VIOLATION OF AMEND[MENT V
OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION & 18 use §§1001 & 1349.
a. Supporting facts:
After being DISCHARGED from the alleged Class-C Felony (5-year) conviction, Petitioner
involved himself in Legal Research and discovered that NONE ofthe alleged GOVERNORS or LT.
GOVERNOR'S ofSTATE OF HAWAII(1959 to 1989)EVER SUBSCRIBED to the required Oath
of Office. In Hawaii the COUNTY PROSECUTOR(s)obtain their authority from the ATTORNEY
GENERAL, and since there was NO VALID Governor or Lt. Governor to Appoint the Attorney
General, the alleged conviction is VOID for lack of Subject Matter & Personum Jurisdiction.
Petitioner stated this "fact" to the Court, but was denied & ignored (over Petitioner's strenuous
Objections), and the "Attorney" who "handled" the Appeal refused to include the issue(s) Petitioner
established and preserved on the Record.(See Proof of NO Oath(s) of Office by Hawaii's Archivist
attached hereto as Exhibit"H"L Petitioner forced MR.JOHN WAIHEE to sign his Oath of Office in
1989, to validly enter the Office of Governor!
Petitioner testified to these facts and was not challenged by the Prosecutor. Petitioner's Appellate
Attorney, Mr. Handy Horiye, refused to address the issue on Appeal even after being shown the
documents(attached as Exhibit"11").The Court ignored the Fact(s)and illegally sentenced Petitioner
pursuant to the alleged [CPC §667] 3-Strikes Law in violation of 28 USC §§ 1738 & 1739. The
documents are self-authenticating as they are not only from an alleged STATE AGENCY (Hawaii
Archives), but were filed as Evidence in a Court case. The Court not only denied Due Process, but
utilized a void JUDGMENT in so doing. Petitioner has been punished far more than any law allows,
and demands to be released immediately.
Presumption: "If a Public Record is not where it is required to be, it is presumed not to exist."
(F.R.EV. §803(10)(A)&(B):CAEvid. §1234 & 1530.10.).
Continued on Page 1 la
b. Supporting cases, rules, or other authorities.
HAWAII CONSTITUTION, Article 16, §4; Hawaii Archivist's Certification (Exhibit "II";
28 USC §§1738 & 1739; Fed. Rules ofEvid;(FREv)§§803(6),803(10)(A)&(B), 902^1003,1005; FRCvP Rule 44(b)
- Lack of Records,"A written statement that a diligent search of designated records revealed NO RECORD or entry of
a specific tenor is admissible as evidence that the records contain no such record or entiv..."(See: Pecole v. Love. 310
111. 558, 142 N.E. 204(1923);
Continued on Page I la
B.57A Petition for Writ in Nature of Habeas Corpus
Page I I of 1^
a. Supporting Facts:(continued from prev. page):
In this vein,the Court's manifestation ofextreme prejudice against Petitioner(Pro Se)is revisited,
however,this time Petitioner is requiring Judicial Notice ofthe FACT(s)as presented by Petitioner's
Exhibit "11". the cited F.R.Ev.'s, F.R.Cv.P. Rule 44(b), Fed. Statutes and cases cited, CA Evid.
§§1284, 1521, 1523, 1530(a)(l)«fe(2)&(b).
This Court has no Authority to "pick & choose" what Laws, Rules, & Regulations k wants to
follow, and is required to act according to the evidence presented. And,as stated earlier,"No right of
action can come from Fraud." Petitioner has proven he has a Right to the Writ and this Court has no
valid/lawful option but to vacate the VOID JUDGMENT and release Petitioner immediately. Fiat
Justitia, Ruat Caelum - "Let Justice be done, though the Heavens may fall." The seven alleged
Justices failed miserably at "doing Justice."
b. Supporting cases, rules, or other authorities(continued from prev. page):
CA Evid. Rule §1284,1530(a)(I)(2)&(b);
44 use §2116 also applies to STATE ARCHIVES,Childs. supra at 1336 [Hn. 16];
U.S. V. HOOK. 195 F.3d 299; 29A Am. Jur. 2d (1994) Evid. §1376, et seq.;
US of A V. CHILDS.5 F.3EI 1328,1334-1336,(9"' Cir. 1993)(& cases cited therein):
Air Land Forwarders. Inc. v. U.S.. 172 F.3d 1335, 1342(1999);
U.S. V. Rav. 930 F.2d 1368, 1370(1990);
People V. Atkins. 258 C.R. 113, 117,210 C.A.3d 47, 54.
Other Remedies; Describe any other procedures(such as habeas corpus, administrative remedies, etc. That
you have used to exhaust your state remedies on Ground(s)ONE through SEVEN:
Petitioner filed a Petition for a Writ in the Nature of Habeas Corpus (S-216294) of which this
Instant Petition is an "Appeal." Petitioner also filed a Complaint to the COMMISSION ON
JUDICIAL PERFORMANCE and a NOTICE OF VOID ORDER (copy attached), as well as an
INDICTMENT in Federal Court. (See Ground EIGHT,infra.)
B.57A Petition for Writ in Nature of Habeas Corpus
Page l la of 1^
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?