[OPF List] Habeas Corpus docketed in the U. S. Supreme Court

Gary Hunt hunt at outpost-of-freedom.com
Tue Jul 2 11:55:41 KST 2013


Just a little background on the Habeas Corpus:

It was first served (January 27, 2012) before the subsequent trial (February
9, 2012) which should never have been held until the Habeas Corpus was
heard), and ignored.  It was then submitted to the US District Court, US
Court of Appeals, and, the Florida Supreme Court (all, March February 10,
2012).  The District Court never responded.  The Appeals Court violated
their own rules and treated it as if it were insignificant.  The Florida
Supreme Court denied jurisdiction (May 30, 2012).  This left only the United
States Supreme Court, if the constitutional right of Habeas Corpus still
exists in our Constitution and country.

The Demand for Habeas Corpus was then submitted to the United States Supreme
Court (November 26, 2012), and has since been resubmitted five times,
culminating in my receipt of the attached Docketing notification.  However,
the matter will go before the Court, and the Demand, as submitted is
attached hereto.

There are some peculiarities, however, in that the Demand was submitted to
Justice Antonin Scalia, as the Justice assigned to the Circuit wherein Larry
Mikiel Myers is detained, this consistent with 28 USC § 2241-2243, and Rule
22 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, in that a clerk directed it to the
entire Court by docketing it, as he did.

28 USC § 2243 requires that the "court, justice or judge entertaining an
application for a writ of habeas corpus shall forthwith award the writ or
issue an order directing the respondent to show cause why the writ should
not be granted."  "Forthwith" means immediately.  Further, that same section
provides that "The writ, or order to show cause shall be directed to the
person having custody of the person detained.  It shall be returned within
three days unless for good cause additional time, not exceeding twenty days,
is allowed."  This is less than a month, though the rerouting by a clerk
will delay this to perhaps many months, leave it to the politics of the
entire Court, and, deny that basic right that has been sought for over 16
months.

Finally, Rule 20 requires that the caption of this Writ be "In Re [name of
petitioner]", which is on the Demand, and in fact, Larry Mikiel Myers.
However, the attached letter has captioned the case as "In Re Gary Hunt",
though I am not the petitioner, as the law, and rules, allow another to act
on someone's behalf.  Can you imagine if the caption of a case bore the name
of the attorney rather than the person aggrieved?

Even so, the case has been docketed, and that, in itself, is cause for sober
consideration.

Habeas Corpus - Main Page  <http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/HC00.htm>
webpage

Habeas Corpus docketed in the U. S. Supreme Court
<http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/HC04.htm>   article

Demand for Habeas Corpus - Docket 13-5008
<http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/Habeas_Corpus_Demand_13-5008.pdf>   (PDF
of filed document)

 

 

Docket 13-5008 verification

 

 

Gary Hunt
 <http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/> Outpost of Freedom

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.oneamericanpatriot.com/pipermail/opf/attachments/20130701/56f012cc/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 33190 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.oneamericanpatriot.com/pipermail/opf/attachments/20130701/56f012cc/attachment-0001.jpe 


More information about the OPF mailing list