Come to next court date 8/19/16 at 10 am rm 506. 2600 S California, Chicago.
On July 13, 2016 Judge Diane Cannon will announce her written opinion concerning Dr. Shelton’s motion to declare the Illinois battery and aggravated battery statutes unconstitutional concerning de minimus, minor, or no harm with alleged crime of touching or making contact with a person or officer. Help fight injustice in Illinois by coming to court at 10 am 7/13/16 room 506 at 2600 S. California Ave (no cell phones or electronic devices allowed in courthouse).
Shelton’s argument is that charging a disabled tremulous, spastic person with felony battery for touching an officer due to their spasticity or due to an officer purposely inducing a PTSD flashback where a person unintentionally touches an officer without harming them is abusive and unconstitutional.
It is particularly abusive and unconstitutional as it violates the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) in that in this case against Shelton the Court Disability Coordinator, Melissa Pacelli, had been given written documentation by a psychiatrist and other physicians that Shelton suffers from PTSD (post-traumatic-stress disorder) due to having been previously beaten by Sheriff and Chicago police officers and during flashbacks triggered by specific actions of officers as a result of the PTSD she “misperceives ongoing events” (becomes confused believing she is being attacked by officers) and that male officers should not yell at her and grab her, but should “back-off” if a flashback occurs as Shelton is “inherently non-violent”, as well as because she cowers, is fearful, and crys, as well as may defensively waive her arms around her head thinking she is defending herself or may reach out suddenly to prevent herself from mis-perceived falling during flashbacks if pushed as she suffers from congenital and acquired severe balance problems requiring the use of a walker. Thus, they should wait until the flashback is over and she understands what is going on when one occurs, rather than rush her, grab her, and push her. Such actions by officers will cause Shelton to unintentionally touch officers and this fact is sufficient to be an outrageous reason to charge Shelton with felony battery that has as a sentence a possibility of as much as 14 years in prison.
As intent is a required element of the crime of battery, during flashbacks, Shelton is unable to form intent to harm an officer due to the PTSD and balance issues if she is pushed, particularly by loud and aggressive male officers, and the criteria for felony battery is unconstitutional according to Shelton due to the fact that a disabled person without intent can be charged with felony battery merely for touching an officer under such a circumstance.
For more information about the aggravated battery case against Shelton for “touching an officer’s ear” see this post.
Recently a grandmother, Ms. Tina Hunt plead guilty of aggravated battery for kicking an officer in a courtroom when she got mad and received a one year sentence – she could have received a mandatory six year sentence if she went on trial before a jury. This would have been a harsher sentence than a sentence for sticking a knife into an officer or throwing acid in a person’s face. This is outrageous abuse of criminal law. That is why Shelton has argued that the statute is unconstitutional.
After Shelton’s oral argument in May 2016, Judge Cannon gave the State another two weeks to prepare their oral argument. The State’s response was as follows:
State’s Argument essentially was “we stand on our written pleading” – [apparently they had no rational argument to counter Shelton’s pleadings and statements.]
The judge then gave herself six weeks to consider the arguments and come up with a written decision. Judge Cannon’s written decision will be announced on July 13, 2016.
UPDATE: Her decision was a two sentence statement without ANY explanation: “The defendant’s motion to declare the Aggravated Battery Statute unconstitutional is respectfully denied. This is a final order. Dated July 13, 2016 by Judge Diane Cannon.
Appeal will be filed, but in Illinois it likely won’t be filed until the end of the case because the higher courts have no jurisdiction on pretrial motions [known as interlocutory motions] until ALL issues in the case are final or until IL Supreme Court Rule 304(a) is followed. This rule states as follows:
Supreme Court Rule 304(a) provides as follows:
ll Parties or Claims — Necessity for Special Finding. If multiple parties or multiple claims for relief are involved in an action, an appeal may be taken from a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the parties or claims only if the trial court has made an express written finding that there is no just reason for delaying enforcement or appeal. Such a finding may be made at the time of the entry of the judgment or thereafter on the court’s own motion or on motion of any party. The time for filing the notice of appeal shall run from the entry of the required finding. In the absence of such a finding, any judgment that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties is not enforceable or appealable and is subject to revision at any time before the entry of a judgment adjudicating all the claims, rights, and liabilities of all the parties.” (87 Ill.2d R. 304(a).)
It is without common sense, but the Illinois Appellate Court said that using the word “final” does not comply with Illinois Supreme Court rule 304(a).
According to the Illinois Appellate Court 1st District an interlocutory order that states that a pretrial order is “final and appealable” is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the appellate court. Until the final disposition of all issues in the case the statutory terms “there is no just reason for delaying enforcement or appeal” are required to confer jurisdiction of the Appellate Court from a pretrial order of the local Circuit Court. Greer v. Yellow Cab Co., 582 N.E.2d 1292, 221 Ill. App.3d 908, 164 Ill.Dec. 348, (1991) IL App (1) 1-89-1548
Who is willing to publicize this? All the evidence will be provided to anyone who requests it – it is voluminous so there will be numerous emails.
Which lawyers are willing to take this case and do class actions about this?
What government agencies will walk the walk on this issue and not just talk the talk? So much is said that help is available, but in reality it is not!!
If anyone wants to help, then I will meet with them and give you all the evidence on a silver platter!
Also sent to the FBI tip line as follows:
I sent this to HUD.gov
I sent the following Email to Fannie Mae about a disabled person who inherited a lot of money and a home that should have gone into a special needs trust and a land trust with a life-time interest in it. However corrupt lawyers in league with corrupt officials including several local police conspired to steal the estate by forging a deathbed trust by manipulating a mentally ill sister of the disabled person – then bribing a judge to ignore the proof of forgery and fraud, as well as proof of the intention of the deceased (transcripts from court in another case explain decedent’s concerns & prove sister mentally ill and unable to manage his affairs) and the testimony in court of the mentally ill sister that she was unable to handle the affairs of the deceased. No trial or due process evidentiary hearing ever was allowed.
Then these corrupt attorneys stole the estate of the deceased by charging exorbitant attorney fees ($1 million dollars). This is a scheme they are using throughout the Cook Co IL area to steal estates from elderly and disabled persons. Can you help me find an attorney to help and get the FBI and US Attorney to investigate?
I already sent the evidence and info to the U.S. DOJ Disability section and have not even received any acknowledgement that they received it. I am scared that the disabled person will be evicted and homeless and the criminals will get away with their crimes.
EMAIL TO FANNIE MAE’s SERVICER = SETERUS 4-15-16
I am a disabled beneficiary of a trust. A bunch of corrupt attorneys influenced a mentally ill family member to forge a deathbed trust for my father and bribed a judge to ignore transcripts of what my father said and the family member testifying they are too mentally ill to manage anything and ignore proof of the forgery.
Then they made false domestic violence complaint later dropped to jail me so they could have court proceedings without me and steal my inheritance and home as well as evict me.
Even the forged trust said the first thing they must pay off was a mortgage on a condo they put me in after they evicted me from the home I should have inherited and stole my property.
Now I find out you have started foreclosure proceedings on the condo where I don’t want to live because these criminal did not pay the mortgage so I will be homeless.
I would like to join forces with you to get criminal charges against these criminals and sue the law firms to get damages and my $500,000 inheritance which was supposed to go into a special needs trust and the and cost of the home they sold that I should have inherited which was supposed to go into a land trust where I have a life-time interest in living in it.
The law firms took advantage of my mentally ill sister and essentially stole a $1.5 million estate with excessive and unnecessary fees. I need help from a big time law firm as these are top attorneys with political connections to corrupt officials in Illinois including the attorney general.
The local police were influenced to refuse to take criminal complaints from me.
I reported this to the FBI but they have not contacted me as to whether they even received my complaints. It took me several years to gather the evidence to prove all the above.
Would you be willing to join with me as co-Plaintiff to recover the damages? I really need assistance as I have been reduced to poverty while disabled. I will give you all the evidence you need if you can help find a law firm to take this case.
These corrupt lawyers are doing this with a lot of elderly or disabled people in order to steal estates.
Here is another example of judicial misconduct and denial of due process in family courts in Cook County that destroy children’s relationship with their parents. http://unlawful1.blogspot.com/2015/12/judges-police-hate-african-american-men.html?spref=tw
On Sept 30, 2015 Judge Cannon in wrongful prosecution case against Dr. Linda Shelton for “touching an officer’s ear and hair” (charged as felony battery with possible 3-14 year sentence), still pending, stated that she agreed with her motion to declare the bail retention clause of the IL bail statute unconstitutional. For details about the case read here.
The statute is unconstitutional because the court clerk in order to extort money from all defendents, innocent and guilty, charges 10% of the bond (or 1% of the bail) as a fee for the service of processing and holding the money from a bond check. This means the clerk commits fraud by charging vastly disparate amounts for the SAME service. If bail is $300,000, then the clerk’s charge is $3,000, while if the bail is $1000, the clerk’s charge is $10, collected at the time the case is over and bond is returned – minus 10%. [Note: to get out of jail on bond in IL under a “D-bond”, the defendant pays 10% of the bail]
In any other service business, if the business charged different amounts for the same service, this would be criminal fraud.
Then Judge Cannon illegally stated she was entering and continuing this motion until the end of the case because she said Shelton had no standing to question the statute until the 10% of bond was actually withheld by the court clerk.
This is nonsense as the bond $30,000 bond (10% of outrageous $300,000 bail) has already been paid, which means the clerk must withhold 10% of the bond when it is returned at the end of the case.
This holding the decision prevents the state from appealing it directly to the IL Supreme Court until after the case is over.
Read the motion here.
Note: the new bail statute in IL that states in counties where the population is greater than 3 million, then the clerk’s charge can be no larger than $100, the statute is still unconstitutional.
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to uphold their own holdings in denial of Shelton’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus. Dr. Linda Shelton was unlawfully convicted of contempt of court and summarily sentenced to 16 months in jail with no trial or due process because she followed Illinois law that allows a person other than the defendant to file a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus on “behalf of another”. Judge McHale held that it was illegal for Shelton to file this petition on behalf of Annabel Melongo when Shelton was not an attorney. Melongo was released after 20 months when the Illinois eavesdropping law was declared unconstitutional. Melongo had been denied hearing on Shelton’s petition for her in an illegal act by Cook County judges who refused to hear this petition. Thus they violated the U.S. Constitution Suspension Clause that says that habeas may not be suspended except in times of war. READ THE FOLLOWING!! (Transcript where Shelton appeared before Judge McHale asking for him to assign judge to represent Melongo on Shelton’s next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus on her behalf on May 11, 2010 – NOTE: habeas corpus is the highest right a person has in the U.S. written in the constitution to protect against unlawful incarceration yet few Americans are educated to know what this means!)
Shelton alleges Judge McHale (substituting for Judge Biebel – presiding judge of the Cook County Criminal Court) illegally and in an act of felony federal treason and conspiracy to violate rights under color of law, after stating he would not hear her petition (i.e. admitted she was before him on an administrative matter and not with him acting as a judge) in retaliation for Shelton’s whistle blowing about judicial corruption in the Circuit Court of Cook County (she had given the FBI and U.S. Attorney extensive evidence about this corruption and published it on Internet blogs), in May through November, 2010, summarily convicted her of three (3) “cases” which should have been three (3) “counts” of criminal contempt for the legal act of filing a next-friend habeas petition ,as a NON-ATTORNEY, on behalf of Annabelle Melongo, a dual Haitian/Cameroonian citizen with language difficulties and who was confusing English and Roman law, and then telling the judge that his act of ruling that a non-attorney filing was “illegal” was a violation of his oath of office to follow the law as well as a criminal act. The conviction was not only illegal, but it was retaliatory.
The fact that he stated he would not hear the petition meant that there was no case before him when he charged me with contempt and this occurred after I asked for SOJ as a right, which also means that his orders are void as he did not follow the law on SOJ.
Shelton alleges Judge McHale’s consecutive SUMMARY sentences of 4, 6, and 6 months (total of 16 months) in CCDOC with good time jail credits quashed by order of Judge McHale, were in:
A) violation of IL Substitution of Judge (“SOJ”) as Right Statutes, 735 ILCS 5/2-1001 which make all orders given after denial of this SOJ as a right void, Jiffy Lube International, Inc. v. Agarwal,2 77 Ill.App.3d 722,727, 214 Ill.Dec. 609,661 N.E.2d 463 (1996); Curtis v. Lofy, 394 Ill. App..3d 170, 176 (2009);
B) violation of Habeas Statutes, 735 ILCS Art X which allow a person to file a habeas petition on “behalf of another”;
C) violation of IL Appellate Court holding that requires a full due process jury trial if contempt sentence is summarily imposed on a day other than the day in which the contemptuous act occurred In re Marriage of Betts, 200l ll.App.3d 26 (1990); Winning Moves, Inc., v. Hi! Baby, Inc., 238 Ill. App.3d 834 (1992); Kaeding v. Collins, 28I Ill.App3d 919 (1996)
D) violation of IL sentencing statutes requiring concurrent sentences for the same conduct or acts occurring during the same state of mind, 720 ILCS 5/3-3; and
E) violation of IL statute where habeas petition must be heard quickly before the chief judge of the division, Habeas statutes, 735 ILCS 5/10-119, and the rules of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Rule 15.2(d); and
F) violation of the U.S. Supreme Court holdings and IL Court holdings which:
1) require jury trial if sentences exceed 6 months aggregate for contempt, In re Marriage of Betts, 200 lll.App.3d 26 (1990), Cheff v. Schnackenberg, 384 U.S. 373 (1966); Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506, 513, 94 S.Ct. at 2692 (1974); Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701;
2) forbid sentencing for more than one count of contempt during one trial or case, People v. Brown, 235 Ill.App.3d 945 (1992);
3) forbid removal of automatic statutory good time jail credits by a judge – Good Time Jail Allowance statute, 730 ILCS 130, gives jurisdiction for such credits to the county sheriff and not the judge, also violation of Codispoti v. Pennsylvannia 418 U.S. 506 (1974); and
4) specifically state it is legal for a non-attorney to file a next-friend petition for writ of habeas corpus, U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008); 735 ILCS Article X.
The Illinois Appellate Court in violation of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 298 and Smith v. Bennett and Marshall v. Bennett, 365 U.S. 708, 81 S.Ct. 895 (1961) denied my indigence petition , thus denied my appeal illegally.
The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed Shelton s Federal Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus regarding these three convictions, ACC 100083-01, 93-01, & 94-01, falsely stating that Shelton did not exhaust state remedies. Judge Hart ignored and violated the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in the line of cases Neirsheimer, Regan, and Loftus. People v. Loftus, 400 Ill. 432, 81 N.E.2d 495 (1948), (in response to order of Court in Loftus v. People of State of Illinois, 334 U.S. 804, 68 S.Ct 1212 (1948)); Woods v. Neirsheimer, 328 U.S. 211, 66 S.Ct. 996 (1946); White v. Ragen and Lutz v. Same, 324 U.S. 760, 65 S.Ct. 978 (1945); Young v. Ragen, 337 U.S. 235, 69 S.Ct. 1073 (1949).
There may be an exception to the exhaustion bar for cases involving colorable claims of actual innocence. See, e.g., House v. Bell, 47 U.S. 518, 522 (2006). This case also involves this is as since there is no possibility that filing a next-friend habeas petition is illegal or that complaining, as a litigant to a judge that he is violating the law, when he is violating the law, is illegal, there is no possibility that Shelton is actually guilty of contempt.
These sentences by Judge McHale were acts of felony treason, a violation of 18 U.S.C. §2381, punishable by a sentence of 20 yrs. to life, per previous holdings and/or dicta of the United States Supreme Court including:
1) that the judges in U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200 (1980) affirmed the statement of Chief Justice Marshall in Cohens v. Virginia, 6 Wheat. 264, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821) that it is “treason on the constitution” when a judge “usurps [the jurisdiction] that which is not given”; and
2) that it is a “war on the constitution” when a judge violates his oath of office to support it [including supporting statutes of a state = due process], Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401(1958).
Judge McHale’s knowing violation of the statutes concerning petitions for writ of habeas corpus, SOJ as a right, good conduct jail credits; concurrent sentencing for the same act; violation of case law concerning right to trial if sentence is > 6 mo, right to trial if sentence for contempt is given out on day other than day of contempt incidence, ban on more than one count of contempt during one case or trial; and violation of U.S. Supreme Court holdings/dicta in U.S. ex rel. Toth v. Quarles, 350 U.S. 11, 76 S.Ct 1 (1955) and Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723, 128 S.Ct 2229 (2008) that a non-attorney may file a next-friend habeas petition prove Judge McHale illegally found Linda Shelton in contempt three times, illegally sentenced her, and knowingly did this in an act of treason, violating Shelton’s constitutional rights to be free of arrest and imprisonment without due process and in violation of law, denied her father’s need for her caretaker, companion, and executive assistant services and love in his final days in an act of cruelty and lawlessness, and denied Shelton’s need for medical care and proper diet.
In addition, Annabelle Melongo’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed by Shelton, has been ignored by Judges McHale, (Brosnahan, Wadas, Kazmierski – to whom Plaintiff presented habeas filing prior to presenting it to Judge McHale and all of whom refused to hear it stating that they have no jurisdiction to hear filings from a non-attorney on behalf of another, despite Plaintiff reading the IL habeas statute to them), and Judge Biebel and she is still in jail a year later! All these judges have therefore committed treason. This is a grotesque and extremely serious violation of the Constitution of the United States – suspension clause (Article I, section 9) which states that the Great Writ of Habeas Corpus may not be suspended except in time of war.
Judge McHale was fully informed in open court by Plaintiff of the case law, code, and constitutional issues stated herein and therefore cannot claim mistake or unintentional error. Plaintiff therefore now petitions the U.S. Attorney and U.S. Justice Department to pursue the violations of 18 U.S.C §241 AND 18 U.S.C §242, as well as 18 U.S.C. §2381 that are clearly documented in this document and attachments, under the jurisdiction as permitted by the Presentment Clause of the Constitution and under 18 U.S.C. §3332 – which specifically states, as is supported by case law, that a citizen with evidence of federal crimes may petition a judge to present this evidence to a special grand jury . I ask that the Justice Department bring this cause before a judge for an indictment against Judge McHale for corruption.
Judge McHale ILLEGALLY AND UNCONSTITUTIONALLY IN VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW incarcerated Shelton for 16 month summary sentence for which she served six months and during that time DISCRIMINATED AGAINST DR. SHELTON’S DYING FATHER, ALLAN LORINCZ, BY ILLEGALLY JAILING SHELTON, SNUBBING HER REQUEST FOR HOUSE ARREST TO CARE FOR HER FATHER, AND PREVENTING HER FROM CARING FOR HIM IN HIS LAST DAYS AS HE REQUESTED RESULTING IN HIS DEATH from self-starvation and dehydration due to depression over his loss of his caretaker and companion, Shelton and his progressing Parkinson’s disease. By turning a deaf ear, HE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST DISABLED SHELTON IN IGNORING HER DISABILITY NEEDS WHILE UNLAWFULLY JAILED BY HIM, in that he refused to order the Sheriff to provide her appropriate medications and food for her conditions. He, IN RETALIATION FOR HER WHISTLE BLOWING AND COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUDGES AND SHERIFF STAFF, ILLEGALLY JAILED HER knowingly and willingly suspended her right to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, violated at least four U.S. Supreme Court holdings by unlawfully convicting her of contempt and summarily sentencing her to 16 mo. in jail, and trashed Shelton’s due process constitutional rights, as well as numerous Illinois statutes and Supreme Court and Cook County Court rules. Finally, he ordered a fitness exam when there was no reason to, in order to help justify his illegal conduct but ignored Shelton’s attorney’s motion that a person cannot be found in contempt if the judge questions their fitness as contempt requires intent and allegation of lack of fitness precludes concept of intent.
See the following criminal cases, appeals, motions for habeas & mandamus – which are explained in the following:
Cook County Court Habeas Petition: 09 CH 12736 – renumbered after transfer from Chancery division to criminal division to 09MR00025 (Shelton’s next friend habeas petition for Maisha Hamilton – allowed and Hamilton assigned a pro bono attorney); 10 HC 0006 & 7 (Shelton’s next-friend habeas petitions for Melongo – Judge McHale refused to hear, told Shelton filing it was criminal); 10 HC 00008 & 12 (Shelton habeas petition – Judge Porter summarily denied)
Cook County Criminal Contempt Cases: ACC 1000083-01, ACC 1000093-01, ACC 1000094-01 (Unconstitutional & Illegal against Shelton – summary total sentence of 16 months for filing next-friend habeas petitions for Melongo and defending her right to do so)
Cook County Criminal Cases: 10CR8092 (Melongo’s criminal eavesdropping case – declared unconstitutional eavesdropping law – this was upheld by IL Supreme Court) 08CR1050201 (Melongo’s computer tampering case which she later won as State committed fraud)
U.S. Supreme Court Complaint for Leave to File Mandamus: 12-6561 (Shelton pro se filing, granted in forma pauperis but denied leave to file brief)
Illinois Appellate Court: 10-3342, 10-3344, 10-3345 (Shelton’s appeal of contempt cases dismissed when denied in forma pauperis and demanded back payment for previous cases as well as $25 payment for each of these cases)
NOTE: the following case law
Sacher et al. v. United States, 343 U.S. 1, 72 S.Ct. 451, 96 L.Ed. 717 (1950)
Courage does not equal contempt.
An attorney has the right to make a fearless, vigorous argument
It is the right of counsel for every litigant to press his claim, even if it appears farfetched and untenable to obtain the trial court’s considered ruling. Full enjoyment of that right, wit due allowance for the heat of controversy, will be protected by appellate courts when infringed by trial courts. At 9
Men who make their way to the bench sometimes exhibit vanity, irascibility, narrowness, arrogance, and other weaknesses [ignorance] to which human flesh is heir. Most judges, however, recognize and respect courageous, forthright lawyerly conduct. They rarely mistake overzeal or heated words of a man fired with a desire to win, for the contemptuous conduct which defies rulings and deserves punishment. They recognize that our profession necessarily is a contentious one and they respect the lawyer who makes a strenuous effort for his client. At 12
Bloom v. Illinois, 391 U.S. 194, Footnote 4, 88 S.Ct. 1477, 20 .Ed.2d 522 (1968)
The court has long recognized the potential for abuse in exercising the summary power to imprison for contempt—it is an ‘arbitrary’ power which is ‘liable to abuse.’ Ex parte Terry, 128 U.S. 289, 313, 9 S.Ct. 77, 82, 32 L.Ed. 405 (1888). ‘(I)ts exercise is a delicate one, and care is needed to avoid arbitrary or oppressive conclusions.’ Cooke v. United States, 267 U.S. 517, 539, 45 S.Ct. 390, 396, 69 L.Ed. 767 (1925).4
Footnote 4. ‘That contempt power over counsel, summary or otherwise, is capable of abuse is certain. Men who make their way to the bench sometimes exhibit vanity, irascibility, narrowness, arrogance, and other weaknesses to which human flesh is heir.’ Sacher v. United States, 343 U.S. 1, 12, 72 S.Ct. 451, 456, 96 L.Ed. 717 (1952). See also Ex parte Hudgings, 249 U.S. 378, 39 S.Ct. 337, 63 L.Ed. 656 (1919); Nye v. United States, 313 U.S. 33, 61 S.Ct. 810, 85 L.Ed. 1172 (1941); Cammer v. United States, 350 U.S. 399, 76 S.Ct. 456, 100 L.Ed. 474 (1956).
United States v. Seale, 461 F.2d 345 (7th Cir. 1972).
[T]he conduct so personally involved the trial judge that the contempt hearing should be presented before another judge. “Attorneys have a right to be persistent, vociferous, contentious, and imposing, even to the point of appearing obnoxious, when acting in their client’s behalf.” In the matter of Dellinger, 461 F.2d 389, 400 (7th Circ. 1972)
Sentences more than six months either separate or aggregate require a jury trial:
When the aggregate punishments for a particular course of criminally contemptuous conduct committed in the presence of a judge exceed the parameters of punishments normally imposed for misdemeanors and the punishments are not imposed immediately after occurrence of the contemptuous conduct, the contemnor is entitled to a jury trial as to the contempt charges. The traditional test for determining whether or not a charged offense is a misdemeanor is whether the penalties exceed $500 or six months imprisonment. Where, as with criminal contempt in Illinois, no maximum punishment is prescribed for an offense, courts look to the penalty actually imposed to determine whether an offense is so serious that a jury trial was required. Some decisions suggest that in the context of contempt proceedings, the $500 fine component.., is subject to upward adjustment based on the contemnor’s financial resources and inflationary trends. In re Marriage of Betts, 200 Ill. App. 3d 26, 50, 558 N.E.2d 404 (4th Dist. 1990).
The following are holdings in Maita v. Whitmore, 508 F.2d 143 (9th Cir. 1975):
[Taylor v. Hayes, 418 U.S. 488, 94 S.Ct. 2697, 41 L.Ed.2d 897, and Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, 418 U.S. 506, 94 S.Ct. 2687, 41 L.Ed.2d 912.]
First: The rules as to whether an ordinary criminal offense is ‘petty,’ thus not requiring a jury trial, or ‘serious,’ thus requiring a jury trial, also apply to charges of criminal contempt. Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 513, 94 S.Ct. at 2692; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701.
Second: ‘Crimes carrying more than six month sentences are serious crimes and those carrying less are petty crimes.’ (Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 512, 94 S.Ct. at 2691; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701.
Third: ‘Judgment about the seriousness of the crime is normally heavily influenced by the penalty authorized by the legislature.’ Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 511, 94 S.Ct. at 2691. Indeed, if the penalty authorized by the legislature exceeds six months, there is a right to a jury trial, even though the judge could impose a sentence of six months or less. Baldwin v. New York, 1970, 399 U.S. 66, 68-69, 90 S.Ct. 1886, 26 L.Ed.2d 437, and cases there cited.
Fourth: Where the legislature has not prescribed a penalty, as is often the case when the charge is criminal contempt, the actual sentence imposed determines whether the offense is ‘serious’ or ‘petty.’ Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. 512, 94 S.Ct. 2687 at 2691; Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 495, 94 S.Ct. at 2701. In such a case, when multiple contempts are tried together, the imposition of consecutive sentences aggregating more than six months makes the offenses ‘serious’ and requires a jury trial. Codispoti v. Pennsylvania, supra, 418 U.S. at 516-518, 94 S.Ct. at 2693-2694. On the other hand, where there are convictions for several contempts but the aggregate sentence does not exceed six months because the sentences are concurrent, jury trial is not required. Taylor v. Hayes, supra, 418 U.S. at 496, 94 S.Ct. at 2702. Moreover, it makes no difference that the trial judge at first imposes consecutive sentences totalling more than six months, if he afterward reduces them to six month sentences to be served concurrently; jury trial is not required. Id. at 496, 94 S.Ct. at 2702.
No justice; no peace – police Officer Servin gets away with murder, disabled activist charged with felony battery for “touching officer’s ear”, innocent grandmother convicted of murder of officer while confused in a seizure after being battered by officer
This blog and other blogs by me are devoted to uncovering and exposing the methods of incompetence and corruption and the systemic lawlessness of our injustice system in Illinois, particularly Cook County. Click the links on your right to see my other blogs.
COME TO COURT, view from court gallery Judge Cannon’s announcement of written decision concerning Shelton’s argument that IL battery statute is unconstitutional on 7/13/16 rm 506 2600 S California at 10 am, Chicago, IL
Until justice is served, Chicago should have no peace.
Alvarez has continued to systemically target me by prosecuting me for now nearly 40 cases of unlawful and unconstitutional arrests over the last 15 years in retaliation for being a whistle blower against corrupt judges and corrupt Sheriff staff and police officers from Chicago, Evergreen Park, and Oak Lawn.
Help me (Shelton) now by showing up to court hearings (NEXT one 7/13/16 room 506 10 AM 2600 S California – though judge hears others first and waits until gallery empty so there will be no witnesses to her illegal rulings), giving Shelton support in pending case: click here
Enough is enough!! Vote out Clerk Brown and vote NO on every judge on judicial retention ballot!! Replace any candidate or Alderman who refuses to commit to investigation of the Cook County Court system, Cook County police including Chicago Police, Suburban Police, and especially the Cook County Sheriff including their Courtroom Services Division and Correctional Officers.
Its time for Chicagoans to stand up against police, prosecutorial, and judicial corruption in consistent, constant, recurring, protests until the Cook County Board, Chicago City Council, the FBI and U.S. Attorney, Illinois legislature, and U.S. Congress change training of police to de-escalate and not shoot unarmed or those with knives or bats, as well as judicial, oversight to remedy the following:
The killing of 22-year-old Rekia Boyd by off duty Chicago police officer Dante Servin when he shot backward over his shoulder towards a group of people is clear murder as well as is involuntary manslaughter because he clearly meant to shoot someone in that direction although he may not have meant to shoot Boyd specifically. So it is both a voluntary act of shooting someone without premeditation (murder) and an involuntary act of killing someone he did not specifically target. You can be sure that if he was a civilian he would have been charged with murder and there are examples of such in the Court Clerk’s records.
Cook County States Attorney Anita Alvarez knows this and purposely undercharged him in my opinion as she always favors the police and covers up for their crimes and errors. She was in charge of the division in the State’s Attorney’s office under SA Devine which was responsible for prosecuting government corruption for a decade and essentially shut down that office. She has for decades had a history of reckless disregard for the rights of citizens, which corrupt and incompetent officials have violated.
(Shelton – http://cookcountysheriffdeputies.wordpress.com and http://illinoiscorruption.blogspot.com , http://prosechicago.wordpress.com , http://chicagofbi.wordpress.com and http://cookcountyjail.wordpress.com)
Alvarez at the same time has continued to systemically target me by prosecuting me for now nearly 40 cases of unlawful and unconstitutional arrests over the last 15 years in retaliation for being a whistle blower against corrupt judges and corrupt Sheriff staff and police officers from Chicago, Evergreen Park, and Oak Lawn.
Help me (Shelton) now by showing up to court hearings (NEXT one 7/13/16 room 506 10 AM 2600 S California – though judge hears others first and waits until gallery empty so there will be no witnesses to her illegal rulings), giving Shelton support in pending case: click here
I mostly defended myself successfully but the two cases for which I was convicted are just unjust wrongful convictions or meatballs that stuck when the spaghetti plate was thrown. Three contempt convictions with a summary (NO TRIAL = illegal sentence) sentence of 16 months later changed to 12 months consecutive were clearly unconstitutional and malicious by Judge McHale. See here description and case law.
One wrongful felony conviction for “bumping an officer with my wheelchair” = felony aggravated battery for “causing an abrasion” and resulting in a two year outrageous sentence was also unlawful, never happened, and due to falsification of records and perjury by Officer Anthony Salemi (see appeal here).
The denial of appeal by the Appellate Court was unlawful and based on an ad hominem attack by Appellate Justice Levin that ignored the arguments and case law in appeal brief. See outrageous opinion here where Judge Levin quotes defamatory rumors about my behavior in courts, which have no basis – here).
The misdemeanor conviction for “bumping an officer with my walker” was again perjury by Courtroom Services Deputy Sheriff Ateca. She lied and said I was sitting and pushed my walker against her causing no injury. She actually walked in front of me when I was walking to the elevator and slowed down suddenly so I would accidentally bump into her. Her partner is aiding and abetting this perjury by not speaking up.
The judge fixed the case by not allowing me to take my medication for chronic pain, vertigo, and PTSD so that I was so distraught and unable to properly question the witness as my own attorney and too sick to testify so I chose not to that I appeared crazy to the jury and confused so they ignored me and convicted me. This was an unlawful trial as I was denied American with Disability Act required accommodations (medications) during my trial as well as access to my legal documents while jailed during the trial.
It’s a violation of civil rights to impede a self-represented person from access to her court documents, pen and paper, during a trial.
There is a pattern of under-trained officers who disregard the rights of defendants and abuse the disabled, especially the mentally ill, as well as purposely lawless judges who cover-up for criminal acts of police, retaliate against whistle blowers, and are biased against poor and minorities or uneducated.
The public defender’s budget is minuscule compared to the prosecutor’s budget so that the public defenders do not have the time or resources to properly defend anyone. The gun (officer’s weapon) used by Robin Johnson was not checked for her fingerprints and no medical experts or doctors were called as witnesses in her defense for example.
Judge Porter is a cunning politician who never should have found Servin not guilty of involuntary manslaughter, despite the lack of the more appropriate murder charge. I suspect that Alvarez and Porter conspired to do this so that Alvarez can say she charged him, but Porter would have an excuse to find him not guilty – thus protecting the officer.
Judge Gainer wrongfully convicted Robin Johnson of murder of an officer in 2013, when Chicago police committed perjury – they shot their own man, by illegally refusing to allow testimony that Johnson was in a standing seizure (confused), had a long history of such seizures that were not controlled well and was often found wandering at night at bus stops, had a grand mal seizure in her bathroom at home that morning, that it took five years pretrial while she was in jail to mostly control her seizures, that she had been repeatedly bashed while in a head lock against a bus by her head by the deceased officer, and Johnson had no experience with guns or training in attacking others or defending herself.
So how does a 5′ tall grandmother with no criminal history disarm a 6′ tall seasoned Sargent and shoot him in the head – with a large gun that is really too large for her tiny hand to hold and handle this weapon while in a confused state of mind due to a seizure?
She clearly could have no intent if she was in a seizure and confused so the charge is void and the public defender refused to argue this defense. The state had multiple videos but the moments where she allegedly held the gun were missing for “unknown reasons”! The gun was lost for a period of time, which per the U.S. Supreme Court decision means that the case automatically should have been dismissed due to tampering with evidence.
The state made up a baloney theory that her motive was that she was an “angry person” out to kill a cop! They didn’t let her children (including a daughter studying to be an attorney) and grandchildren, relatives and friends testify that she was not a violent, aggressive, or “angry” person.
Notably, Gainer should have recused himself because his close relative was former top cop in the U.S. – Terrance Gainer who had at retirement been Chief of the Capital police in Washington, D.C., had long record of being chief of several departments and president of the American Society of Police Chiefs! He is often “randomly” assigned to cases involving police officers as victims or plaintiffs by “coincidence.”
She is now serving a wrongful life sentence while her husband is dying for something she didn’t do in order for Alvarez to cover-up the shooting of the officer by police. Johnson barely survived 22 wounds when officers arriving on the scene emptied their guns against her, even though by then the videos show her unarmed and down. That’s attempted murder.
Robin Johnson = innocent person
Serving life sentence for shooting officer
The FBI and U.S. Attorney should arrest Servin for criminal violation of civil rights under color of law and convict him in that manner.
Mayor Emmanuel should denounce this officer and criticize Alvarez but he has no guts to stand for the right.
Supt. Johnson should call the kettle black and fire Servin for official misconduct due to clear violation of his oath of office to uphold the law and control his gun.
For 20 years I have been supporting the minority populations in Cook County as a physician standing up for my patients in court when no other doctor would do so, writing these blogs to expose corruption and providing the FBI and U.S. Attorney information about corruption and abuse at the jail and in the courts. I won a suit for mandamus, in the public interest, against the Sheriff in 2004-5 for violating the freedom of information act and not giving me a copy of their compliance plan for the Americans with Disabilities Act regarding accommodating disabled at courthouses. They were forced to admit that for more than a decade they were in violation of federal law by failing to have a compliance plan.
I have been repeatedly unlawfully arrested usually for trespass, resisting arrest, or battery of ONLY officers in courthouses usually with only police witnesses (!!) for falsely alleged “bumping them with my walker or wheelchair” and personally beaten by the Chicago Police and Cook County Sheriff staff.
My mouth was covered with duct tape during an asthma attack – which could have killed me except a Sgt. ordered it removed. My pony tail was grabbed and my head banged against a wall despite major neck spine surgery – which could have caused death like with Freddie Grey, held on the floor by Correctional officers Ruiz and Levy and kicked with their boots (see pictures). I was beaten by a Chicago Police Detention Aid Shell (see picture 1 & 2) for taking my medication for severe pain and vertigo after it was handed to me while in the police station during a release from unlawful custody. I had my shoulder severely strained and mildly dislocated by Correctional officer Charles Johnson in Dec. 2006 confirmed by an orthopedic surgeon. I was body slammed when C/O Johnson grabbed by handcuffed in front hands and swung them up and slammed me down against a row of chairs with arms causing contusions on my back especially near my surgery site – resulting in temporary paralysis and shock – then slamming me onto the floor where I laid outside the jail ER mocked by officers for hrs and temporarily unable to move without medical care – then a “nurse” looked at me and said nothing was wrong while ignoring the 5″ scar on the back of my neck from surgery, passed out from cardiac arrhythmia and severe neurocardiogenic syncope in the jail Cermak ER and ignored on the floor for hrs, suffered ischemia of the heart and a brief respiratory arrest when exposed to tobacco smoke in 2001 after a false arrest even though I told them I could not tolerate tobacco smoke – then when returned from the ER the medical staff failed to do the cardiac enzyme tests needed over 24 hrs to be sure I did not suffer a heart attack (I have the medical records).
I have been in 2013-2014 jailed for one year without bail for “touching an officer’s ear” during a PTSD flashback induced by Courtroom Services Sheriff’s Officers who misused information I gave to the Court Disability Coordinator Pacelli to trigger the flashback – then they failed to back off when I began to “misperceive ongoing events” crumbled to the floor and swung my hands around my head to block misperceived blows (due to flashback which is like reliving the nightmare in a daytime dream like altered state of consciousness) as well as grabbed out involuntarily to steady myself when pushed and picked up by them (due to my neurological disease and resulting balance issues). For more information see this link here.
I have now challenged the constitutionality of the Illinois battery statutes for making touching an officer a felony crime. Come to court at 2600 S California, room 506, Chicago on 7/13/16 at 10 am and hear Judge Cannon’s decision on this motion. For more info about this motion read here.
“This is the first time I’ve ever seen (a) judge let a criminal go because he was improperly charged,” said Frank Chapman. “I have never seen that before,” confirming the intellectual, intentional misconduct of Judge Porter in refusing to convict on involuntary manslaughter because “it was voluntary” and he should have been charged with murder.
Chapman believes the state’s attorney’s office and the police department have too close of a relationship to look at cases like these objectively. They say Servin is the first Chicago police officer in 20 years to be charged with killing someone.
We are not asking for his release just that he be charged with what he actually did.
Would u please consider reading and signing my petition. I’d love for u to share it too if possible. If not it’s all good. Thank you in advance ♡♡♡