THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Civil Action No. 5:11-CV-334-H
|
DONNA PILCH, Plaintiff, v. DONALD STEPHENS, Defendant. |
|
AMENDED MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Fed R. Civ. P. 56 |
- I. JURISDICTIONAL BASIS
Plaintiff claims federal jurisidiction pursuant to Article III, 2, which applies to cases arising under the U.S. Constitution. Plaintiff invokes federal jurisdiction for civil rights violations per Title 42, §1983, obstruction of justice, and for violation of the 4th amendment (unlawful seizure of property and false arrest) and the 14th amendment right to due process, caused by Defendant acted in absence of all jurisdiction, and failing to provide relief as required by state and federal law.
- II. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Donald Stephens, superior court judge in residence in Wake County Court acted in absence of all jurisdiction and obstructed justice by denying Plaintiff’s two Motions for Relief, which provided him with indisputable evidence that she was convicted unlawfully and unconstitutionally of a DWI misdemeanor in the Wake Court, where he presides.
On October 27, 2009, Jacqueline Brewer, acting in absence of all judicial function, convicted Plaintiff of a misdemeanor DWI in the Wake Court without her presence, knowledge, consent, right to be heard, and with defective evidence including perjury by an SBI notary, which is a Class F felony pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §14-209. Brewer acted in absence of all judicial function, denied Plaintiff’s right to due process, and obstructed justice.
On August 16, 2010, and again on June 13, 2011, Plaintiff provided Donald Stephens with Motions for Relief that contained concrete evidence that Pilch was unlawfully and unconstitutionally convicted of a misdemeanor DWI.
Pilch’s Motions for Relief included evidence of a felony by the SBI notary who committed perjury, evidence of defective serology protocol, evidence that the serology sample didn’t belong to Plaintiff, and evidence that the allegation in the police report was scientifically impossible, and thus the police officer made a false statement, which is also a felony per North Carolina General Statute §75D-7.
Pilch also provided Stephens with evidence that neither she nor her attorney was ever asked to demand or waive probable cause hearing pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §15A-606 because the N.C. Administrative Office of the Courts has never even created a form in compliance with this statute, (which means that a class of people have been denied their 14th amendment right to due process). Per State v. Hudson, 295, N.C. 427, 430 (1978), probable cause hearing is supposed to ensure that the defendant will not be unjustifiably put to the trouble and expense of a trial if there is no probable cause.
Plaintiff also provided Stephens with evidence that on 12/31/09, court clerk Tonya Woodlief acted in excess of all jurisdiction by changing Pilch’s case status from disposed back to pending when no proceeding occurred on that day. Woodlief then set a new court date of 2/22/10 but didn’t inform Pilch or her attorney (because the Wake Court does not mail notifications of court dates to defendants, violating their 14th amendment to due process). When Pilch missed the 2/22/10 court date, superior court clerk Lorrin Freeman unlawfully and unconstitutionally ordered her arrested with excessive bail, violating the 4th and 8th and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution (unlawful seizure, excessive bail, denial of due process).
Plaintiff provided Stephens evidence that on August 3, 2010, that she was charged for someone else’s DWI by court clerk Sandra Meyer, and that the costs were in excess of what is prescribed by law.
Stephens is ultimately responsible for recordkeeping in the Wake Court pursuant to North Carolina General Statute §7A-105, and thus he has failed to perform his administrative duties as well as acting in absence of all judicial function by failing to provide Pilch relief.
- III. CLAIM OF HARM
Plaintiff has standing to sue because she suffered and continues to suffer personal, professional and financial “injury in fact” to her career, income and reputation, which is directly traceable to Stephens’ deliberate obstruction of justice. No one has immunity from obstructing justice or covering up a crime (the SBI’s notary’s perjury and the false police report, which are both felonies).
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff’s prayer for compensatory and punitive damages is included as an exhibit.
Respectfully submitted, this is the 12th day of September, 2011.
