17 November 2000
See related files: http://jya.com/cejfiles.htm
It is my hope that someone might find the time and energy to distribute this to Internet legal forums and to attorneys throughout the Ninth District, especially Seattle-Tacoma.
Fuck These Morons (TM) have shit all over Constitutional Law and I want to rub their faces in it. It will no doubt piss Them (TM) off to the Max, but I want to stir things up before the Appeals hearing, which should be in the next couple of weeks, if granted.
It's Crunch Time, and I want to shine as much light as possible on what Fuck These Morons (TM) are doing.
Thanks,
CJ
Subject: ATTN: New 9th Circuit Precedents
REF:
USA v. CARL EDWARD JOHNSON
No. 99-30196
D.C. No. CR-98-05393-RJB
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert J. Bryan, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted September 13, 2000
Seattle, WashingtonBefore: SCHROEDER, BEEZER and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges
United States Court of Appeals
for the Ninth CircuitFILED: Oct. 04, 2000
Cathy A. Caterson, Clerk
U.S. Court of Appeals
_______________________________________________________________
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has broken new ground in this case, negating the standards established in Godinez v. Moran, 509 U.S. 389, 399, 113 S. Ct. 2680, 125 L.Ed.2d 321 (1993)(equating competency to waive counsel with competency to stand trial) ruling that the Court may deny a competent defendant the Constitutional right to self-representation and place control of the defense in the hands of a Court-appointed attorney, against the defendant's wishes.
The 9th Circuit Court also ruled that -- contrary to Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, ---U.S.---, 120 S.Ct. 684, 145 L.Ed.2d 597 (2000); Lopez v. Thompson, 202 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2000) -- that the lack of technical legal competence on the part of the defendant constitutes a legitimate ground for denying the right of self-representation, allowing the presiding judge to rule the defendant "not competent to undergo self-representation in a case of this seriousness."
Also, the Court ruled that -- contrary to McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, 174, 104 S.Ct. 944, 79 L.Ed.2d 122 (1984); United States v. Sarno, 73 F.3d 1470, 1491, (9th Circ. 1995), cert. denied, 518, U.S. 1020, 116 S.Ct. 255, 135 L.Ed.2d 1073 (1996) -- a defendant found competent to stand trial may be denied the right to control all aspects of his trial court proceedings.
Further, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that there is no longer any due process requirement for the Court to conduct a full Faretta canvas to determine competency -- Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375, 385, 865 S.Ct. 836, 15 L.Ed.2d 815 (1966) -- upon a defendant requesting self-representation. This, in spite of the presiding Judge stating, in regard to the defendant's mental status, "I don't have real information on that that is reliable ... It is not clear to the Court." ER 47-48.
In toto, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' rulings in this case seem to indicate that the 9th Circuit, in the future, will be giving its presiding judges a wide latitude in allowing the preferences of the Court to take precedence over the desires of the defendant -- denying the Constitutional autonomy of the defendant and putting control of the defense in the hands of a Court-forced attorney at the whim of the presiding judge.
Circuit judges Schroeder, Beezer and Hawkins appear to have ruled that due process is served by foregoing a sua ponte competency hearing and allowing the Court of Appeals, at a later date, to determine the defendant's standing -- under Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 (1975) -- based upon the trial record, in the absence of the defendant.
In light of prosecuting attorney Robb London's appraisal of one of the defendant's motions to the Court as, "The best pro-se motion I've ever seen by a defendant," it is clear that the Constitutional right to self-representation has -- in the 9th Circuit -- been effectively dismissed as a matter of particular importance.
Attorneys practicing in the 9th Circuit should be aware that the trail transcripts and appeal transcripts clearly show that the 9th Circuit no longer considers itself bound by the decisions in the foregoing cases, making it incumbent upon the attorney to properly prepare, accordingly, under the new guidelines.
Transcription and HTML by Cryptome.
Source: http://pacer.ca9.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/dktrpt.pl?CASENUM=99-30196&puid=00974476153
Court of Appeals Docket #: 99-30196 Filed: 6/28/99
Nsuit: 0
USA v. Johnson
Appeal from: Western District of Washington (Tacoma)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Case type information:
1) criminal
2) Sentence & Conviction
3)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Lower court information:
District: 0981-3 : CR-98-05393-RJB
presiding judge: Robert J. Bryan, District Judge
court reporter: Julaine Ryen, Off. Court Reporter
Date Filed: 9/30/98
Date order/judgment: 6/11/99
Date NOA filed: 6/21/99
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fee status: in forma pauperis
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Prior cases:
None
Current cases:
None
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 1
99-30196 USA v. Johnson
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Floyd G. Short
Plaintiff - Appellee FAX 553-0882 (20
(206) 533-7970
Suite 5100
[COR LD NTC aus]
Robert London, Esq.
FAX 553-0882 206
206/553-7970
Suite 5100
[COR LD NTC aus]
USSE - OFFICE OF THE U.S.
ATTORNEY
601 Union St.
Seattle, WA 98101-3903
v.
CARL EDWARD JOHNSON Todd Maybrown, Esq.
Defendant - Appellant FAX 447-0839
206/447-9681
Suite 3020
[COR LD NTC ret]
ALLEN, HANSEN & MAYBROWN, P.S.
One Union Square
600 University St.
Seattle, WA 98101
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 2
99-30196 USA v. Johnson
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
CARL EDWARD JOHNSON
Defendant - Appellant
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 3
99-30196 USA v. Johnson
6/28/99 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. Filed in
D.C. on 6/22/99; setting schedule as follows: transcript
shall be ordered by 7/13/99 for Carl Edward Johnson; Fee
payment due 7/12/99; transcript shall be filed by 8/12/99;
appellants' briefs, excerpts due by 9/21/99 for Carl Edward
Johnson; appellees' brief due 10/21/99 for USA; appellants'
reply brief due by 11/4/99 for Carl Edward Johnson. ( RT
required: y) ( Sentence imp 37 mos) [99-30196] (kc)
7/26/99 Filed Appellant Carl Edward Johnson's motion to proceed in
forma pauperis; withdraw as counsel [99-30196] served on
6/29/99 [MOATT) [99-30196] (ft)
9/23/99 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner) The court has received
aplt's motion to represent himself, and the motion of
aplt's retained counsel, Todd Maybrown, Esq., for leave to
withdraw. The court has directed the Appellate Commissioner
to conduct a hearing pursuant to FARETTA v. CALIFORNIA, to
confirm that appellant's request to proceed pro se is
knowing, intelligent and unequivocal. Accordingly, the
hearing will take place by video conference at 11:00 a.m.
PST, (1:00 p.m. CST) Tuesday, 9/28/99. Appellant Johnson
shall appear in Magistrate Jane Cooper-Hill's Hearing Room,
1st Floor, of the USDC for the Southern District of Texas,
521, Starr Street, Corpus Chirsti, TX 78401. Appellant's
counsel, Todd Maybrown, Esq., shall appear by phone. Aple's
counsel, Assistant AUSA, Atty Robb London, shall appear by
phone or shall file a statement that aple takes no position
on the issue of aplt's representation. if either counsel
wishes to participate by phone, that counsel shall notify
the Appellate Commissioner's office at 415-556-6220 as soon
as possible of the phoen number at which he can be reached.
AUSA Atty London shall make appropriate arrangements with
the U.S. Marshal's Service to produce aplt at the hearing.
The Clerk shall serve a copy of this order on the U.S.
Marshal's Service, 521 Starr St, Corpus Christi, TX 78401.
The Clerk also shall serve this order on aplt Carl E.
Johnson in addition to serving the order on the counsel of
record. The briefing schedule is held in abeyance pending
further order of the court. (Faxed to counsel) ()
[99-30196] (ft)
9/28/99 Faretta Hearing held before Appellate Commissioner on
09/28/99 at 11:00am in San Francisco . Present: Robert
London, Floyd G. Short, Todd Maybrown Ct. Rep./Phone:
415-929-7134 Peppina Thompson . Method: Video . Clerk AS
[99-30196] (jna)
9/30/99 Copy of letter received from U.S.D.C. Judge Bryan: Status
of appeal and is the District Court directed to do anything
at this time. (Sending copy of docketsheet) [99-30196] (ft)
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 4
99-30196 USA v. Johnson
10/5/99 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner) ...(See Case file for
complete text) At the hearing, appellant Johnson withdrew
his request to represent himself on appeal, and requested
that counsel Maybrown be appointed to represent him on
appeal. Counsel Maybrown concurred and, accordingly, the
earlier-filed motion for leave to withdraw as counsel for
appellant is DENIED. Counsel Maybrown is appointed to
represent appellant Johnson. The motion to proceed in
forma pauperis on appeal is GRANTED. Appellant shall
disignate the reporter's trancript by October 8, 1999. The
trancript is due November 8, 1999. Appellant's opening
brief and exerpts of record are due January 7, 2000;
appellee's brief is due February 7, 2000; the optional
reply brief is due 14 days after service of the appellee's
brief. [3721462-1] [3721462-2] ( ) [99-30196] (kc)
11/8/99 Copy of letter received from Carl Edward Johnson: Status of
results of the Faretta hearing. [99-30196] (ft)
12/27/99 Filed motion and deputy clerk order :(Deputy Clerk: jlc)
Court Reporter Julaine V. Ryen's motion for an extension of
time to file the transcript is granted. The rt is due
1/18/00. This order waives the mandatory fee reduction
provided that the transcripts are filed within the time
allowed in this order. The briefing schedule is as follows:
the opening brief is due 2/28/00, the answering brief is
due 3/29/00. A copy of this order shall be provided to the
court reporter at the dc. ( Motion recvd 12/17/99)
[99-30196] (ft)
1/28/00 Filed certificate of record on appeal; RT filed in DC
1/18/00. [99-30196] (hj)
3/3/00 Filed original and 15 copies Appellant Carl Edward Johnson
opening brief ( Informal: no) 30 pages and five excerpts
of record in 1 volume; served on 2/28/00. [99-30196] (hj)
3/21/00 14 day oral extension by phone of time to file Appellee
USA's brief. [99-30196] appellees' brief due 4/12/00;
appellants' reply brief due 14 days . . . (jlc)
4/18/00 Filed original and 15 copies of Appellee USA's answering
brief of 45 pages and 5 supplemental excerpts of record in 1
volume; served on 4/12/00. (***SUPPLEMENTAL EXCERPTS TO BE
FILED UNDER SEAL PER 4/21/00 ORDER***) [99-30196] (ca)
4/18/00 Filed Appellee's pre-sentencing report UNDER SEAL.
(RECORDS) [99-30196] (ca)
4/21/00 Filed motion and deputy clerk order :(Deputy Clerk: cag)
The Govt's motion to seal is granted. Volume 1 of the
supplemental excerpts of record shall be filed and
maintained under seal. [3894811-1] ( Motion recvd
4/18/00) [99-30196] (lp)
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 5
99-30196 USA v. Johnson
4/26/00 14 day oral extension by phone of time to file Appellant
Carl Edward Johnson's reply brief. [99-30196] appellants'
reply brief due 5/15/00; (jlc)
5/1/00 Received Appellant Carl Edward Johnson letter dated
4/26/00 re: Extension of time granted to file a reply
brief. [99-30196] (kc)
5/17/00 Received orig. 15 copies Carl Edward Johnson's reply brief
(Informal: n) of 12 pages; served on 5/15/00 deficient y:
(footnotes are not correct typeface) Notified counsel.
[99-30196] (je)
5/26/00 Received Appellant Carl Edward Johnson's satisfaction of
(major) brief deficiency, served on 5/24/00 [99-30196] (je)
5/26/00 Filed original and 15 copies Carl Edward Johnson reply
brief, ( Informal: n ) 12 pages; served on 5/24/00
[99-30196] (je)
6/28/00 Calendar check performed [99-30196] (th)
7/10/00 Calendar materials being prepared. [99-30196] [99-30196]
(th)
7/13/00 CALENDARED: Seattle Sept 13 2000 9:00 a.m. Courtroom
815, US Courthouse [99-30196] (th)
9/13/00 ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO Mary M. SCHROEDER, Robert R.
BEEZER, Michael D. HAWKINS [99-30196] (kym)
10/4/00 FILED MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED ( Terminated on the
Merits after Oral Hearing; Affirmed; Written, Unsigned,
Unpublished. Mary M. SCHROEDER, Robert R. BEEZER,
Michael D. HAWKINS ) FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT.
[99-30196] (ft)
10/18/00 Filed original and 50 copies Appellant Carl Edward Johnson
petition for rehearing with suggestion for rehearing en
banc in 15 pgs; served 10/17/00. (PANEL AND ALL ACTIVE
JUDGES) (af)
Docket as of October 26, 2000 11:24 pm Page 6