Discharge Certificate Update

June 27, 2013, citizen Lee mailed his writ of certiorari to Milwaukee State Court.

July 5, 2013, citizen Lee telephoned the clerk of court's office to verify that his petition for a writ had been received and filed.  The clerk's office stated that "no writ had been received".

July 6, 2013, the Milwaukee Courthouse on fire.

July 8, 2013, citizen Lee mailed his petition for a writ again by certified mail and tracking.

July 23, 2013, citizen Lee received a letter from Carol B., DCC/Chief Judge Jeffrey A. Kremers confirming that his petition for writ of certiorari had been received, assigning case number 13-cv-006447, the Hon. William s. Pocan, Br. 26 as the judge.  The petition was filed and authenticated July 2, 2013.  Three days before citizen Lee called the clerk's office to verify receipt of the petition and returned one of the $133 dollar cost of filing payments.

Now, we have to serve Denise Symdom, Administrator for State of Wisconsin Department of Corrections who made the final decision to not honor the discharge certificate issued by Secretary for Wisconsin Prisons, July 27, 2012.

Well, the court issued it's decision, that will save some money and time, no need to serve the regional chief who is also the administrator.  Let's discuss the court's July 24, 2013 decision.

Opposition To Motion To Dismiss

August 01, 2013, plaintiff's response in opposition to motion to dismiss are as follows:

1.  Taxpayers Bill of Rights I, II, and III.
2.  28 U.S.C. 1331.
3.  81 Cong. Rec. 1416 (1937).
4.  Administrative Procedure Act.
5.  Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
6.  Eighth Amendment.

And the beat goes on...

Federal District Court Order To Show Cause

July 30, 2013, my response to order to show cause was mailed to the court and a copy to Wisconsin AG's Office.  "The enabling statute for federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. subjection 1331, provides that the district courts have subject-matter jurisdiction in all civil actions arising under the constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States".  In summary this suit relies upon the following:

     1.  Acts of Congress.
     2.  Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
     3.  Administrative Regulations.
     4.  Eighth Amendment.
    
   
And the beat goes on...

Federal Writ of Certiorari

May 7, 2013, The Wisconsin Attorney General Department of Justice was asked to waive service of a summons in accordance with rule 4 of the Federal Rules on civil procedure that "requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving summons and complaint".  The attorney general office refused, therefore, taxpayers... "will be required to pay the expense of service, unless the defendant shows cause for the failure".

June 25, 2013, the writ and summons was served by Dane County Sheriff's Office on Wisconsin Department of Revenue.

July 11, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division issued its Order To Show Cause and to appear before the court on August 13, 2013, at 3 p.m. and present federal statutes and case law in support of his position that the court has "subject matter jurisdiction" over the case.

July 15, 2013, plaintiff received Wisconsin Department of Revenue attorney's brief.  The Attorney General Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the suit.  The argument is based on the following legal claims:

     1.  The Tax Injunction Act.
     2.  The Rooker-Feldman Doctrine.
     3.  Claim Preclusion.
     4.  Eleventh Amendment immunity from suit in federal court.

...and the beat goes on.

Milwaukee Courthouse Fire

Saturday July 6, 2013, more than a thousand people off work. Fire damage to building estimated at $368,000 and property damage at $150,000.

July 16, 2013, an electrical fire that closed Milwaukee Courthouse for a week could cost about $2 million to clean up.

July 24, 2013, courthouse reopens after two-and-a-half weeks.  Fire destroyed the main electrical infrastructure.

No Justice No Peace.

State Court Certiorari Review

What happens after a person has exhausted his administrative proceedings?

A certiorari review by a court is available to people who want to challenge a decision that affects them, made by an administrative agency.

The court's authority is limited to determining:

1.  Whether the administrative agency kept within its jurisdiction.
2.  Whether the division of parole and probation acted according to law in
      making the decision.  This includes whether the State or Federal
      Constitutions, State Statutes, or the Wisconsin Administrative Code
      rules were violated.
3.  Whether the administrative decision was arbitrary, oppressive or
      unreasonable and represented the agency's will rather than its judgment.
     The administrator is supposed to reach a reasonable decision based
      on the evidence presented.
4.  Whether, based on the evidence, the administrator would reasonable
      have decided as she did.

Administrator of Adult Field Supervision Decision on Discharge Certificate, dated May 30, 2013, and received June 08, 2013.

"It is my findings that you are still subject to the Department of Corrections's authority under extended supervision component of your sentence in Milwaukee County Court Case #05CF63".

"Your aggregate extended supervision term, as ordered by the court...will not expire until July 27, 2018".  "While  you may have received a discharge certificate...of Milwaukee County Case #05CF63, this does not translate to an absolute discharge from the other components of the sentence".  "You will receive a separate discharge certificate after you reach the termination date for extended supervision".

Here is the problem:  The legal purpose of the "discharge certificate is the evidence that a convicted person has served his sentence or otherwise satisfied the judgment against him and that that person is restored to his civil rights".  Wis. Stat. 304.078.