arrow left
arrow right
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
  • ROOSEVELT HAYES V. STATE OF FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL document preview
						
                                

Preview

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE „I JUDICIAL CIRCUIT CI 1....., IN AND FOR Ilf1/4126 COUNTY -icc-, - : .... ' is ....., CX:. P.. ..' STATE OF FLORIDA C .) rn C3 .:.....,.m nc c-i --4 c) _.......... c.,. "11 IN..) ~a 1r1 a aya Defendant, tatj1: . 91 CI r; - 3:". 70 (-) -1:1N.).. . = ...... . r-r- 1 e) c .. ...41. ... CASE NO: ..C IV STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent, CI-DL PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS F.S. 79.01 FOR DISMISSAL OF INDICTMENT/INFORMATION AND CHARGE NO SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION 1. This Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus F.S. 79.01, for dismissal of Indictment/Information and charge no subject matter jurisdiction State of Florida F.S. 944.17(5)(d). There was no Probable Cause Affidavit filed on Defendant at arrests on the / ,45.> which makes his arrest illegal: false arrest, false imprisonment, and wrongful incarceration. 2. The Florida Depai inent of Corrections under F.S. 944.17(5)(d) F.D.O.C. shall refuse to accept a person into the correctional system unless there is a Probable Cause Affidavit in his prison file, and at Central Office, Tallahassee, Florida. 3. The fact that Fla. Stat. 944.17(5)(d), states FDOC shall refuse to accept any person into the correctional system unless the following documents are presented in completed form, and 944.17(5)(d) specifically states a copy of the Probable Cause Affidavit for each identified in the current Indictment/Information the conviction is not attacked. It should be null and void because the defendant's due process of the law was violated thus was falsely arrested and convicted. 4. The Court does have jurisdiction as Defendant is itetained in Miami-Dade County and the Court is bias and refuses to do the right thing and grant Writ of -Habeas Corpus. Newly- discovered is just that newly discovered evidence Fla. R. Crim. Proc. 3.220 in the county of 0&/2/1/4. 5. Defendant invokes jurisdiction under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.600(3). Newly discovered evidence, new, and material evidence which if introduced at the trial would have changed the verdict, or finding of the Court. Also, the Defendant could not with due diligence have discovered, or produced at the trial, has now been discovered. Also on each new charge Defendant is to be Mirandized [sic]. See Miranda v. Arizona on additional charges upon arrest. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.133 Probable Cause Affidavit, determination and adversary preliminary hearing, F.S. 901.12 (1968); Escobe Doud Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 87 Supreme Court L. Ed. 20 973 (1967). 1972 Amendment the ABA Standards on pre-trial release provided for a person arrested to be taken before a committing Magistrate. 2 Fla. Stat. 944.17(5)(d), Alvarez v. State, 157 Fla. 254 25 So. 20, 661; 1946 Lex-718 (No# in original) April 5. 1946. 7. In an Information be amended in a matter of substance, such Information should be re-signed by the county solicitor (ASA), and re-sworn to him and re- ified with the clerk. Further, the defendant should be re-arraigned, should re-plea and the jury should be re-selected and re-sworn upon the new issues joined. 8. Mace-Proof, vb. To be exempt from an arrest: To be secure against an arrest. 9. Audita Querela (law Latin "The Complaint having been heard.") A Writ available to a judgment debtor who seeks a re-hearing of a matter on grounds of newly discovered evidence, or newly existing legal defenses. (Cases: Audita Querela). "The Writ of Audita Querela- (Querela having been heard) ... Introduced during the time of Edward III, was available to re-open a judgment in certain circumstances. It was issued as a remedy to defendant where an important matter concerning his case had arisen since the judgment. Its issue was based on equitable, rather than common law principles." L.B. Corzon, English legal history 103 (2nd Ed. 1979). Every time it's amended in order to I.D. him — as the accused to formally charge him before the record. See Landrum v. State, 247 So. 2d 53 (Fla. Sup. Court 1971). Albritton v. State, 948 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2007) (Jan 31st, 2007) 38 Fla. Law Weekly D1891 - D1892. 3 Wherefore, Defendant demonstrates his constitutional right to the 4th and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution be upheld, and order Defendant's charges dropped, and his immediate released from an illegal custody. x4-1 /b Submitted this trlday 4,11/ 01) , 202 . 6/eA-- ae,--2\- 4-At-cakoa-i .1pfae660Z CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document has been placed in prison officials hands for mailing via U.S. Mail to: Clerk of Court, tidal/44 iorAi) stimi/ato 440144/fifiiv t.eviv) F.D.O.C. Secretary, 501 South Calhoun Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 on this /7 ay of Pt , 2023. S CCM all 07 A.1 ty M /0490 0 Z121111k4)4fiffi: WI) 44 1)6 61dd Everglades Correctional Institution 1599 S.W. 187th Avenue Miami, Florida 33194 4 go (web a1114, b'ayeAliCW44 2 MIAMI FL 330 reg 0, /2 am /t, d4/7 MAILED FROM ,rgov quadient FIRST-CLASS MAIL 4141. atim IMI CORRECTIONAL r. .1 $000.63 2 0 11/20/2023 ZIP 33194 co INSITUTE 043M31229203 C di 0,(4.,41beef ue7wzd fl dt gz-e. PgAtid. f'614,--ah .31-/YeZYI M' Ze . d/4/Yeb,4