Pro Se (self-representation)
See also: Propria Persona ; Sui Juris and Common Law Court
Avoid using the term “Pro se”, Instead use “Propria persona” or “Sui juris”.
Videos
Why pro se litigants lose in court...
RULES A PRO SE MUST FOLLOW TO WIN!
RULES A PRO SE MUST FOLLOW TO WIN PT.2
DEFENDING FEDERAL CHARGES PRO SE
D.I.Y. Kangaroo Courts 10 - Walk Out!
D.I.Y. Kangaroo Courts 11 - Give them the Liability
D.I.Y. Kangaroo Courts 12 - It is all Civil - No Criminal
Void Judgments = no jurisdiction - DO NOT give them jurisdiction!! - Kangaroo Courts 16
DIY Kangaroo Courts 16 - 7 Elements of Jurisdiction
DIY Kangaroo Courts 18 - Certificate of Participation
Understanding fraud, and how to write a lawsuit
MELISSA ISAAK: HOW TO OBJECT IN COURT AS A PRO SE LITIGANT
Pro Se Court Success!
Pro-se litigant deposition by Dr Eric James McDonough
Introducing Evidence as a Pro Se Litigant
Family Court Pro-Se-Litigant & Veteran Burke Hall puts on his case in Judge Pomrenze Courtroom 1-4
Resources for pro se employment litigants in Federal Court: The magic of the pro se office!
Legal Lunch & Learn: Guidance for pro se litigants
Social contract, accepting a settlement less than original amount, lawsuit advice
Here’s a YouTube Playlist critiquing pro se litigants from court recordings, shows a lot of “mistakes” using sovereign citizen tactics
Your right to cross examine your accuser
Practical Considerations - It is NEVER over until You say it is over!!
Knowing about the “word salad” and legalese used by lawyers, the above cases are just a way to disparage your right, and this is where we address the “work product immunity”
The court, the judge sitting on the bench must assist someone who is a pro se litigant. The judge can’t just dismiss your document based upon technicalities, they have to tell you what’s wrong with your motion or writ, such as quo warranto. If you file a habeas and its wrong, instead of ostracizing you saying its not in proper form, form is to be dismissed with someone who isn’t an attorney. They are to help you by giving directives, for example, “This is what we need to see, we need to see an affidavit in support of this motion.” “You have to tell this court why this action should be granted.” You have to show them the law.
The Supreme Court ruled you can’t hold a Layman to the same standards as an attorney when he’s appearing pro se. If an attorney makes a mistake you can call for a technical error and move for dismissal and call for summary judgment
If charged with something and brought into court ask: “What evidence do you have to suggest that you can prosecute me this way… or that I am a member of __ or that I am a member of the State?” The rules state that the court must have proper evidence that you can inspect and cross examine. If there’s nothing in the record, by what authority is the prosecutor (or court) moving?
When a non-lawyer files their own legal papers, that party is expected to write the shorthand, "in pro per" under their name in the heading on the first page.
Litigants or parties representing themselves in court without the assistance of an attorney are known as pro se litigants. “Pro se” is Latin for “in one's own behalf.” The right to appear pro se in a civil case in federal court is defined by statute 28 U.S.C.
When a litigant proceeds without legal counsel, they are said to be proceeding "pro se." See, e.g. Rivera v. Florida Department of Corrections, 526 U.S. 135 (1999).
The Sixth Amendment guarantees criminal defendants the right to representation by counsel. In 1975, the Supreme Court held that the structure of the Sixth Amendment necessarily implies that a defendant in a state criminal trial has a constitutional right to proceed without counsel when he voluntarily and intelligently elects to do so. See Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975). Thus, an unwilling defendant may not be compelled by the State to accept the assistance of a lawyer. A defendant's right to self-representation in federal criminal proceedings is codified in 28 U.S.C. § 1654.
Any waiver of the right to counsel must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent. The Faretta court stated that "a defendant need not have the skill and experience of a lawyer, but should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that he knows what he is doing and "the choice is made with eyes open." See Faretta. In 2004, the Court acknowledged that it has not prescribed any formula regarding the information a defendant must possess in order to make an intelligent choice. See Iowa v. Tovar, 541 U.S. 77 (2004). According to the Court, determining whether a waiver of counsel is intelligent depends on "a range of case-specific factors, including the defendant's education or sophistication, the complex or easily grasped nature of the charge, and the stage of the proceeding." See Tovar.
“...the right to file a lawsuit pro se is one of the most important rights under the constitution and laws.” ...Elmore v. McCammon (1986) 640 F. Supp. 905
Suits between man and man are common law. Also, suits in law (contract). Where is the contract that binds me to this? Is this a suit between man and man and where is the real party (the accuser who has standing) and interest?
Pro Se Cannot Be Defeated:
(discussing competent pro se litigants who can do the research)
- The cost of the misdemeanor case to the court, in a jury case, is about $1500 - 2000(probably more now). For this reason courts and prosecutors are careful not to tackle an experienced pro se litigant because the cost is usually ten times the value of the fine or more. Money rules in this game. Most of the time, cases will be dismissed on motions of the prosecutor.
Don’t plea bargain. To the prosecutor: “I believe that any case that’s important enough for the state to prosecute is important enough for me to defend.... if you’re concerned about court costs, this case could simply be dismissed.... You want me to plead guilty to save the $2,000 and I want you to dismiss to save the $2,000. Why don’t you tell me where there’s some common ground” (the judge may suggest pleading guilty to a lesser penalty , i.e. go into the court room and lie.)
- The experienced pro se will file at least 15 motions per case. Raising numerous constitutional issues that will force the litigated issue into years of appeal and expense that will demoralize the prosecutor and nuisance value when the money issue doesn’t.
”My theory of the case is the court has no jurisdiction, my rights have been violated, I’ve been denied due process and equal protection under the law and I haven’t had counsel so I’m going to demand a struck jury, a jury of my peers and a jury of 12 pursuant to the common law. I’m going to file about 15 motions. I demand a Grand jury, Sua sponte... the issue to focus on is ‘why did you deny me my rights” - Issues like Article 1 Section 10, parking meters and counsel of your choice are just some of the issues that government doesn’t want to answer because of the potential loss of revenue that would be caused by the over-turning of an unconstitutional statutory consent law. Many laws were passed just to generate revenue. We never attack statutes and laws, we attack them as they apply to this man/woman in this case. Most all statutes, laws, rules and regulations, so says the Supreme Court have the presumption of constitutionality and the burden of going forward and showing that they are unconstitutional is upon you, the defendant. Don’t try to show its unconstitutional, just show its unconstitutional as its applied to you because of your status, or you because of procedure, or you because of some other reason.
- 90% of the trial lawyers are incompetent in their chosen field, so said Chief Justice Warren Burger in a speech to the American Bar Association. There are 800 rules of procedure, both Civil and Criminal for police, prosecutors, jailors, interrogators, and judges to observe. It isn’t just the judge who commits reversible error, it can be the prosecutor, the jailor, the police, etc. Six significant procedural errors (according to rules of your state, court or any significant federal question like beating a confession out of you to use in court) will give the pro se a trial novo or reversible error.
Most pro se victories come from procedural errors made by incompetent public officials. Its very difficult to win a case at the jury level so you need to set the theory of the case and your appealable issues way before you go to trial, assuming the jury will come back with a guilty verdict.
At the lower court level, these admiralty juries of 6 people are just kangaroo courts of the king’s star chamber. In these types of courts they don’t even need a jury, its just window dressing to make people think they have rights. When you are in the equity jurisdiction of the traffic court what you are seeing is “We have a contract here with a penal clause to it. We are simply going to enforce the penal clause”. That’s an administrative procedure. In administrative procedures you aren’t entitled to constitutional due process.
Many think they have rights when they don’t, this has to due with the police powers that pre-dated the Constitution. Police powers can come into play and supersede what people sometimes think are constitutional rights, which are in fact, not. For example, the policeman searches your car and you have a driver’s license - you’ve entered into a voluntary regulated enterprise. That is not a rights issue but a contract issue since a driver’s license is used as a contract.
Don’t sign anything including a notification of a trial date. “I don’t want to sign anything unless I have my counsel present to go over it.” The judge has presented a legal document, if you don’t sign it he may say he’s going to hold you in contempt of court.
A response, “If you hold me in contempt of court what are you going to do to me?”
‘I’m going to sentence you to 5 days in jail.”
“Ok,if I don’t sign this document you are going to put me in jail for 5 days. Is that your position Sir?
“Yes it is”
“Ok, then I’m going to sign this” And you sign it adding, signed under duress, threat and coercion
Under the Miranda doctrine, signing anything under threat, duress and coercion makes it null and void. Now the judge has a trial date and you don’t have to appear, if you don’t appear and he throws you in jail, now he’s compelled you to sign something against your will and over your objection - now you’ve got him under a Title 42 lawsuit.
If the policeman won’t voluntarily violate your rights, how can you help him a bit, ask him some questions. You’ve got a judge who’s nasty, doesn’t understand rights or law, help him a little bit. With a policeman, “If I don’t sign this ticket what are you going to do to me?” He says, “I’m going to take you to jail.” You can reply, “Don’t get upset, let me see if I understand your position, you’re going to do something terrible and awful to me if I don’t sign this ticket, right?”
Most times you won’t file a suit, but when encountering a very truculent officer or judge prone to violating people’s rights a lawsuit may be worthwhile. When one or two such suits are filed in your county, you’ll find that your public servants will stop being public officials and revert back to being public servants again.
How to Write to the Man in the Black Robe
Start with “Bob, greetings”…that way he knows you are talking to him as a man, one man to another. “I hear that you’re going to be the civil hearing officer presiding over this matter that’s going to come before you on May the 19th.”
That’s how you stylize your letter to a person in a black robe. Because when you move it over to the common law side of the court your only judge is going to be the jury. You will explain to him the rules of the court. It’s going to be your court.