No. 07-3386IN THEAPPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOISFIRST DISTRICTPEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS)Appeal from the Circuit Court)of Cook County, IllinoisPlaintiff-Appellee))-vs.-)No. 05 CR 1271801)LINDA L. SHELTON))Honorable Joseph KazmierskiDefendant-Appellant)Judge Presiding
RESPONSE TO PEOPLE’S MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT TOFILE A COMPLETE RECORD
NOW COMES, Linda Shelton, Defendant, Pro Se, who respectfully replies to people’sabove motion as follows:Trial Court on December 3, 2007
ordered
the Circuit Court of Cook County (“CCCC”)Court Reporter to prepare, compile, and file a copy of the record of proceedings with the TrialCourt Clerk, as well as prepare a second copy for Defendant without cost. Defendant had boughtthe portion of the record of proceedings up to and including trial, with borrowed money, inAugust 2007 to use to prepare for writing the post-trial motions, but the CCCC Court Reporter failed to honor her promise to have these transcripts ready by October 10, 2007. Therefore, the partial transcripts were retrieved from the CCCC Court Reporter, by standby counsel, whileDefendant was wrongfully imprisoned, tortured and denied appropriate medical care as anactually innocent, but [il]legally convicted person. The Trial Court Clerk had made an error inordering the transcripts December 3, 2007 and failed to include post trial sentencing hearingdates. This Court remedied that error by ordering the CCCC Court Reporter to prepare anddeliver to Defendant the post-trial transcripts, which she did in 2008 & 2009. Then Defendant1
carefully compiled, lettered and numbered the transcripts and as she read them made personalnotes. She then wrote her Appellant’s Brief in June 2009 and filed it, fully expecting that a fullcompiled, lettered and numbered set would be filed by the CCCC Court Reporter with the CCCCClerk
, as ordered by the Trial Court
.The CCCC Court Reporter to this day has failed to file the record of proceedings with theTrial Court, thereby violating Defendant’s Constitutional rights under the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment. Despite numerous requests for and receipt of the Trial Court order, the CCCC Court Reporter refuses to file a copy of record of proceedingswith the Trial Court Clerk. This refusal to and failure to file these documents is
prima facie
evidence of intentional contempt of this Trial Court order.This Court denied Defendant’s motion for stay of sentence pending appeal in 2008, thusdenying her due process rights to appeal under the Fourteenth Amendment, as she has nowserved the complete wrongful sentence including statutory supervised release as ordered by theTrial Court, in violation of the United States Supreme Court holdings in Cunningham v.California, 127 S. Ct. 856 (2007), and Illinois statutes, 730 ILCS 5/5-6-1(a). Failure to permit aDefendant to appeal prior to expiration of sentence, while withholding a stay of sentence pendingappeal, essentially moots appeal and denies rights under the due process clause of the FourteenthAmendment, as held by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. It also violates the prompt justiceclause of the Constitution.On July 16, 2009 Trial Court heard Defendant’s motion for rule to show cause againstCCCC Court Reporter for failure to prepare, compile, and file the record of proceedings with theCCCC Clerk. Judge Kazmierski (Trial Court) stated he cannot rule on this motion as jurisdictionwas lost to the Illinois Appellate Court. Therefore, it is incumbent on this Court to enforce his2
orders.Defendant has previously filed with this Court numerous motions to compel courtreporters to prepare record of proceedings and file them with the Circuit Court Clerk or in thealternative issue a rule to show cause or even order the court reporter to pay for the Defendant tocopy and file this record of proceedings
. She will not repeat here her numerous and exhaustive pleadings. This Court knows it is their Constitutional duty, as well as duty under United StatesSupreme Court holdings to enforce the Trial Court’s orders for a
FREE
copy of record of proceedings to be filed, as the authorities below supporting this have already been presented tothis Court in previous pleadings. This Court has willfully failed to do so. This Court is therebyintentionally impeding Defendant’s appeal in violation of law. Accordingly, this Court is incontempt of the Constitution and the United States Supreme Court.The United States Supreme Court ruled that under the due process and equal protectionclauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, an indigent defendant isentitled to a free transcript of proceedings for direct appeal in Illinois, where statutes or lawrequires such. It is common knowledge that Supreme Court Rules have the power of law.For Appellate review indigent defendants are entitled to a record of proceedings.“Destitute defendants must be afforded as adequate appellate review as defendants whohave money to buy transcripts.” Griffin v. Illinois 351 U.S. 12, 19 (1956)Illinois Supreme Court Rule 607 mandates that if a defendant is indigent, that the courtorders two sets of transcripts of the proceedings, one set for Defendant and one set to be de-
1
Il App Crt denied Motion to Compel CCCC Court Reporter to file transcripts on August 26, 2008, November 13,2008, February 5, 2009 and June 2009, and denied Motion for CCCC Court Reporter to pay for Defendant to copyher set of self-compiled, self-numbered and written on with personal notes (to be blacked out after filing) transcriptson February 5, 2009, as well as failed to comment on issue of who will pay for copying Defendant’s self-compiledand written on copy of the record of proceedings as well as who will black out Defendant’s personal notes on thetranscripts, which are confidential.
3
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Response to State Motion to Deny Indigent Defendant Transcripts for Appeal - Illinois Appellate Court 2009
Response to States Attorneys motion to compel indigent defendant to pay for her own transcripts, which is a violation of U.S. Supreme Court holding in Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12, 19, (1956).
3.4K
Reads
5
Readcasts
1
Embed Views
More From This User
Notes
Load more
