• Embed Doc
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
-1-
123456789
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

RICHARD I. FINE
Prisoner ID # 1824367
c/o Men\u2019s Central Jail
441 Bauchet Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

Notice cannot be given for this Ex Parte Application due to the fact that the Court has neither granted the writ \u201cforthwith\u201d nor issued an order to show cause \u201cforthwith\u201d to Respondents to \u201cshow cause why the writ should not be granted\u201d as required by 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 2243. Without the Court doing the acts required by \u00a7.2243, Petitioner does not have any person to whom to give the notice, as no respondent has \u201cappeared\u201d in the case.

RICHARD I. FINE,
Petitioner,
vs.

U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF
CALIFORNIA, et al,

Respondents.
Case No. CV09-07943 JFW (CW)

EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE AND FOR
IMMEDIATE GRANT OF WRIT OF
HABEAS CORPUS

-2-
123456789
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

To best of Petitioner\u2019s knowledge, the following are the addresses of the Respondents and their attorneys, based upon information in case no. CV09- 1914 JFW (CW):

Respondent
Attorney
U.S. District Court

Unknown
312 North Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Sheriff Leroy D. Baca
Lawrence, Beach, Allen & Choi, PC
c/o Men\u2019s Central Jail
110 West Broadway, Suite 1200
441 Bauchet Street
Glendale, CA 91210
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Tel: (818) 545-1925
Fax: (818) 545-1937
Email:af ontana@lbaclaw.com

LA Superior Court and
Benton, Orr, Duval & Buckingham
Judge David P. Yaffe
39 North California Street
111 Hill Street
P.O. Box 1178
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Ventura, CA 93002-1178
Tel: (805) 648-5111
Email:kmccor mick@bentonor r .com
Petitioner (\u201cFine\u201d) incorporates the Petition filed herein by reference as if
set forth in full.
The grounds for the Ex Parte Application are as follows:
1.
The Petition was filed on October 30, 2009;
2.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. \u00a7 2243, the Court must either grant the Petition \u201cforthwith\u201d or order the Respondents \u201cforthwith\u201d to show cause why the writ should not be granted;

-3-
123456789
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3.

The Court has violated \u00a7 2243 as of the present time as it has not \u201cforthwith\u201d granted the writ nor ordered the respondents to show cause why the writ should not be granted;

4.
The Court has a history of violating \u00a7 2243 in the exact manner and did the
exact same thing in case no. CV09-1914 JFW (CW);
5.
The aforementioned violation of \u00a7 2243 is one of the bases for the present
Petition;
6.

Even if the Court could cure the violation of \u00a7 2243, the Court would have to grant the writ as the Respondents cannot show cause why the writ should not be granted;

7.

The Petition is clear on its face that the Respondents knew that Petitioner could not be \u201ccoercively incarcerated\u201d for more than five days under CCP \u00a7 1218(a) and the case of In Re Farr (cited in the Petition);

8.
The Petition is clear on its face that Respondents knew that no March 18,
2008 order existed;
9.

The Petition is clear on its face that Respondents knew that Petitioner was criminally charged with a Business & Professions Code \u00a7 6126 violation and that such charge was not dismissed;

10.The Petition is clear on its face that Respondents knew that Judge Yaffe stated
that there was no court order violated relating to the charge of practicing without
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...