You are on page 1of 7

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

David James Carlson

Plaintiff-Appellant

Case No. 16cv765SRNBRT


Appeal No. 162793

vs.

Defendants-Appellees
County of Ramsey,
State of Minnesota
County of Anoka,
State of Minnesota

AFFIDAVIT OF APPELLANT
DAVID J. CARLSON

Independent School District No. 624 (ISD #624)


White Bear Lake, Minnesota
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------COMES NOW Appellant David J. Carlson, who, after being duly sworn on Oath,
states and affirms:

1.

Appellant has not seen or spoken with his children since 11 July, 2016, in

violation of the standing temporary order for visitation for Appellant and his minor
children in Ramsey County Family Court.
2.

Since Appellants last filing with this Honorable Court, further

circumstances have developed which necessitate being brought to the immediate attention
of this court.
3.

Proceedings continue in both Ramsey County Family Court (Defendant

No. 1) and Anoka County District Court (Defendant No. 2).


4.

Petitioner filed a Motion for Continuance in Anoka County District Court

on 30 November, 2016, which was denied by Anoka County District Judge Kristin C.
Larsen on 2 December, 2016.
5.

Petitioner filed a Motion to Reconsider on 9 December, 2016 with Anoka

County District Court, and provided two (2) additional medical letters directly speaking
to Petitioners medical status and ability to perform as Pro Se at the 12 December, 2016
hearing in Anoka County.
6.

On 9 December, 2016 at approximately 16:28 CST, Petitioner received a

phone call from the Anoka County Clerks Office informing Petitioner that his Motion to
Reconsider was verbally rejected by Anoka County District Judge Thomas M.
Fitzpatrick.
7.

Petitioner asked the clerk if he would be given a written order to appeal, or

if any order was required to which the clerk replied its up to the Judge if they want to
issue a written order.

8.

Petitioner filed for an Emergency Writ of Prohibition halting the actions of

Anoka County District Court at approximately 08:15 CST on 12 December, 2016 with
the Minnesota Court of Appeals.
9.

Later on during the morning of 12 December, 2016 Petitioner was

informed by Minnesota Court of Appeals counsel that the Chief Judge of the Minnesota
Court of Appeals had received and reviewed Petitioners Emergency Writ, and denied the
Writ on procedural grounds, and the Anoka County District Court actions would
commence at 09:00 on 12 December, 2016 as scheduled, and Petitioner had a right to
appeal any decision made therein.
10.

The scheduled Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) hearing in Anoka

County District Court did commence, and a 50-year HRO was amended and issued
against Petitioner, including the minor children effective from 12 December, 2016 until
12 December, 2066 to include Petitioners former spouse, Mrs. Krista A. Dickenson, and
both minor children by Anoka County District Court Judge Sharon L. Hall.
11.

Judge Hall issued this order despite Petitioner submitting four (4) letters

from Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical doctors and professionals going into
great depth in support of Petitioners repeated requests to reschedule the district court
matter so that he could attend and represent himself adequately.
12.

Judge Hall commenced court without Mr. Carlson having an opportunity

to defend himself and present evidence and testimony in the matter.


13.

Mrs. Dickenson has again requested that the Anoka County District Court

findings and orders be implemented immediately and permanently reflected in the


custodial orders issued in Ramsey County Family Court.

14.

The nexus of involvement and deliberative processes and procedures

being used against Mr. Carlson between Defendant No. 1 and Defendant No. 2
simultaneously in equal yet separate jurisdictions have become too great a burden for Mr.
Carlson to continue to represent himself Pro Se, and the interests of justice demand that
this Honorable Court intervene and provide relief for Petitioner and his children.
15.

Despite all these facts, submissions, and direct evidence, at the 12

December, 2016 hearing in Anoka County District Court, Judge Hall for all practical
interpretations eviscerated Mr. Carlsons parental rights as to his children, effective
immediately, for the period of fifty years, until 12 December, 2066.
16.

Mr. Carlson would like to inform this Honorable Court that in the year of

2066, he would be 85 years of age, and his minor children the young age of 60 years of
age.
17.

Since the Appellants Reply Brief was submitted, this case has grown even

more complicated and toxic, as set forth herein, with increasingly more and more severe
consequences for Mr. Carlson and his twin daughters.
18.

In direct violation of Minnesota Statutes, Mr. Carlson has been given no

information regarding the childrens recent medical treatment or hospitalizations, and has
been given no information about their schooling and extra-curricular activities; nor has he
been given any telephone or other electronic access to his children, again in direct
violation of Minnesota law. Yet these violations continue to go unaddressed by Judge
Millenacker and the Ramsey County Family Court.
19.

In addition, now given the recent actions by Defendant No. 2, Mr.

Carlsons currently non-existent parental rights stand to be permanently terminated until

the year 2066 in the upcoming Ramsey County Family Court hearing before Judge
Robyn A. Millenacker, a Judge Petitioner has sought removal for all the way to the
Minnesota Supreme Court.
20.

With each passing week, this case becomes more complicated, and more

of Mr. Carlsons and his childrens rights continue to be violated. The record now in
both Ramsey County Family Court and Anoka County District Court clearly shows that
Mr. Carlson and his children have no redress of their grievances, nor redress of their
rights violations, within the Minnesota Court System.
21.

This is outrageously exemplified in the ruling from Anoka County District

Court essentially barring any contact between Mr. Carlson and his children from age nine
(9) until 60 years of age in 2066.
22.

Therefore, it is now more compelling than ever for this Honorable Court

to grant expedited hearing to Appellant, to grant oral argument to Appellant, and to grant
relief to the Appellant and his children as previously prayed for.
23.

With each passing day, more of Mr. Carlsons constitutional and civil

rights are being wholly trampled and obliterated, and without help from this Honorable
Court, it is painfully evident the Carlson family will continue to be treated amongst the
very worst our nation can possibly treat; to-wit: our returning veterans and their families.
24.

The interests of equity, fairness, and justice demand this court hear this

case and reestablish law and order in the Carlson matters.


25.

Mr. Carlson strongly asserts he is being retaliated against by two (2)

defendants in this matter, Ramsey County (Defendant No. 1) and Anoka County
(Defendant No. 2) and that there is a clear and incontrovertible conflict of interest in both

of these defendants continuing to hear matters critical to the life and well-being of Mr.
Carlson, a litigant with federal actions against the defendants.
26.

Mr. Carlson respectfully asks this court to provide balance and fairness to

the matter, and order a change of venue and consolidation of Mr. Carlsons Ramsey
County and Anoka County matters in another court.
27.

Mr. Carlson, for the second consecutive Christmas, had no contact with

his children, and his family is additionally being kept from a relationship with the
children. The law is being disregarded in so many ways in this case that this Honorable
Court must step in and help correct this horrendous miscarriage of justice.

Subscribed and sworn to before me this _____


day of December, 2016.

Notary Public in and for the State of Minnesota

Dated: 30 December, 2016

Respectfully Submitted,

Signature of Party

________________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on 30 December, 2016, the Affidavit of Appellant David J. Carlson
was filed with the Clerk of the Court by the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system.
The following participants in the case are registered on CM/ECF users, and will
be served by the appellate CM/ECF System:
Mr. Scott Thomas Anderson
RUPP & ANDERSON
SUITE 1200
527 Marquette Avenue, S.
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Ms. Kristin C. Nierengarten
RUPP & ANDERSON
SUITE 2800
333 S. Seventh Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Mr. Andrew T. Jackola
ANOKA COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
Suite 720 2100 Third Avenue
Anoka, MN 55303-0000
Mr. Robert B. Roche
RAMSEY COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
Suite 4500
121 Seventh Place, E.
Saint Paul, MN 55101
Mr. Richard Sletten
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
District of Minnesota
202 U.S. Courthouse
300 S. Fourth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55415-0000