You are on page 1of 5

Case 1:03-cr-00131-CC Document 296

Filed 05/02/11 Page 1 of 5

FILED IN CLERK'S OFFICE
U.S.D.C. IItlal1ll

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

MAY - 22011
JAMES N. HATTfN CLERK

By:

SCOTI HINTZ, Petitioner

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

* *
*

* * *

*

.

~~

No.1 :03-CR-131-CC

MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE AND TO SUPPORT DOC.#294 FILING Petitioner has been on appeal since 2004, Petitioner has previously sought leave to file Pro Se with this Court. This Court has approved Petitioner's desire to file Pro Se. This was most recently evidenced by this Court's acceptance of Petitioner' s Habeas Appeal (doc. #253). The filing of this Habeas Appeal was suggested by the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals after they found appointed counsel (who was appointed by a Judge with personal, professional and financial conflicts of interest in this case) waived some of Petitioner'S direct appeal rights (evidence shows this was done against the very specific directions of this Petitioner). Petitioner had requested the recusal of the judge and had requested the Court either replace counselor allow Petitioner to proceed Pro Se on direct appeal rather than be "forced" to use counsel with serious conflict of interests. To date, tbere has NEVER been a bearing on these issues. The docket of this case incorrectly states this case has been closed since August 17,2006. The appeals of this case started in 2004, are still open, and are awaiting hearings. This Court has also becn informed individuals associated with the Gerova-Net Five companies were also involved in convincing this Petitioner into entering into the involuntary and unknowing plea of

Page 1 of 4

5'1f

Case 1:03-cr-00131-CC Document 296

Filed 05/02/11 Page 2 of 5

this case and they have also been involved in decisions and actions leading to the subject matter of this case (see doc. #'s 281, 284, and 294). Since the last filing in this case, there have been even more troubling events that further evidence the need for the relief sought in doc. #294.
AFFIDAVIT

I, Scott Hintz, state the following are true to the best of my knowledge, and under the penalty of petjury, pursuant to 28 USC Section 1746: A. On April 22, 2010 Robert Willison stated his and Mike Garone's attorney, Jerry Froelich, was observing Good Friday and would not be available to represent them because Mr. Froelich was observing this religious holiday. To accommodate Mr. Froelich's observance of the religious holiday, the warrant hearing was reset to April 29, 2011. Mike Garone and Robert Willison, before and after this criminal warrant hearing, took actions against me and others to clearly intimidate and discourage testimony against their alleged illegal activity; Willison and Garone also communicated with sufficient specificity to show they believed I would be incarcerated on April 25, 2011. B. On April 29, 201l, various witness heard attorney Jerry Froelich state he had discussed this case (apparently exparte as there is no record evidence of any such conversations in this case) with Judge(s) involved with this case and he stated that I had already been found guilty and that everything has already been set up to send me back to jail. C. I was told about some of Mr. Froelich's statements and came into the courtroom to hear Mr. Froelich's statements and ensure he would not have exparte communications
Page 2 of 4

SIf

Case 1:03-cr-00131-CC Document 296

Filed 05/02/11 Page 3 of 5

with the state judge, I overheard Mr, Froelich make false statements to the state udge, When I corrected attorney Jerry Froelich about his false statements, and informed Mr. Froelich that the allegations his clients have made against me are false and would still have to be determined by trial, Mr, Froelich told me he has already talked to Judge Cooper and that Judge Cooper had already determined I would "go back to jail" at my hearing before Judge Cooper and that the only thing left to do was to determine only a sentence, Others were present to overhear Mr. Froelich's statements to me, to his clients, and to others.

D. Mr. Jerry Froelich became agitated when I corrected him about his clearly false
statements and began raising his voice so much so that a court deputy came over to him. He asked the warrant hearings be held as far in the future as possible.

I

requested the hearing be held immediately because Mr, Froelich, both his clients, my witnesses and evidence, and I were all present for the hearing. The state judge

compromised and reset the warrant hearing for a second time to give Mr, Froelich further time to prepare for the first warrant hearing. E. Immediately after Jerry Froelich's April 29, 2011 eourt outbursts, he was questioned by a local CBS reporter. Mr. Froelich's questionable behavior and apparent anger issues arc also visible in CBS Atlanta's April 29, 2011 news story entitled, "Attorney Gets Physical Trying To Stop Tough Questions." The video is at the following link: http://www.ebsatlantacomllocalvideo/index.html?grabnetworks video id=4669743 F. Jerry Froelich showed a similar, but not as extreme, outburst when I intended to call him as a witness for his personal a2Jw~ns and statements during the April 13,
Page30f4

2011

Sit

Case 1:03-cr-00131-CC Document 296

Filed 05/02/11 Page 4 of 5

hearing of this case, His outbursts can be heard in the background of the court recording for this hearing. G. On April 29, 2011, I was informed by USPO Lisa Moore that Jerry Froelich had just contacted her. The statements he made were false statements and I informed Ms. Moore that Mr. Froelich was lying and was acting very questionably. H. On April 29, 2011, I was specifically informed Mr, Froelich's questionable actions and his false statements to United States Govemement employees were made very specifically to interfere with the civil RICO claims I have brought against his clients. I state the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge this 30th day of April 2011.

Scott Hintz
CONCIJUSION

For all the above reasons and those that will be testified andlor presented in Court-if necessary, this Court should: (A) Take judicial notice of all the items above, (B) Correct the docket to reflect the appeal of the underlying case is still open, and (C) Immediately grant the relief requested in doc.#294 filing of this case. Respectfully submitted this 30th day of April 20 II.

-a; -­
Scott Hmtz, Pro Se Petitioner VIA CERTIFIED MAIL #7009 1680000045552509
page40f4

SH

Case 1:03-cr-00131-CC Document 296

Filed 05/02/11 Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Sentt Hintz, certify I have served upon:

AUSA Leslie J. Abrams 600 U.S. Courthouse 75 Spring Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 A true copy of the foregoing filing this 30th day of April 2011 by sending same in a sealed envelope with sufficient 1st class postage for delivery. Respectfully,

&e­