one of us? open carry at dui checkpoint

This is why I made no arguments in court before the judge. I'll argue on paper before the appellate court, thank you very much.

Hope this isn't too much of a thread hijack, but I didn't feel it was worthy of a new post.

Anywho, a few of you know that whenever I see a speed trap I pull over and hold a 'police ahead' sign. I've been to a couple of the checkpoints with signs as well. So recently, I came across a deal where I could get pro printed signs for $5 shipped, so I had a couple made. Enjoy.

Nice signs hope to see you at a checkpoint!

DON`T TREAD ON ME said:

Nice signs hope to see you at a checkpoint!

Click to expand...

Definitely, sorry I couldn't make it to the last one. I'll let you all know if I come across some cheap banners again, too.

On appeal, the conviction was affirmed. Man, I love this place!

Yard Sale said:

On appeal, the conviction was affirmed. Man, I love this place!

Click to expand...

I'm sorry to hear that.TBG

Open carry related:

their discovery of a loaded weapon within his reach gave them reasonable suspicion to order him out of his vehicle and probable cause to place him under arrest.

Click to expand...

You can't make this up!

WOW they didn't even try to justify it with "officer safety" just straight to "reasonable suspicion".....I guess they haven't heard of Florida v JL.....there is no firearms exception to the fourth amendment.

What's your next step YardSale?

If you go into wiznet, you will see two different criminal appeals, one cost nothing... I would appeal to the Nevada Supreme court. They dismissed mine initially but I petitioned for a rehearing and it is now pending! Since it costs you nothing, I would ditch the mouthpiece (lawyer) and get it reviewed.

update

My appeal is docketed in the supreme court. I requested and received some of the muni court recordings from the district court, which had them in their possession for the appeal. They did not have the first arraignment or first trial recordings despite the muni court's earlier insistence they had sent everything up to the district court.

Yesterday I went to the muni court and again requested the missing recordings and again was denied. I explained I was making an oral request for public records as per NRS chapter 239. The clerk went to the judge and came back and said the judge said NRS 239 didn't apply to his court. Ha, just the like fourth amendment didn't apply to his court! He also said I may have no more 'informal conversations' with the court staff and everything must be handled on motions. Derr, I'm done with his court as a party to an action (until much later). I'm just some schmoe asking for public records. Time to ask a higher court for a writ of mandamus, a la Donrey v. Bradshaw.

While I was there they served me with the judge's new sentencing order: $1137 in fines/fees, 45 days suspended, and 14 weeks of anger management. They haven't received notice that the supreme court accepted my notice of appeal and the judge refused to stay his sentence.

With some difficulty, I converted the propietary recordings of the second arraignment (~5 minutes) and second trial (~6 hours) to a common audio format. It's going to take a lot of time to edit the perjuring cop testimony and other juicy bits for posting on YouTube.

Yard, I think I know why they want the anger management. By the time this is all said and done, they are afraid you are gonna be pi$$ed off.

Is organic law like organic fertilizer? You know, spread the poo around.

Lasjayhawk said:

Yard, I think I know why they want the anger management. By the time this is all said and done, they are afraid you are gonna be pi$$ed off.

Is organic law like organic fertilizer? You know, spread the poo around.

Click to expand...

Regarding the "poo" --- polish it all you want it is still only polished POO!

And they say we have a criminal justice system in this country. Well, I guess there is a system, they don't say it WORKS.

Supreme court dismissed the appeal. This appears to be over.

Remember, there's new case law in Washoe County: open carry is probable cause for arrest. For what exactly the judge didn't say, possibly obstructing an officer, possibly possession of a firearm while intoxicated.

Oh man. I'm sorry Yard Sale.

The "system" is truly broken beyond repair.

It really scares me to think of the only option left in most of this country for those of us who demand our rights be recognized by agents of The State.

DON'T TREAD ON ME... We are two Nevada residents who have records of police misconduct at roadblocks. Would you care to leverage this into shutting down roadblocks statewide?

NHTSA and NDOT/OTS grant agreements require agencies to follow all public laws. We have evidence they don't. We, and the city attorneys and city managers who would be defending them from lawsuits know there is no leash short enough for the officers who who work their roadblocks and it's inevitable they will be in trouble again. Sparks has temporarily stopped its roadblocks; Reno is conducting roadblocks with changes, and Vegas doesn't seem to have slowed down one bit. All it will take is a cease and desist letter from an attorney to the OTS and participating agencies outlining their past transgressions and our evidence.

Yard Sale said:

My appeal is docketed in the supreme court.

Click to expand...

Docketed or not, don't be surprised if the Supremes fail to take any action... other than to say they don't have jurisdiction over your appeal.

District Courts “have final appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in Justices Courts and such other inferior tribunals as may be established by law."

The Constitution of the State of Nevada, Article 6, Section 6.1.

usmcmustang said:

Docketed or not, don't be surprised if the Supremes fail to take any action... other than to say they don't have jurisdiction over your appeal.

District Courts “have final appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in Justices Courts and such other inferior tribunals as may be established by law."

The Constitution of the State of Nevada, Article 6, Section 6.1.

Click to expand...

Yes and I let it go without a petition for a rehearing en banc.

Retrial: judge allows recording, prosecutor objects, judge disallows video recording

^ above is a link to YouTube

God forbid the public activity of a trial were to be exposed to.....the public.

Absolutely ridiculous that the prosecutor got away with this.