My question involves civil rights in the State of: CALIFORNIA
July 15, 2009 I did present the court with a MOTION TO VACATE A VOID CRIMINAL JUDGMENT. I asked if you had read the motion; you did not indicate that you had. Rather you responded, in what I have come to experience with you in all of our court room experiences -- an angry and demeaning manner – and with no due process, “It is untimely and I am incarcerating you!” I replied, “Void Judgments never die.[ Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194].” I was then shackled and taken off to county jail and incarcerated for forty-four  days. (On that very night in the jail I did almost die due to an overdose of medication given by the guards, and had to be transported to JFK Hospital where I was kept for four days.)
Rulings made in violation of Due Process are void.
August 12, 2009 an oral motion was made to reconsider Defendant’s motion and it was denied, again as “untimely.”
Either JUDGE T. DOUGLASS, you do not know the law – incompetence, or, you ignored the law – unconscionable!
CCP Section 473 permits a trial court, on noticed motion, to set aside void judgments and orders. Courts also possess inherent power to grant such relief. Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194. A void act or judgment may be attacked in any forum, state or federal, where its validity may be drawn in issue. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714 [24 L. Ed. 565 ] (1878).
(Burns v. Municipal Court (1961) 195 Cal.App.2d 596, 599.) “The most important is jurisdiction of the subject matter. ‘No person can be punished for a public offense, except upon a legal conviction in a court having jurisdiction thereof.’ (P.C. 681.) In other words, the court in a criminal trial, like the court in a civil proceeding, must have jurisdiction of the subject matter” (4 Witkin & Epstein, Cal. Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) Jurisdiction and Venue, § 1, p. 86, citing, inter alia, Burns v. Municipal Court, supra, 195 Cal.App.2d 596, 599.)
When a judge does not follow the law, i.e., they are a trespasser of the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges’ orders are void, of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974); Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980 ); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821); When judges act when they do not have jurisdiction to act, or they enforce a void order (an order issued by a judge without jurisdiction), they become trespassers of the law, and are engaged in treason The Court in Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962)
You have lost your immunity: When a judge does not follow the law, i.e. ,they are a trespasser of the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that "when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." [Emphasis supplied in original].
I shall be writing a motion to have your ruling against me dismissed, and again presenting my Motion to Dismiss the Void Criminal Case in the near future.
THEREFORE I am making this thirty  day demand for $150,000.