OH. MY. GOD.

I will NEVER understand why certian memebers of a message board are so extremely worried about picking fights with people that they will hijack another poster's thread in order to argue about a typo. Especially when they seem to be quite incapable of readin the text of a thread as it is written rather then any implication they wish to put on it... (as will be evidenced in the rest of the post since you are still doing it).

In Illinois, residential bugulayr is considered a "violent offense" regardless of whether or not any violnce was used or intended. If this is the same in Caluifonira it may elimiate your confusion, other then that of why they would make such a ridicoulousd etmerinatiop.

So, when you attacked, our proper response, in your opinion, was to have said something along the lines of "you should read the original post more closely before you slam members of the board"?

That was said often.
No and no it was not.

Law uses precise language to express precise thought. Again, it is not our job to figure out what you really meant. Everyone makes spelling errors and they are usually forgiven.
Actaully legal language does not express any thoughts, and this is not a courtroom last I checked.

Exchanging "friend" for "husband" had nothing to do with a typographical error.
That's nice. What does my mentioning FireFox not ctaching typos if the typo turns out to be another existanct word have to do with that?

And you were told that a far more efficient use of the time spent calling is to contain those calls to the state in which the crime occurred and the law applies.
Quote it without editing the text (since it didn't happen). Also there is really no such thing as a "more efficent use of 30 seconds", since the loss of 30 seconds doesn't usually hurt anyone. Also, the "alternative use" OF this 30 seconds is likley to be spent doing some other unrelated activity - for example, reading a novel - since a human obvioulsy would not be calling someplace in Alabama to ask if they know of any similar organizations in California unelss they were NOT already aware of such possible organizations and therefore were NOT able to call them otherwise.

The rest was just your spouting, again, with the nugget of knowledge you knew and trying to make it relevent to the conversation. When all you have is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. I recommend you expand your toolbox... or keep your answers contained to Alabama law.
I don't recall any other human here giving any ideas. Obviously, my idea is a decent contribution to the conversation, since it contains SOMETHING that
MAY help instead of
a) a hijacked thread in order to pick a fight with another human for no valid reason at all or
b) stating that the poster beleives there is nothing she can do, which is a valid reply but is of course not as helpful as saying there MIGHT be something that MIGHT help you.

I have not seen a single other poster with a suggestion so far. If one turns up with a better suggestion or an outline of what exactly one would do to proceed, then their post will make more sense if it actually happens.

Note the name of the forum.
I'm sorry I was not aware that representatives from the Alabama Equal Justice Initaiative had posted in this thread, nor was I aware that your above post is considered legal advice regardless of the fact that it contains no legal information more or less advice.

Lawyers and those providing legal counsel or aid will restrict themselves to the laws that they are both trained in and most familiar.
I was not aware that you were acquainted with every single lawyer that has ever existed in the history of America. I was also not aware that I had metnioend anything abuot contacting lawyers... since, you know, I hadn't.

Laws are not only possibly different from state to state, they ARE different from state to state and, further, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction
NO RLY?

Different areas of the country, from a legal standpoint, may as well be on another planet in terms of the law.
Or, they might be very similar, which is why you would say, "THISIS WHAT WE DO HERE. YOU SHOULD RESERACH THIS AND SEE IF IT APPLIES IN YOUR AREA. IF IT DOESN'T, YOU MIGHT COME ACROSS SOMETHING THAT DOES." instead of, "THIS IS WHAT WE DO HERE. YOU SHOULD DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING EVEN THOUGH IT WILL NOT BE LEGAL AND WILL PROBABALY GET YOU NOTED AS INSANE SINCE ALL THE DOCUMENTS I AM GIVING YOU HAVE OUT OWN ARE'AS NAME RIGHT ON THEM."

Apparently you are incapable of comphrending such a thing, but, that really has nothing to do with me or my posts.

Why not ask the person to contact a legal aid society in France, Italy or Iran? After all, they, too, may know someone in California that can help.
Of course they might. They might also have some knowledge of the laws, since laws in most developed and Euro-American countries are pretty similar in a general form. For example, the law which requires certian drivers to pledge their motor vehicle to the state and pay a tax on it exists in Austrlia, Britian, America, and Canada at the least. AND it exists in EVERY STATE OR PROVIDENCE within each of these countries. AND it can be fought in MOSTLY the same way in every one of these countries when it is illegally applied to people who are not subject to it.

But since you said "legal aid society", that probablay would not work anyway, sicne a "legal aid society" will probabaly only be aware of other "legal aid societies".

Where a look through their local phone book has a much better chance of success.
I have never seen a phone book that specifically describes exactly what an agency is deisgned to do. The entry for "Walgreens" is usually under "drug stores," but it does not say that "We are a highly customer-service rotiended drug store who sells things at expensive prices. We have our own brand of product which we believe is superious to the non-store brands we sell. We have the floowing aisles in our store: _______, ______, [etc]. We do not accept food stamps but we do accept the cash portion of a food stamp card. Credit card purchases do not require signatures unless they are over $25. The names of our employyes are _________, _________, [etc.]." I have failed to EVER see anything about an organization in a phone boko besides
-name
-category, sometimes
-a small ad with no information in it, sometimes.

Offering false hope is not a kindness. It is cruelty.
Okay. Thas has nothing to do with this topic, whatsoever, nor is it always true, but okay.

I was talking about you and your responses.
Well one might think so but then you read what you said there and realize it doesn't really apply in that light.

First, because that is what the OP actually said
Actually, she didn't say that at all. She did not specifically state it either way. She probablay thought ti was rather obvious, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Please provide California statute and/or case law that states that a lawyer can ignore statutory appeal limits.
Why? Lawyers who ignore appeals limits and/or find some way around them are unlikely to be following the same statues they are avoiding!

That is absolutely true.

A drug offense is not eligible for third strike.

Burglary to support the habit is.
Okay. A drug offense isn't eligible. A burglualry is. But that does NOT mean that there is "more to the story". It means that EITHER there is "more to the story OR the the courts have done exactly what she said they did, and done so illegally.

But you were sending the OP to Alabama.

See how that works.
Probablay the same way that reading ideas from a lawyer in California who has never practiced in Illinois got my last ticket dismissed after I did the relevant research to see what the "similar laws" said in Illinois exactly as I am saying she should do if they give her any similar info?

OP, I would hesitate following the legal advice of anyone whose only reference is wikipedia.
Okay. But since there is no one that has posted in this thread who's "only legal reference is Wikipedia," that's a rather odd thing to say. Of course if there was someone here who's "only legal refernce is Iwkipedia," they would obviously not be able to say that, "The Wikipedia decribes this as being xxxx, but the entry is wrong....", sionce they would have no place to know that it was wrong from....

Again, please state how such a writ could help in this case.
That's what the contact is for, duh.....

I cannot even follow your thought here.
Then why bother? Why not read the 8 pages long description of it that will say the same thign I jsut said concisely/ Or, you know, just ignore it....

Three strikes laws have been upheld as NOT being cruel and unusual.
Good for "three strikes law". I wasn't aware that this particular human in question on this particular case with this exact cases exact specifics had gone before the Supreme Court abuot his three cases which appaarently did not involve any violence or $600,000 robberies.

What else have you gotten from your perusal of wikipedia?
I don't know what happens in your fictional world so I am unable to answer that question. Only you can answer a question based on flase allgations that you, yourself, have made.