Evidence Discrepancy

[quincy]

Oh, joy! We probably get to wait another 3 pages for an answer again!

Yes. I probably shouldn’t have asked FreeMauMau a question. Haha.

 

[FreeMauMau]

It is not a “gimmick” to report an attorney to the State Bar for failing to represent you properly or to use “ineffective assistance of counsel” as grounds for a new trial.

The problem now arises, however, that you say you had THREE paid attorneys - and it stretches credulity that all three failed to represent you properly. It seems far more likely that the evidence you now question and find lacking was simply not enough to change the outcome of the trial. Prosecutors apparently had evidence enough to support the conviction.

For what were you charged and convicted? What was your sentence?

The Feds do not have a State Bar for failing to represent properly.

The entire case was around this WhatsApp chat. The trial lasted 3 hours and they talked about the WhatsApp chat for 3 hours The Judge found me guilty in the midst of a motion for judgment of Acquittal ( I brought this up to my 3rd attorney after he didn't spot it, he added it to my Certiorari to the Supreme Court. I'm guessing since the first two never complained about it, then there was no error to correct as the district court did not have a chance to correct it), well after cert.was denied I figured lets have the district court hear this error through a motion for new trial based on a guilty verdict in the midst of a motion for judgment of acquittal. The district court denied it and it is in the Court of Appeals right now, the Government was supposed to reply at the end of July but has asked for an extension to respond. I wonder how they can rebut clear transcript excerpts showing this error

I was in the middle of writing up all of the errors one night of what I thought were worth mentioning to the district court to consider prior to my 2255 and I wrote up a 4th motion for new trial based on the phone device being submitted as evidence belonging to a different person not involved in the WhatsApp chats, not to mention that this phone number was omitted by the government in order to confuse the audience and make everyone think that the device phone number belonged to he WhatsApp chat phone number. The government was supposed to respond as ordered by the Court by August 1st, they have not responded.( I found the police interviews where it is discussed that the owner of the device can manipulate and answer the other phone numbers) My attorney told me that we cannot reference police interviews or deposition anyone in Federal court( which I now know is not true)

I went to trial and was found not guilty in one charge but guilty in two others. The not guilty verdict came 2 months after the original trial and guilty verdicts.

I've had 3 paid attorneys, the first one I should of vetted thoroughly as he only wanted more money for useless acts, ex. let's get a investigator so they can go to the islands and investigate this for you, or let's pay this mental health expert so they can say you have a mental disability. Just some off the wall claims, which just lead me to shut down all together as I seen the set up.

The second attorney agreed with me and placed the interpretation of the laws as I asked but the appellate court said there was sufficient evidence so the verdict I'll stand. Even though they did not disagree with the interpretation I brought forth. Unfortunately, this attorney became a public defendant for the feds and could no longer represent m during the appeal or cert. (Convenient right)

Wait and I told her about some sentencing enhancements not meeting the definition given in the notes section, and the appellate court agreed but affirmed on other conduct that the district court have found me not guilty on. This was the acquitted conduct that the Feds are allowed to punish you on, but that will be changing this year because now the sentencing commission says that's unconstitutional to punish someone for conduct that a person is NOT guilty on, if the public only knew.

The 3rd attorney (I was forced to get because the 2nd became a federal Public defender) agreed about moving forth with the misinterpretation of the laws at issue, but again,since it was not brought up at the district court level there was no error to correct(I imagine) He did add that the guilty verdict came in the middle of a motion for judgment of Acquittal, but the SCOTUS did not hear the case.

Well is time to pay up some other attorney to just browse through the docket and not drive into my case. I wouldn't mind using the same attorney from my cert. But I have contacted a few other attorneys and within 5 minutes all they say is there isn't sufficient evidence, your attorney should of never agreed to a bench trial, blah blah. Same two standard routes to take, which they tell everyone.

To me it seems that they don't want to admit the court does not want to admit their wrongs, my charges and sentence is what I am disputing and should have no bearing but I am leaning toward that somehow my charges and sentence do influence or manipulates the way the attorneys will move forth.

 

[quincy]

Attorneys are licensed to practice law. You file a complaint against an attorney in the state where s/he is licensed.

For what were you charged and convicted?

 

[Taxing Matters]

Again, I filed amotion for new trial Pro Se and is moving. This is something that no attorney or even you told me was possible, 33 months after the trial ended.

Has the motion actually been granted? There are very few grounds on which a court would overturn the verdict and set a new trial almost 3 years after the trial concluded.

The attorney I speak of give the same two standard options that seems you will also advice on "inneffective assistance of counsel" and "there was not enough evidence". Which to me is all gimmick.

Why do you think those are "gimmicks"? If the trial record supports it both of those are grounds for an appeal, and if the appeal is in favor that would typically mean the guilty verdict is reversed and no new trial would be possible. You'd be done with all of it at that point.

 

[FreeMauMau]

Has the motion actually been granted? There are very few grounds on which a court would overturn the verdict and set a new trial almost 3 years after the trial concluded.

I am waiting on the Governments response, interesting enough I would think whatever response they give they will put their foot in their mouth. Regardless, I sent a reply motion for their non response be construed as a non opposition to my motion per local rules.


Why do you think those are "gimmicks"? If the trial record supports it both of those are grounds for an appeal, and if the appeal is in favor that would typically mean the guilty verdict is reversed and no new trial would be possible. You'd be done with all of it at that point.
[/QUOTE]
Gimmicks because sufficiency of the evidence, is viewed in favor to the government or verdict, so all you need is a scintilla of evidence to support a guilty verdict, regardless of whatever other factors may have contributed to such faulty decision.

 

[quincy]

What were the three charges filed against you over these WhatsApp chats? What were the two charges where you were found guilty? What sentence was imposed?

Apparently the Court found that enough relevant evidence was introduced to adequately support the prosecutor’s conclusion that you were guilty of two of the three charges filed against you. Any argument made and/or evidence introduced by your defense attorney(s) was not enough to overcome what the prosecution presented.

 

[FreeMauMau]

What were the three charges filed against you over these WhatsApp chats? What were the two charges where you were found guilty? What sentence was imposed?

Apparently the Court found that enough relevant evidence was introduced to adequately support the prosecutor’s conclusion that you were guilty of two of the three charges filed against you. Any argument made and/or evidence introduced by your defense attorney(s) was not enough to overcome what the prosecution presented.

As I said, the Court found me guilty while the Court was assessing a Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, so they had to view all of the evidence presented by the government favorable to the government, my defense did not have to legally present any arguments in a motion for judgment of acquittal.

The District Judge's ruling is thus plainly one of law, not of fact; it could only exonerate, not convict, the defendant.but that's exactly what happened in my case. My attorney said nothing about charges two and three he only said there insufficient evidence for count 1.

THE DEFENDANT: I'd rather not testify.
THE COURT: Okay. Let's have then -- and you renew your motion as to 2 and 3 asw ell at the end of the case?
MR. Defense: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Let's have brief argument, if you want to present any, on Counts 2 and 3. You can argue Count 1, too, if you choose.(D.E.59, pg. 142,8-9)

If there were any doubts as to which standard of review was at play, soon, thereafter while initiating the argument, the government takes time to remind the Court that we are not at the Reasonable Doubt Standard posture:

MR. Prosecutor: With respect to Counts 2 and 3, your Honor, again,.... I think it isp retty clear, I would say beyond a reasonable doubt, but again we are not at that posture,...” (D.E. 59, pg 148,13-14)


After hearing nothing from defense counsel on counts 2 and 3 and viewing the evidence in favor of the Government, the district court concluded:

THE COURT: “All right. I am going to reserve ruling on Count 1. On Count 2 and Count 3, I find the Defendant guilty…”(D.E. 59, pg. 151,152)

 

[quincy]

As I said, the Court found me guilty while the Court was assessing a Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, so they had to view all of the evidence presented by the government favorable to the government, my defense did not have to legally present any arguments in a motion for judgment of acquittal.

The District Judge's ruling is thus plainly one of law, not of fact; it could only exonerate, not convict, the defendant.but that's exactly what happened in my case. My attorney said nothing about charges two and three he only said there insufficient evidence for count 1.

THE DEFENDANT: I'd rather not testify.
THE COURT: Okay. Let's have then -- and you renew your motion as to 2 and 3 asw ell at the end of the case?
MR. Defense: Yes, your Honor.
THE COURT: Let's have brief argument, if you want to present any, on Counts 2 and 3. You can argue Count 1, too, if you choose.(D.E.59, pg. 142,8-9)

If there were any doubts as to which standard of review was at play, soon, thereafter while initiating the argument, the government takes time to remind the Court that we are not at the Reasonable Doubt Standard posture:

MR. Prosecutor: With respect to Counts 2 and 3, your Honor, again,.... I think it isp retty clear, I would say beyond a reasonable doubt, but again we are not at that posture,...” (D.E. 59, pg 148,13-14)


After hearing nothing from defense counsel on counts 2 and 3 and viewing the evidence in favor of the Government, the district court concluded:

THE COURT: “All right. I am going to reserve ruling on Count 1. On Count 2 and Count 3, I find the Defendant guilty…”(D.E. 59, pg. 151,152)

Guilty of what?

 

[FreeMauMau]

Thats exactly what i am explaining.!!! It is a hypothetical guilty verdict as it never occurred in the way that due process requires for a guilty finding.

Why do you focus on the charge as opposed as to what transpired? Does one's charge dictate whether due process should be followed or not? ( I really want to know why you're stuck on the charges)

 

[FreeMauMau]

The most an appellate court can conclude is that a jury would surely have found petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt—not that the jury’s actual finding of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt would surely not have been different absent the constitutional error. That is not enough. See Yates, supra, at 413–414 (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment). The Sixth Amendment requires more than appellate speculation about a hypothetical jury’s action, or else directed verdicts for the State would be sustainable on appeal; it requires an actual jury finding of guilty. See Bollenbach v. United States, 326 U. S. 607, 614 (1946).

So how could the appellate court even review how the erroneous guilty verdict? It doesn't it assumes all procedures were followed and the guilty verdict was flawless. But what if that guilty verdict was atained through a motion for judgment of Acquittal as in my case?

It is a hypothetical guilty verdict as it never properly occurred.

 

[quincy]

Thats exactly what i am explaining.!!! It is a hypothetical guilty verdict as it never occurred in the way that due process requires for a guilty finding.

Why do you focus on the charge as opposed as to what transpired? Does one's charge dictate whether due process should be followed or not? ( I really want to know why you're stuck on the charges)

A judge found you guilty on two out of three charges filed against you, despite your contention that he couldn’t have found you guilty. The facts as you have presented them here says that the judge did exactly that.

I understand you believe that evidence and testimony should not have been allowed, yet they were - without any apparent objection or argument from your attorney(s). I understand you believe that there has been a great miscarriage of justice, hence your appeal.

If you refuse to say with what you were charged and found guilty, that is your right. I think knowing this would be helpful but it’s up to you.

Good luck.

 

[FreeMauMau]

A judge found you guilty on two out of three charges filed against you, despite your contention that he couldn’t have found you guilty. The facts as you have presented them here says that the judge did exactly that.

I understand you believe that evidence and testimony should not have been allowed, yet they were - without any apparent objection or argument from your attorney(s). I understand you believe that there has been a great miscarriage of justice, hence your appeal.

If you refuse to say with what you were charged and found guilty, that is your right. I think knowing this would be helpful but it’s up to you.

Good luck.

I'm not contending that the judge didn't find me guilty, he did, but in an erroneous manner. Unless you're advising me that guilty findings instead of denials in a motion for judgment of Acquittal is a regular occurrence in your courtrooms.

The inquiry, in other words, is not whether, in a trial that occurred without the error, a guilty verdict would surely have been rendered, but whether the guilty verdict actually rendered in this trial was surely unattributable to the error. That must be so, because to hypothesize a guilty verdict that was never in fact rendered—no matter how inescapable the findings to support that verdict might be—would violate the jury-trial guarantee.

The evidence and testimony that's further support. How can you get to a guilty verdict with the wrong device? Only if you view the evidence in favor to the government.