No. 19-8811

Michael Lee Crane v. David Shinn, Director, Arizona Department of Corrections, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-06-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: citizenship-status civil-rights constitutional-citizen constitutional-rights due-process federal-jurisdiction habeas-corpus procedural-rules standing statutory-citizen
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)

1.a. - Presume that MrCrane is a stATuroRy citizer born M and doniciled in Federal Territory(see 8 u.s.c s1401 anwher he specifically bas claimed that he is not?

1.b. presume that Mr, Crane is Not a Constitutional 8. citizen born inand doviciled in the states of the Union see l4th. . Amerdmert when he has specificly made his solitical status D. and "eivil status Known in advanced and has explained this/His position ii great and explicit detail? beleiving that the following but not imites to the following case 2 laWs and sTATUTEs :28 U.S.c 8peS3(c.(2, SlaikVMeDaie, 529 U.s 473 484 (2000) and G0n2alez v. Thale5, S65 U.s. 13, 140-41 . A.R.S.13-702, . AR,S. 13-801,A.RS,13-1901, AB,S.13-1902, A.R.S, 13-1904, 01 Rule32 for Post Conviction Releif -is law for Mr Crane,who is a . "national " state national.", and Constitutional but not statutory . Citizen?

1.disctont of its scope of authority by ishng 28 uis.cs Le Deliberaty consFUse POLITICAL JURISDICTION with LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION witH the case laWs ard statudES .used to rule against Mr. crane's Habeas Corpus Petition?

2. By WhAT aUthORITy dOES U.S: COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH V Arizona procedures statutes, codes, case law "slack v Mclaniel,sd u.s. 23 ( ( to supercede r overrule the suprene Court's decision Hale v. Herkle, 2ol us. 43 (19ob, which is the case law that Mr. Crare, used in his Habeas Corpus Petition Ground 2 as a Means to help defend .his rights protected by the u.s.c.A-Anendmerts

z.a. By what authoriTy dOeS the US. SOURT OF APPEALS. FOR THE NINTHI o ctRcuI have that allows it to allow the STAte to violate Mr.Crare's . rights protected by the us.C. Admerdmert4?



and4?

8.5. By what authority does the court/state/ have to Force and

2. 6. By wnat autherity des the STATE and the U.s, couRT oF the use of the code in their its paper work, contracts and plea agreenest?

sI In connection with the Comman Law andor u.s.C.A, Section, 6.parograph 2 and/us. v.Anderson,6o FSupp 649 (0.c. Wash.1945 I by what authority does the us. couRt of AepeAls ath circuit /STATE a fo a writ of Habeas Corpus?

2. not acknowledge or Follow Federal Bules of Civil Procedure Rule & (b) (6)

3. in regerds

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit erred in denying Mr. Crane's habeas corpus petition

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-08-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 24, 2020)

Attorneys

Michael Lee Crane
Michael Lee Crane — Petitioner