No. 20-8277

Richard Wesley Bryan v. Jeffrey Uttecht, Warden

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-06-10
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: constitutional-rights due-process first-amendment First-Amendment-right,civil-rights,due-process,sta habeas-corpus judicial-misconduct jurisdiction Question-not-identified
Latest Conference: 2021-12-03 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1) has the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT (USDC) decision conflict with this aggrieved party's fundamental First Amendment Right?

2) has the NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS (COA) sanctioned supported, the USDC's unjustifiable decision?

3) did either the USDC or the COA "Resolve " any of the plainly pleaded "justiciable " (Article III.) "claim?s " or allegation's?

4) did the USDC & the COA sanction/support the STATE COURT'S Clerk's & Budge's willful misconduct & willful malice?

5) has the USDC & COA willfully departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceeding's, i.e., the willful violat ion of the Specific/Statutory-[ ]- Provisions for entertaining an-[Original ]-Habeas Corpus-Action?

6) does-[ any]-Federal Court "Lack.Jurisdiction " over a "matter " (brought to their attention in good-faith, by Affidavit; and declared under penalty of perjury) that plainly involves the willful depravation of fundamental, inalienable, rights by STATE "Bad-Actor 's," specifically, but not limited to this aggrieved party's fundamental First Amendment Right To Redress?

7) has the USDC & COA violated, "Model Penal Code §2.06?

B) would jurists of reason conclude that the USDC or the COA "Resolved " any of this aggrieved party's Art.III., "Claim!s "?

9) would jurists of reason conclude that this aggrieved party's Constitutional issue's are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further?

10) doss this aggrieved party have a fundamental right to an "equitable.remedy " in an Art.III., "Court of Equity"?

11) does the " fundamental -rmiscarriagerrof-* justice -.exception " apply in this aggrieved party 1s-[Original ]-state , Habeas Corpus?

12) does this "supreme.Court ." sic, i.e., an Article III., Court of Equity; as opposed to the SUPREME .COURT-QF-THE.UNITED-STATES , SIC, an executive/administrative "COURT" (28 U.S.C. §451); have "equity .jurisdiction " to "Review " this aggrieved party's, State and Federal, "Original " Habeas Corpus-Action 's-de- nave ?

13) does this aggrieved party have a fundamental right to "Equal Protection " of the Supreme . "Uaw.of.the.Land ?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

First-Amendment-right,civil-rights,due-process,standing,civil-procedure,habeas-corpus

Docket Entries

2021-12-06
Rehearing DENIED.
2021-11-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/3/2021.
2021-10-28
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 12, 2021)

Attorneys

Richard W. Bryan
Richard Wesley Bryan — Petitioner