No. 21-5951

Steven B. Baumgarten v. Erika Evans

Lower Court: Washington
Docketed: 2021-10-13
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process excessive-punishment judicial-disqualification mental-illness mental-illness-discrimination perjury-allegations stalking stalking-evidence standing
Latest Conference: 2022-03-18 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1) Is the U.S. Constitution and federal case law violated when a trial court
erred in finding substantial evidence of two or more distinct, individual, noncontinuous occurrences of stalking when there was only one demonstrable
instance of random contact which can be proved and disproved there was
any other?

2) Was my US constitutional right to disqualify a judge violated 29 U.S.
Code §455 Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge to
disqualify a judge

3) What does the Constitution say about perjury? What is the public interest
in all kinds of people taken down by accusations when false accusations
false statement after statement which all 3 Ms. Levias, Ms. Evans, Ms.
Sylvester all-knowing made proven false statements omissions and
dishonesty to obtain that some can be proved?

4) Do US officials United States important to know the public interest of
mental illness discrimination and the fact we are victim of crimes and often
victims of false reporting are almost 50,000,000 mentally ill and 11,400,000
seriously mentally ill in United States

5) Does the Public Interest of systematic prejudice and selective prosecution
against the mentally ill which cops ' courts city attorneys happen to me in
this case and pattern by the cops, judges and these exact city attorneys
against the mentally ill who are guilty of allowing not just me but the
mentally ill in general to be victims of assaults (David Jones threatening me
for decade before and after the night he chased me injured my brain) for
instance.

6) Is it a NATIONAL PUBLIC INTEREST MARIJAUNA LAWS the
CONFLICT OF INTEREST between FEDERAL and STATE LAWS and
serious HEALTH HAZARDS MENTAL and PHYSICAL associated with
MARIJUANA that affects the mentally ill and all people in general.

7) Was the systematic prejudice against mentally ill in the court system a
greater national public interest that has affected the mentally ill since the
medieval times on a United States National level the green light to perjure in
writing also in one false statement after another a factor in more than what
just happened to me many other mentally ill people experienced and people
in general have been victims of false accusations.

8) Was the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution of the United States
violated regarding excessive punishment. They know that I don't know who
she is other than by name, which is why they put her on the phone in court.
I have a brain injury and do not remember her the ESP checking question for
Ms. Levias about other receptionists and later the 2nd ESP checking
question of what happened remember don 't remember Ms. Evans nor Ms.
Levias not any of 8 female city attorneys in court. They put Ms.Evans on the
phone because they know don 't know who she is other lady thought was her
figured out was Ms. Sylvester a little better because she was saying all this
false stuff. Was the 1000 foot permanent order in this not so big town till
day I die EXCESSIVE INAPPROPRIATE to 1 random contact for 35
seconds maximum as proved where moved to the front left of the bus to be
considerate to see Brent and a little mindless dribble (basketball) in park
when don't know who she is as they know when have Brain injury and
already forgetting stuff and risk of dementia.

9) PUBLIC INTEREST Was my constant unavoidable 2nd hand Marijuana
exposure and lack of sleep and concussion that caused my delirious
exhausted constant fantasizing forgetfulness that reop

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Is the U.S. Constitution and federal case law violated when a trial court erred in finding substantial evidence of two or more distinct, individual, noncontinuous occurrences of stalking when there was only one demonstrable instance of random contact

Docket Entries

2022-03-21
Rehearing DENIED.
2022-02-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/18/2022.
2022-02-04
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-06-05
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 12, 2021)

Attorneys

Steve Baumgarten
Steve Baumgarten — Petitioner