No. 23-5930

Brent Douglas Cole v. R. D. Keyes, Warden

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2023-11-01
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: appeal civil-rights constitutional-privileges due-process federal-jurisdiction habeas-corpus judicial-bias jurisdiction standing subject-matter-jurisdiction writ-ad-prosequendum
Latest Conference: 2024-03-01 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

1) The USCA 7th Cir. issued an order of non-involvement for the U.S. Attorney from Wisconsin, and held my objection to be a motion, DENIED IT INSTEAD OF ORDERING THE U.S. ATTORNEY FROM CALIFORNIA, WHO HAS BEEN LITIGATING THIS CAUSE SINCE OCT, 2014 TO RESPOND, THUS RENDERING IT AN ADVERSARIAL PROCEEDING WITH NO ADVERSARY, AND THE Judges as "both judge and party, arbiter and advocate in the same CAUSE." AND VIOLATING THE PRINCIPLE "THAT A JUDGE MUST NECESSARILY BE FREE FROM ALL BIAS AND PARTIALITY." INLAND STEEL Co. V. NLRB, 109 F.2d 9, 20, 1940 U.S. U.S. App. LEXIS 4879 (CA 7th Cir.). To "cause to cease for a time" or "fail to meet obligations" is TO 'SUSPEND', WHICH WAS THE EFFECT OF THE COURT'S COURSE OF ACTION. I HAVE URGED THAT THERE IS NO SHOWING OF JURISDICTION ON THE FACE OF THE RECORD AND THAT THE TRIAL COURT WANTONLY CIRCUMVENTED THE NECESSARY PROCESS FOR REMOVING A PRISONER TO A JURISDICTION NOT THE SAME, THE WRIT AD PROSEQUENDUM, SUSPENDING THE PRIVILEGE 9/18/2014, violating Art I, §9, cl.2, and the Northwest Ord., Art.2 (1787). Did said Court deny the Appellant due process of law, and/or appeal, and/or Art I, §9, cl.2, U.S. Const., and/or said compact? Restated: Was the USDC Eastern Dist. of Calif, without subject MATTER JURISDICTION AND/OR APPELLANT DIVESTED OF HIS ENTITLEMENTS?

2) The Appellant was convicted of assault per 18 USC §111(a) & (b), AFTER BEING ACQUITTED ON STATE CHARGES FOR THE SAME INCIDENT FOR SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME CHARGES, ASSAULT ON AN OFFICER, WHICH OCCURRED WITHIN THE EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF CALIFORNIA. I WAS MORTALLY WOUNDED, SHOT FIVE (5) TIMES WITHIN TWELVE SECONDS OF OFFICERS DRAWING THEIR GUNS ON ME FIRST AND FIRING SEVENTEEN (17) BULLETS AT ME. IT IS A MATTER OF RECORD THAT MR. HARDIN DREW HIS GUN ON ME WHILE MINE WAS STILL HOLSTERED IN ITS EXTERNAL HOLSTER. I HAD MADE NO THREATS OR PROVOCATIONS. DISTRICT ATTORNEY CLIFFORD Newell "cleared the involved officers in the Brent Cole shooting INCIDENT OF ANY CRIMINAL LIABILITY. ... AND HAS FILED CRIMINAL CHARGES against Brent Cole . ..." Sergeant Matt Whiting ID#: 12888, 10/30/2014. There was no judicial hearing or witness testimony. Did the panel judges libel the appellant in their ORDER on 6/28/23?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Question not identified

Docket Entries

2024-03-04
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2024-02-14
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2024.
2024-01-26
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2024-01-08
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2023-12-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-10-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 1, 2023)

Attorneys

Brent D. Cole
Brent Douglas Cole — Petitioner
R. D. Keyes, Warden
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent