No. 24-5634

Camille A. Abboud v. Iryna Abboud

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2024-09-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (3)IFP
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-rights due-process judicial-misconduct parental-rights self-representation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity ERISA DueProcess CriminalProcedure
Latest Conference: 2025-03-21 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

Where Florida 7th (Seventh) Judicial Circuit Judges AND the U.S. Middle District of Florida REPEATEDLY VIOLATED the Petitioner 's the US & FL Constitutional, Civil and Fathers ' Rights, MAINLY in the Order " Order Determining Respondent to Be Vexatious Litigant AND Ordering Co unset ' issued on November 13th. 2023 . Instinctively Prejudicial & Intentionally VIOLATING the Petitioner 's 6th Amendment as of February 2nd, 2023, the Pleadings filed by the Petitioner "For Orders - Social Investigation - Retrieval of Tools of the Trade & Related Items & Documents - THREE prior Court Orders were IGNORED, filed July 26t,,, 2023 & October 29th, 2023, Motions "For the Recusal of Judges" filed November 14th, 2023, AND Petitioner 's Notice/Petition "Objecting to the Destruction of ALL Evidence since August 30th, 2021 - Date of the Initial Assault ", filed June 16th, 2023 & November 17th, 2023 AND Notice/Petition "Objecting to The Pre-Trial Stipulation on November 21st, 2023. Then, the U.S. Middle District of Florida - Jacksonville - Division, on August 28th, 2024. "Dismissed With Prejudice " the Amended Complaint, as Ordered, on August 26th, 2023, again VIOLATING the Plaintiff's Civil, Constitutional and Parenting Rights. The Second Amended Complaint filed against the State of Florida, St. Johns County, the St. Johns Sheriff, the St. Johns State Attorney, the Florida Department of Children & Families (DCF) and the 7th Judicial Circuit Judges for Intentionally & Maliciously VIOLATING the Plaintiff 's Civil, Constitutional & Parenting Rights among other Federal Protection Acts. In 1975, the U.S. Supreme Court established, in Faretta v. California, that Defendants have a Constitutional Right to Self-Representation, implied in the 6th Amendment, and that Judges MUST ALLOW Self-Representation if Defendant are Competent to Participate in Criminal Proceedings. Again, in 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the Right of Self-Representation is NOT limited to Criminal Cases but also applies to Civil Cases in Indiana v. Edwards, declining an invitation to overrule Faretta, and stated again that the Constitution Guarantees (Criminal and/or Civil) Defendants the Opportunity to Exercise Their Constitutional Rights, mainly the US Constitution ' Sixth Amendment for Self-Representation as the Petitioner is a highly educated and Competent US Citizen. When the Petitioner "Objected " to the stated above ORDERS in open-recorded Court, invoking HIS Right for Self-Representation & "exposing" the Conspiracy of his prejudiced - accusers (ALL Defendants) mainly after Eight (8) Florida Attorneys had failed to even appeal one Prejudicial Order, at a cost of Over $150.000 (Raiding HIS Retirement Accounts), the Highly Educated Competent, US Citizen, himself, filed SIX 16) Florida 5DCA Appeals. FIVE (5) Florida Supreme Court Appeals. Pro Se Civil & Constitutional Federal Claims (ALL involved in this Prejudicial Conspiracy) in Florida 's US Middle District Unconstitutionally & Willfully . Maliciously

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a retired Army Colonel's constitutional and parental rights were systematically violated by Florida state and federal judges through prejudicial orders and dismissals

Docket Entries

2025-03-24
Rehearing DENIED.
2025-02-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/21/2025.
2025-02-07
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2025-01-27
Petition DENIED.
2025-01-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/24/2025.
2024-12-10
Petitioner complied with order of November 25, 2024.
2024-11-25
The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 16, 2024, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
2024-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2024.
2024-10-31
Waiver of right of respondents Ralph J. Larizza, Shevaun Harris, Judge Joan Anthony and Judge Alexander R. Christine, Jr. to respond filed.
2024-09-17
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 25, 2024)

Attorneys

Camille A. Abboud
Camille A. Abboud — Petitioner
Ralph J. Larizza, Shevaun Harris, Judge Joan Anthony and Judge Alexander R. Christine, Jr.
Daniel PalardyFlorida Office of the Attorney General, Respondent