Ninth Circuit Court To Decide Monday On Appeal Rights In Richard I Fine Contempt Case

Los Angeles, CA The Full Disclosure Network is releasing an eight minute telephone interview with prominent Anti-Trust attorney Richard I Fine featuring his reaction to the news that a two-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will consider his request for a Certificate of Appealability on Monday, August 10, 2009 in San Francisco.

CIVIL CONTEMPT OF COURT
Ninth Circuit Judge Andrew J. Kleinfeld and Milan Smith will decide on Monday whether to approve or deny Fine's request to issue a Certificate of Appealability . Without such an action Fine would be unable to appeal the U.S. Central District Court action that denied his Writ of Habeas Corpus request for immediate release from jail. He has been sentenced indefinitely for civil contempt of Court, for an undetermined period of time, without a trial, bail or date set for hearing or release.

NINTH CIRCUIT PROCEDURE
According to David Madden, Assistant Executive for Court Information at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Certificate requires approval from only one Judge and considerations are not conducted in public. If the panel should issue the Certificate of Appealability, Fine's Emergency Motion would then move on to a "briefing" stage or, if denied, Fine could then request a "Reconsideration". No matter what happens, time and options are running out for Mr. Fine who has been held in the L.A. County Central Men's Jail, in solitary coercive confinement, for over five months. Strangely, no opposition to his Writ of Habeas Corpus, has been filed.

TRANSCRIPT 08-06-09 Full Disclosure telephone interview with Richard I. Fine:

FINE: I think it's about time for the Court to consider the request for the Certificate of Appealability. That Emergency request was filed, if I remember correctly, somewhere in the vicinity of about July 3rd (2009) And, so- they're well over a month behind schedule. Normally something like that should have been considered way back early in July. The Certificate of Appealability is the very first thing that they consider with respect to an appeal, and the only reason that the 9th Circuit has to consider it is because of the fact that the District Court refused to issue a Certificate of Appealability even though we have numerous constitutional issues in the case, and even though no one opposed my Writ of Habeas Corpus at the District Court level.
DUTTON: Is it unusual for the District Court to refuse or deny a Certificate of Appealability? That sounds so ominous that they would be denying you your right to appeal.
FINE: Oh, it -- it's highly unusual. I mean it's basically not only unusual, it's outrageous. And particularly in this case where the Sheriff didn't even answer the Writ of Habeas Corpus and thereby broke the law, and in addition to that, the -- Superior Court, didn't oppose any of the grounds in the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, and also didn't certify why I'm in jail. So the action in the District Court is just totally and completely outrageous.
DUTTON: Will you explain to us, when the Judge John F. Walters denied the Certificate of Appealability he also made the notation "With Prejudice," what does that mean?
FINE: Well, that basically means that we can't refile the Writ of Habeas Corpus in his court. And we can't really ask him to reconsider. So it meant that the case automatically goes right up to the, 9th Circuit. The way that the procedure works in the District Court is that the minute that we file a Notice of Appeal, the case is up into the 9th Circuit and the District Court has to either grant or deny a Certificate of Appealability. If the District Court grants the Certificate of Appealability, there is no question that the appeal goes forward in the 9th Circuit. If the District Court denies the Certificate of Appealability and denying With Prejudice, that means that automatically the 9th Circuit considers the Certificate of Appealability. And what Judge Walter did was he denied the Certificate of Appealability and he checked the box saying that there was no constitutional right that was (inaudible), which is totally and completely, beyond belief given the fact that there are about a number, there's the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment constitutional rights that were violated in this case. So, I mean it's -- but we know from looking at what Judge Walter did, we know that he never even read the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. So the denial of the Certificate of Appealability is consistent with, everything he did in this case.
DUTTON: Well, I guess that, the next step then is to wait for Monday to see what happens with the two judge panel in San Francisco and, then go from there.
FINE: That's correct. And hopefully, I would expect that they would grant the Certificate of Appealability and then, and then God willing they would immediately take up the Motion, to go to be released, and maybe even be correct enough to go forward and just overturn the case right then and there because given this particular case, this is such an unusual case that it's very seldom that you find a Writ of Habeas Corpus with no opposition.
DUTTON: And I would like for our viewers' sake for you to explain why this is an emergency motion on your part.
FINE: Well, it's an emergency motion on my part for a number of reasons. -- The first reason being that with no opposition to the Writ, there is no reason for me to have been (recording). With no opposition to the Writ, to have been in jail in the first place. The second thing that we have is the physical emergency that is taking place and that's since I've been in jail, I've contracted a staph infection, I've contracted back pains, and I have swelling of my legs, my feet and my ankles. So we've got the entire physical things that have happened that is due to having been in jail. And the third thing that we have happening is we have the financial problems that are taking place which is the, uh, the loss of the house, which can be coming up because of the fact that having been in jail, I've been denied my Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to earn a living. And, actually through that, we have the situation of possibility losing the house. So unless I get out of jail and can get out there and start earning some money, you know, I'm suffering physical hardship and suffering financial hardship.
FINE: I'm now going into the sixth month of being unlawfully incarcerated.
DUTTON: How is your family taking all of this?
FINE: Well, needless to say my family are not happy campers about this. But, you know, there's one thing that I can say about my family, and that is that nothing is going to break our family. When this judge (inaudible) is going to try and coerce me into telling him about my assets so that he can go on with his unlawful activity and he figured he was going to break me and my family. That is not going to happen. You know, nothing will break our family unit. We will, end up prevailing and justice will prevail, and 38 million Californians are going to get their judicial system back before we will give in to this particular judge, or to any of the judges who received immunity for their criminal actions. We're going to get our judicial system back, and these judges are going to be gone whether they resign or whether we vote them out of office. But they will be gone and we will get our judicial system back.

Comments to date: 16. This is page 1 of 2.


Fefe Forde L.A.	Posted: 07:26 pm [PST] on February 22 2010
Please provide updates on Richard Fine. I feel for his cause. The judges in L.A. are corrupt! The media or someone needs to bring this out more.

Truth Seeker Location unknown	Posted: 09:25 am [PST] on January 24 2010
@ Courtwatch. Please work with Leslie Dutton on a report NAMING NAMES. We deserve the right to know the names of these Judges. All 2000 of them. We deserve the right to know, from top to bottom, who came up with the sudden SBX211 "Bill/Law" to make these payments legal. Every one of them. It's extremely interesting that Marin County and San Diego County are now undergoing "audits" for Court Corruption, but Los Angeles, which is where THIS part of the corruption started has been left out. Los Angeles is the center of the septic system of Court Corruption, and the law makers as well. (Some who's spouses are Judges) It appears that our Government is just really a large mafia. Why is Madoff in jail if these Judges aren't? They have done the exact same thing, but it's worse. He was at least caught, and stopped. There is no stopping the Government. Leslie, please do a report, naming names of all the ones involved from top to bottom. Who drafted SBX 211, who supported it, and who is getting the payments. All 2000 names.

courtwatch Marin County	Posted: 08:05 pm [PST] on January 21 2010
For those of you who are interested in the Richard Fine issues, the statistics about the judicial perks he was complaining about can be found in the Judicial Council's December 15, 2009 report entitled "Historical Analysis of Disparities in Judicial Benefits". The key statistics are in attachment D, pages D-9 to D-14. In 2008, CA counties paid a total of $30,388,289 in "supplemental judicial benefits" to their judges, above and beyond their state salaries and benefits.$23,482,932 of this total $30.3 million was paid by Los Angeles County, to Los Angeles County judges. The report does not state how much each judge receives per capita, but it states that Los Angeles County has 436 judges-- that comes out to each LA judge receiving approximately $53,860 from LA County. Richard Fine challenged the LA judges, stating that those receiving these hefty benefits from LA County should not be hearing cases involving LA County. He also claimed the payments were illegal. In 2008, a court of appeal agreed that the payments were illegal.(Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 630.) According to the Judicial Council report (page 4), in response to the Sturgeon case, "the judicial branch sought legislation, Senate Bill X2 11". The legislation, commonly known as SBX 211, was pushed through on an emergency basis. It allows judges to continue to receive these extra benefits, and also provides RETROACTIVE IMMUNITY from prosecution to counties paying the benefits, and judges receiving the benefits. In other words, CA judges were taking the county benefits in violation of the law. When this was made public, the CA judiciary got emergency legislation passed, allowing them to continue to receive their benefits (while courts are being closed due to "budget constraints"), and also allowing them to escape prosecution. Meanwhile, the lawyer who had been challenging the LA bench for taking these hefty illegal perks for years, was disbarred and sent to jail, where he has been held in solitary confinement for almost a year. The legality of SBX 211 has subsequently been challenged -- something the language of the legislation itself anticipated. If you think this report on judicial benefits is interesting, check out the report issued the same day (12/15/09), by the CA Judicial Council's "Commission on Impartial Courts" recommending that judges be allowed to take campaign contributions from those who appear before them (although 75% of the public, and over 25% of judges, believe such contributions affect the outcome of cases), and also recommending AGAINST the implementation of Judicial Performance Evaluations--which consultants to the Judicial Council have repeatedly,strongly recommended.

Michael K Los Angeles	Posted: 11:57 pm [PST] on January 04 2010
Dear Myrra Yeg, you are so right. and Mr. Fine, you are right, I met judge Yaffe, he is a real son of a bitch and very dishonest. Funny in my case was agaisnt the county and he dismissed my suit because the proof of service title differ from the first page headings. It is a well known mafia and the corruption in the Los Angeles Superior Court has been going for many years now. We must stop those minutia Pharos. The Family Law court is even worse. They Judges there take bribes from attorneys and put those financially unprivileged under unsubstantiated restraining for years, while depriving parents from their children, until the children grow up. You are so right that the beneficiaries of court corruption are most often white professional, male and female judges are especially Ashkenazi Jews. I thought the same why they are so hateful and lacking compassion and conscious for other people and often compared them to Hitler. I then wonder, if they were not the one who instigated such hate from enemies of the Jews. I am Jewish and ashamed they call themselves Jewish. In fact they are not Jewish, they only have Jewish names. Yes, one can understand why some minority of those bastard, instigated hate in Europe, and how their pathetic and selfish ethnosociopathy helped to Hitler's emergence. I truly believe this to be true. Not that I justified the SOB for killing 6 million of our people, but he should have chosen those pathetic arrogant who caused him to hate Jews in the first place. In fact many of those judges in Los Angeles act are Jewish and act as little Hitlers on their own. Be Strong Mr. Fine, because you are a fine and dignified person. In Hebrew we say "Hazak ve Hemtzch." Don't give up to them. We have a voice together.

Pam Bennett San Diego, California	Posted: 01:04 pm [PST] on November 25 2009
Please expect documents in the mail about next week regarding a victim of a Central District of California (Orange County) conviction ring. The Defendant, James Davis Bennett, Ninth Circuit Appeal 06-50580, has been denied all of his Civil and Constitutional rights. He has proven, with Court documents, that he is innocent. Although there is no legal basis for Defendant Bennett's continued incarceration, Chief Judge Alex Kozsinski continues to hold him hostage. We hope you will publish his story and help an innocent man to come home to his family.

Myrra Yeg	Posted: 07:47 am [PST] on September 16 2009
At least someone has a courage to stand up to the mafia-kind corruption in the Superior Court. The Family Law court too takes bribes from attorneys who willing to pay to obtain custody benefits for their clients. Guess what? beneficiaries of court corruption are usually white professional or other well to do male especially ashkenazik Jews. One can understand why they instigated hate in Europe, and how their ethnosociopathy helped to Hitler's emergence.

joebanana so. cal	Posted: 10:48 am [PST] on September 14 2009
Oh......there you are.(yawn) Only problem is, where it say's "enter code on picture", there's no picture. Thanx

Full Disclosure Los Angeles	Posted: 09:00 pm [PST] on September 06 2009
Joe Banana, why don't you subscribe to our newsletter that gives you updates? Explore the website and where you find "subscribe" go ahead and sign up, it is free. Joe, you sleepy head, wake up!

joebanana so. cal	Posted: 08:36 pm [PST] on September 06 2009
Why isn't Fulldisclosure replying to my e-mails about recent updates on Mr. Fine, are you guy's on vacation or something?

joebanana so. cal	Posted: 08:35 pm [PST] on September 06 2009
So, nothing's happened since Aug. 10th, no updates, nothing?