at The District Court of the united States

For Hawaii

 

THE AGENCY IN THIS CASE

PLAINTIFF case #:___________________

 

v.

 

Your name

Defendant-in-error

 

This document is drafted with the direction of ___________for the purpose of securing and noticing the above parties the matters illustrated herein and no other, this _____day of ______, 2019.

 

___________ requests that this court afford ______ unfettered assistance of counsel for his/her defense as provided for the Constitution for the united States and the Constitution of Hawaii affording his/her assistance of his/her own choice in prosecuting defenses to allegations propounded against the peace and dignity of his/her lawful use of the public way in the locomotion of his/her person and property not subject to the licensure and therefore the regulation complained of or its penalties.

 

Such "assistance of unfettered Counsel" is to have no allegiance or duty to any sovereign organization, system or individual other than _____ and the rights secured in this proposed act of peaceable assembly for the redress of grievance to the party claiming injury.

 

As i am a wo/man exercising a secured right, not subject to diminishment by rule or custom, i am not proceeding nor do i intend to proceed in propria persona or as "pro se" or other representative capacity nor do i contemplate that i am competent to proceed or appear without assistance of Counsel in any proceedings.

 

This matter should be heard as soon as possible before trial is scheduled on that day as this matter bears on my ability to prosecute an effective defense and therefore, a fairer trial.

 

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE OF UNFETTERED COUNSEL

 

The Constitutions for the united States and the Constitution of Hawaii both provide that "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the assistance of Counsel for his/her defense, (the word "counsel" is not capitalized in the State Constitution).

 

Further, the Sixth Article of the united States Constitution provides in part:

"This Constitution, and the laws of the united States which shall be made in pursuance thereof and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the united States, shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, and anything in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

 

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the united States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution."

 

To deny the exercise of a protected activity to one rightfully not prohibited or barred by incapacity from exercising such conduct is to do violence to the Oath of the office by which such performance is mandated, and dishonoring the service agreement for which all "officials" are renumerated while serving in the capacity for which they have given such Oath.

 

It is well known that "lawyers" are officers of the court as a privilege afforded to those who swear allegiance to the "BAR" and are licensed to "practice" before "courts", sometimes using the appellation "Esquire" to distinguish themselves from the "laity". By the terms of the Constitution for Hawaii, Judges are required to be "licensed as Lawyers" to practice law as a condition of obtaining said office, and as "BAR" members, are also afforded such privilege as "membership in the BAR" carries with it, not excluding the title of nobility known to all the laity as "your honor".

 

Is it possible that the BAR association has a least minor influence in drafting the language used to establish such a foundation for the judiciary, or perhaps just enough influence on the "model constitution" from which this "progressive" idea was obtained to support such a monopoly in a "free" state?

 

It is axiomatic that a grant of privilege results in a reciprocal "duty" to the "grantor" of the privilege. Such privilege and duty converts to allegiance in circumstances of conflict of interest, as when a contract of employment with appointed or hired defense lawyers conflicts with "BAR" policy; reducing the contract to that of secondary importance (see e.g., Corpus Juris Secundum under Attorney and Client)

 

Given the duty of a recipient of a privilege to the provider of the privileges, it is likely that the reprentations of the BAR "Counsels" are at least as likely as not to be biased in favor of the BAR when the question turns on that which affects the members in the negative.

 

Given that i do not choose to be adventuresome in respect of my libery, i have decided to exercise the only available alternative and prosecute such defenses as is practicable given the prevailing conditions.

 

Done this ____day of ______, 2019, as related above and signed below at the instance of the accused ______ with copies to be served on all appropriate parties.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Date: ___________________________

 

Proof of Service

A true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion was hand delivered/mailed to below named party(s).

 

Date: /s/___________________________