Star: Hills, Alan Gjurovich; temporary mailing location: care of: general post near: [Porterville, California] non domestic without the U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE #: Star: Hills, Alan Gjurovich; CERTIFIED, VERIFIED ‘COMPLAINT’ AND COMMON LAW ‘PETITION OF Plaintiffs, RIGHT’ OF Star: Hills & Alan David PER CHISOLM EXECUTOR VS GEORGIA -VS- (1793) 1 DALL 419; 7 th ARTICLE OF THE BILL OF INALIENABLE RIGHTS; FOR VIOLATION OF INALIENABLE RIGHTS TERRORIST THREATS; FALSE DONNY YOUNGBLOOD in his IMPRISONMENT DAMAGE TO individual capacity; Mark Surrel PROPERTY;BURGLARY; INVASION OF in his individual capacity; PRIVACY; IMPERSONATING AN ‘Mark Doe ;Doe -‘Maxwell’;Doe OFFICER UNDER COLOR OF LAW; David’;Rick Waters; nine INVASION OF PRIVACY; BREAKING & unidentified Armed men wearing ENTERING;VANDALISM; UNLAWFUL Kern County Sheriffs Uniforms; USE OF FICTITIOUS NAME & ADDRESS Does 1-100 NEGLIGENCE; BREACH OF GOOD FAITH; DISTURBING THE PEACE; MISCONDUCT;OPPRESSION;PUNITIVE Defendants. OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES; _________________________________ Comes now, Star: Hills, & Alan Gjurovich, hereafter “Star” and “Alan”, with their Verified Petition of Right and Civil Complaint against named Defendants as follows:
35
Embed
Petition of Rite- Federal Complaint - Sheriff Et Al
Federal lawsuit filed 3/29/12 Fresno California, Sheriff's et al official oppression and impersonating under color of law, unwarranted search and seizure, breaking and entering, assault, terrorism, FRAUD
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Star: Hills, Alan Gjurovich;
temporary mailing location:care of: general post near: [Porterville, California]non domestic without the U.S.
FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CASE #: Star: Hills, Alan Gjurovich; CERTIFIED, VERIFIED ‘COMPLAINT’ AND COMMON LAW ‘PETITION OF Plaintiffs, RIGHT’ OF Star: Hills & Alan David PER CHISOLM EXECUTOR VS GEORGIA
-VS- (1793)1 DALL 419; 7th ARTICLE OF THE BILL OF INALIENABLE RIGHTS; FOR VIOLATION OF INALIENABLE RIGHTS TERRORIST THREATS; FALSE DONNY YOUNGBLOOD in his IMPRISONMENT DAMAGE TO individual capacity; Mark Surrel PROPERTY;BURGLARY; INVASION OFin his individual capacity; PRIVACY; IMPERSONATING AN‘Mark Doe ;Doe -‘Maxwell’;Doe OFFICER UNDER COLOR OF LAW;David’;Rick Waters; nine INVASION OF PRIVACY; BREAKING &unidentified Armed men wearing ENTERING;VANDALISM; UNLAWFUL Kern County Sheriffs Uniforms; USE OF FICTITIOUS NAME & ADDRESSDoes 1-100 NEGLIGENCE; BREACH OF GOOD FAITH; DISTURBING THE PEACE; MISCONDUCT;OPPRESSION;PUNITIVE Defendants. OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES; _________________________________
Comes now, Star: Hills, & Alan Gjurovich, hereafter “Star” and “Alan”, with their
Verified Petition of Right and Civil Complaint against named Defendants as
follows:
Star and Alan ARE SUING FOR EQUITABLE & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF & FOR
DAMAGES AGAINST NAMED DEFENDANTS IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL
CAPACITIES UNDER THE COMMON LAW & THE 7th ARTICLE OF THE
BILL OF INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF 1791 & FOR A PETITION OF RIGHT
UNDER THE COMMON LAW PER THE US SUPREME COURT RULING IN THE
CASE OF CHISOLM EXECUTOR VS GEORGIA (1793) 1 DALL 419;
FACTS & ALLEGATIONS
PARTIES & RELATIONSHIPS
1. Star, is a sovereign living woman who peacefully inhabited the land commonly
known as Kern: county, [California], at all times mentioned in this complaint, &
she was at all times mentioned in this petition & is presently ONE HALF
OWNER OF THE “REAL PROPERTY” commonly known as “3018 Linden
Avenue, [Bakersfield, California]”.
2. At the time of the acts alleged in this Complaint, all named Defendants in this
Complaint were fully aware of, & had all previously received complete prior
written Notice of the Fact that Star: Hills was not & is not a “Citizen” of any
“Body Politic”, including the Fictitious Political Entities known as the “UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA”, The “STATE OF CALIFORNIA” or any of the other
alleged 49 “Union States” of the said “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”, but is a
Free Sovereign Woman living on the land, in accordance with the Ruling of the
United States Supreme Court in the Case of Chisolm Executor, vs the State of
Georgia, (1793) 1 DALL 419, Stating:"The only reason, I believe, why a free man is bound by human laws, is, that he binds himself. "
Star was not at the time of the actions & events alleged herein & is not
presently subject to the purported Governance of any purported Political
Governing body, their purported “Body Politic”; “Legal Domicile”; “Officers”;
“Agencies”; “Agents”; or “Employees”; of any purported “Body Politic”, &
has never given her “Consent” to “be Governed” by any such Fictitious Bodies,
& does not now give her Consent to be Governed by any such Body Politic,
or their Statutes , Acts, Codes, By-Laws, Ordinances, Addendum’s, Military, and
/ or Any Rule of the De-Facto STATE OF CALIFORNIA nor any of the
purported Officers or Employees of said State or the “UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA”, in accordance with the Express Language of the “Unanimous
Declaration of Independence of the United States of America” signed on July 4,
1776, which Expressly states:
“ ' WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF EVIDENT, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT AMONG THESE ARE LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS''“THAT TO SECURE THESE RIGHTS GOVERNMENTS ARE INSTITUTED AMONG MEN, DERIVING THEIR JUST POWERS FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.”
and in accordance with the California Supreme Court Ruling in the Case of: Thor
v. Superior Court (Andrews) (1993) 5 Cal.4th 725 : Stating:
“ARABIAN, J.
More than a century ago, the United States Supreme Court declared, "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law, than the right of every individual to possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law. ... 'The
right to one's person may be said to be a right of complete immunity: to be let alone.' [Citation.]" " (Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford (1891) 141 U.S. 250, 251 [35 L.Ed. 734, 737, 11 S.Ct. 1000].)
and in accordance with the Statement of one of the original Founders of the
“UNITED STATES AMERICA” John Adams, second President of the UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA:"You have Rights Antecedent to all earthly Governments, Rights that can not be repealed or restrained by human laws; Rights derived from the Great Legislater of the Universe.”
And in accordance with the Statement of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the Case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886), that:
“ Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. And the law is the definition and limitation of power. It is, indeed, quite true that there must always be lodged somewhere, and in some person or body, the authority of final decision; and in many cases of mere administration, the responsibility is purely political, no appeal lying except to the ultimate tribunal of the public judgment, exercised either in the pressure of opinion, or by means of the suffrage. But the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, considered as individual possessions, are secured by those maxims of constitutional law which are the monuments showing the victorious progress of the race in securing to men the blessings of civilization under the reign of just and equal laws, so that, in the famous language of the Massachusetts bill of rights, the government of the commonwealth 'may be a government of laws and not of men.' For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life,at the mere will of anotherseems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself.”
and in accordance with the Statement of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the Case of:
Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Dept. of Health (1990) 497 U.S. 261, 343 [111 L.Ed.2d 224, 282, 110 S.Ct. 2841] (dis. opn. of Stevens, J.) that:
"The constitutional protection for the human body is surely inseparable from concern for the mind and spirit that dwell therein."; id., at pages 279, 287-289 (conc. opn. of O'Connor, J.), 304-306 [111 L.Ed.2d at pages 242, 247-248, 258-260]; Citing the Case of Schmerber v. California (1966) 384 U.S. 757, 767 [16 L.Ed.2d 908, 917, 86 S.Ct. 1826.Mr. Justice Brandeis, whose views have inspired much of the 'right to be let alone' philosophy, said in Olmstead v. United States .... 'The makers of our Constitution ... sought to protect Americans in their beliefs, their thoughts, their emotions and their sensations. They conferred, as against the Government, the right to be let alone-the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized man.'”3. The Acts alleged herein against Defendants were committed in Violation of
Star’s undisputed PRIOR lawful “Notice and Demand” and are in Violation of
their purported Oaths to “Uphold” & “Defend” the US Constitution. The said
Written Notice previously served on all said named Defendants is hereby
incorporated into this Complaint by reference as if fully set forth and is hereby
made a part of this Complaint. See exhibits #3, “Star’s "Public Notice of
Status” ; "Notice and Demand, "Notice of Default and Offer to Cure” ; "Claim of
Right”; “Notice of Understanding and Intent"; “Orders to Cease and Desist”;
“Certified Mail Return Receipts, Proofs of Service”; and, exhibits #6 “Notice of
Non Abandonment”; “Letter to Star from Donny Youngblood” dated ____________
regarding Star’s first Notice and Questionnaire in exhibit #1.
4. Alan Gjurovich, hereafter herein referred to as ‘Alan’, is a sovereign living man
who was peacefully inhabiting the land commonly known as Kern: county,
[California], at all times mentioned herein this Complaint, and who obtained a
FIFTY (50 %) PERCENT OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE “REAL
PROPERTY” commonly referred to as “3018 Linden Avenue, [Bakersfield,
California] ” on October 5, 2009 by way of a QUIT CLAIM DEED which was
executed by the sole owner at that time, ‘Star: Hills’. The alleged legal description
of the said land is: “One Half of Lot 17 in Block 26 of Skyline Park Subdivision
No. 2 according to the map thereof filed on August 13, 1923, and recorded in
Book 3, pages 88 to 93, inclusive, of Maps, in the Office of the Kern County
Recorder. APN: 123- 330-06.” see said ‘QUIT CLAIM DEED’ recorded in KERN
COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE, Document #: 0209147487, which is hereby
incorporated into this Complaint by reference as if fully set forth and is hereby
made a part of this Complaint. FACTS & ALLEGATIONS
AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS :
5. All said Defendants are subject to the laws of the De-Facto STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, and the Jurisdiction of this Court.
6. Named Defendant Donny Youngblood who is being charged here in his private
capacity without immunities, who was allegedly Doing Business As “KERN
COUNTY SHERIFF” at the time of the acts alleged herein and who was PRIOR
served with Star’s ‘Public Notice of Status’ , and “Final Notice and Demand /
Orders to Cease and Desist” , attached hereto as Exhibit #__ and who is being
charged herein with acts of foreknowledge and willful intend to do harm and
caused and or allowed or otherwise participated in all acts of all the defendants
herein, named and unnamed After being served with Star’s Notices, in Exhibits
1- ___, Donny Youngblood caused & or allowed the actions of defendants
herein ‘Mark Surrel’ & DOE #2- ‘Maxwell’ to conduct an unauthorized raid
on Star and Alan’s home wherein they accompanied three other unidentified
men who were not Kern county deputies, & who were NOT Law
Enforcement Officers and who COULD NOT BE authorized by Donny
Youngblood to carry out such a Raid on the morning of March 30th 2010, at
around 6:30 a.m. when said ‘5 defendants’ forced their way into Star and
Alan’s home, by breaking into a back room window & breaking into the back door
which were both locked at the time. Upon reception of Star’s Notices, said
defendant ‘Donny Youngblood’ was charged with the knowledge that
‘Star’ was not subject to any statutory authority of the De Facto STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, including but not limited to any alleged authority of the said
Donny Youngblood or any other alleged Officer or Employee of the “STATE
OF CALIFORNIA”. Upon reception of Star and Alan’s “Notice of Non
Abandonment”, served upon him on more than three occasions prior to the time of
the acts alleged in this complaint, said defendant ‘Donny Youngblood’ was
charged with the knowledge that the land and property of Star and Alan at the
location commonly called ‘3018 Linden Avenue’ was private and in litigation
concerning BANK FRAUD, and Donny Youngblood had been forewarned of said
FRAUD and he had a DUTY to KNOW and investigate before proceeding to take
any action against Star and Alan or their home and or property and he did act
willfully, intentionally and knowingly with no authority to order two alleged
deputies to accompany 3 alleged Bail Enforcement Agents to trespass on private
property and force Star and Alan from their home. Pursuant to Star’s numerous
prior Notices served upon Donny Youngblood, see exhibits 1- , and he had a
DUTY TO KNOW that he had NO JURISDICTION WHATSOEVER
“UNLESS STAR WAS CHARGED WITH A CRIMINAL ACT, BY WRITTEN
VERIFIED COMPLAINT SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT SHOWING
PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE SHE WAS GUILTY OF THE CHARGE,
AND BONDED FOR THE AMOUNT OF THE CLAIM”. See Exhibits 1- ___,
“Star: Hills - Public Notice of Status” and exhibits #____ “Notice of Non
Abandonment ______” “Star: Hills vs GMAC et al "NOTICE OF UNLAWFUL
USE OF “FICTITIOUS, FALSE OR ASSUMED NAME, TITLE ” case #1500 CV
265552, filed on April 4, 2009 in the Kern County Superior Court.
7. Defendant ‘Mark Surrel’, alleged Kern county deputy was at all times mentioned
in this Complaint without any authority under the law to accompany any bail
bond agent on a raid such as the one conducted by himself and defendants DOE
#1, ‘Mark’ and DOE #2, ‘Maxwell’ , & defendants DOES #3 AND #4 - the two
other unidentified men of the said 5, all of whom were without any warrant ,
without any sworn complaint, without any reasonable suspicion, probable cause
and had never been witness to any crime at or near the location known as “3018
Linden Avenue, [Bakersfield California]”, at the time of the alleged acts herein this
Complaint nor at any other time, nor had any of them ever witnessed either Star or