True name is: Constitution of the United States *
True name is: Constitution of the United States *
Proof of true name - Constitution of the United States *
Form of Oath *
Who shall take the Oath – several States *
Of the several States -when shall the Oath be taken *
How – appointed or elected shall take Oath – several States *
Who shall administer the Oath – several States *
There shall be a written record of the Oath – several States *
Ignorance of the law excuses no one – Maxim *
Federal courts have authority to order state officials to comply *
The supreme Law shall be obeyed by all individuals or officials *
Perfect good faith defense for willful if Supreme Court decision was relied on *
Judicial officers have no immunity when they have no jurisdiction over subject matter *
Oath required for all public officers - Constitution of the State of Alaska *
Judge is a public officer *
Oath shall be taken before entering upon the duties of their office - *
Oath is to the Constitution of the United States – Constitution of the State of Alaska *
All judges shall be citizens of the United States and the State *
All judges shall be licensed to practice law in the State *
Documents that do not exist -FOIA Request from the Supreme Court justices *
Compiled Laws are not true laws – must read the original statute(s) *
Act of Congress May 17, 1884 Vol. 23 ch 53 adopted the Laws of Oregon for Alaska *
Laws of the Territory of Alaska in force until they expire, are amended, or repealed. *
2nd Preamble in the Constitution of the State of Alaska *
Article XV should not be printed as part of the Constitution of the State of Alaska *
Common usage of Preamble of only one per document. *
Civil Commissions are mandatory on all Territorial officers(state officers) *
State officer is in the Constitution of the State of Alaska *
Civil commission requirements for Supreme Court Cases *
Courts are either constitutional or legislatively created for judges *
Chapter 50 of 1959 – Court of supreme and superior *
Chapter 184 of 1959 – Magistrate District Court of the State of Alaska} *
Judges in courts of record can not be a member of the Alaska Bar Association *
We are entitled to a neutral and detached judge in the first instance *
Where a court is without jurisdiction, its acts and proceedings are void *
Judges members of Bar and have a license to practice law in Alaska *
Judicial officer defined, disqualification, and Oregon statute is source of the Law *
Judges in Courts of Record can not be members of Alaska Bar Association *
Attorneys authority to discharge, money – Oregon Law *
Attorneys requiring proof of authority – Oregon Law *
Attorneys – compelling an attorney to deliver over money or papers – Oregon Law *
Attorneys – Court order under AS 22.20.080 – Oregon Law *
State of Alaska has no capital or seat of government *
Purported Oath of Office as a public Officer and Violation of same. *
Notary – Form in Alaska Statutes *
Constitutional Treason *
Caveat *
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the "THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES" and the "ACTS OF THE FIRST CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Passed at the first session, which was begun and held at the City of New York on Wednesday, March 4, 1789, and continued to September 29, 1789" Statute I Chapter I. Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled and approved on June 1, 1789 (hereafter in this mandatory Judicial Notice known as 1 Stat 1 23
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the intent the Congress of the United States of 1 Stat 23 on page 23 being " CHAPTER I. An Act to regulate the Time and manner of administering certain Oaths."
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the only one true, correct and complete name of the written instrument of the organic and fundamental law of 1789 arising under "this Constitution for the United States of America" in the Preamble, to wit:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." [Emphasis added.]
and arising under the sixth article of this Constitution, to wit:
[clause 1] "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
[clause 2] 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, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
[clause 3] 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; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." [Emphasis added]
means only the "Constitution of the United States" as conclusively and positively identified in 1 Stat 23 Section 1, to wit:
"That the oath or affirmation required by the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States shall be administered in the form following, to wit: ‘I, A. B., do solemnly swear or affirm (as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.’" [Emphasis added]
This evidence of 1 Stat 23 of the only one true, correct and complete name is the "Constitution of the United States Exhibit 1 and 2.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the name of the written instrument of the organic and fundamental law of 1789 is only one true, correct and complete name is the "Constitution of the United States. And further, said true name was used by the Supreme Court of the United States in 920 cases from 1789 to 1890. Attached as a sample are thirty-two cases from the year 1789 to 1806.
This evidence of the 32 cases of the Supreme Court of the United States is identified as Exhibit 3.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that arising under the first Act of Congress 1 Stat 23 Section 1 that the form of the Oath to the Constitution of the United States arising under the sixth article of the Constitution of the United States is the following:
"I, A. B., do solemnly swear or affirm (as the case may be) that I will support the Constitution of the United States."
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of those who shall take the Oath are all the members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States arising under 1 Stat 23 Sec. 3 arising under the Constitution of the United States, to wit:
"SEC. 3. And be it further enacted, That the members of the several State legislatures, at the next sessions of the said legislatures, respectively, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States, who have been heretofore chosen or appointed, or who shall be chosen or appointed before the first day of August next, and who shall then be in office, shall, within one month thereafter, take the same oath or affirmation, except where they shall have taken it before; which may be administered by any person authorized by the law of the State, in which such office shall be holden, to administer oaths. And the members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States, who shall be chosen or appointed after the said first day of August, shall, before they proceed to execute the duties of their respective offices, take the foregoing oath or affirmation, which shall be administered by the person or person, who by the law of the State shall be authorized to administer the oath of office; and the person or persons so administering the oath hereby required to be taken, shall cause a record or certificate thereof to be made, in the same manner, as, by the law of the State, he or they shall be directed to record or certify the oath of office." [Emphasis added]
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the Oath shall be taken by all the members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers before they proceed to execute the duties of their respective offices arising under 1 Stat 23 Sec. 3 arising under Article VI of the Constitution of the United States.
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that this Oath shall apply whether chosen (elected) or appointed to all members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States arising under 1 Stat 23 Sec. 3 arising under Article VI of the Constitution of the United States.
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that this Oath of all members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States shall be administered by a person or persons who by the law of the State shall be authorized to administer the oath of office arising under 1 Stat 23 Sec. 3 arising under the sixth Article of the Constitution of the United States.
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that this Oath of all members of the several State legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers of the several States authorized to administer the Oath shall cause a record or certificate thereof to be made, in the same manner, as, by the law of the State, he or they shall be directed to record or certify the oath of office arising under 1 Stat 23 Sec. 3 arising Article VI of the Constitution of the United States
This evidence of the Statute-at-Large Statute I Chapter I is identified as Exhibit 1.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Maxim of Law "Ignorantia Legis Neminem Excusat", Ignorance of the law excuses no one. 4 Bouv. Inst. No. 3828; 1 Story, Eq. Jur. § 111; 7 Watts, 374. In all judicial proceedings every man, it is said, is presumed to know the law of the land, which absolutely does not exclude any judicial officer or public officer or de facto officer or anyone operating under color of law.
This evidence of the this maxim in law from Blacks 4th Dictionary is identified as Exhibit 4.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice arising under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the sixth article clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of New York v United States, 112 S.Ct 2408 (1992), 2430 of the Supreme Court of United States, to wit:
Federal courts have the authority to order state officials to comply with federal law, as (1) such authority is plainly conferred by Art III, 2 of the Federal Constitution; and (2) the Constitution's supremacy clause (Art VI, cl 2) makes federal law paramount over the contrary positions of state officials, and the power of federal courts to enforce federal law thus presupposes some authority to order state officials to comply. [Emphasis added]
This evidence of New York v. United States 112 S.Ct 2408 (1992) is readily available and is not attached as an exhibit.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice arising under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the sixth article clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States.
And further shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of Ex Parte Siebold 100 U.S. 371(1879), 392 of the Supreme Court of the United States, to wit:
"As a general rule, it is no doubt expedient and wise that the operations of the State and national governments should as far as practicable, be conducted separately, in order to avoid undue jealousies and jars and conflicts of jurisdiction and power. But there is no reason for laying this down as a rule of universal application. It should never be made to override the plain and manifest dictates of the Constitution itself. We cannot yield to such a transcendental view of state sovereignty. The Constitution and laws of the United States are the supreme law of the land, and to these every citizen of every State owes obedience, whether in his individual or official capacity." [Emphasis added]
This evidence of Ex Parte Siebold 100 U.S. 371(1979)is readily available and is not attached as an exhibit.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of United States v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973), 360 that if I have relied on prior decision of the Supreme Court, I have a perfect defense for willfulness.
And further in U.S. v Bishop on page 360 is as follows:
"The Court has said, "It is not the purpose of the law to penalize frank difference of opinion or innocent errors made despite the exercise of reasonable care." Spies, 317 U.S., at 496. Degrees of negligence give rise in the tax system to civil penalties. The requirement of an offense committed "willfully" is not met, therefore, if a taxpayer has relied in good faith on a prior decision of this Court." James v. United States, 366 U.S., at 221-222. Cf. Lambert v. California, 355 U.S. 225 (1957) [Emphasis added]
This evidence of United States v. Bishop, 412 U.S. 346 (1973) is readily available and is not attached as an exhibit.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of Bradley v Fisher 80 U.S. 335 (1871), 351,352 that officers of the court have no immunity when they have no jurisdiction over the subject-matter.
And further in Bradley v Fisher on page 352 and 352 is as follows:
"Where there is clearly no jurisdiction over the subject matter any authority exercised is a usurped authority, and for the exercise of such authority, when the want of jurisdiction is known to the judge, no excuse is permissible."
This evidence of Bradley v Fisher 80 U.S. 335 (1871) is readily available and is not attached as an exhibit.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Oath of Office required of all public officers arising under Article XII Section 5 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, to wit:
"SECTION 5. OATH OF OFFICE. All public officers, before entering upon the duties of their offices, shall take and subscribe to the following oath or affirmation: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Alaska, and that I will faithfully discharge my duties as . . . . . . . to the best of my ability." The legislature may prescribe further oaths or affirmations." [Emphasis added]
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that a judge is a public officer, who by virtue of his office is clothed with judicial powers.
And further we find in Todd v United States, 158 US 278 (1895), 284 we find the following:
"… and it was held by Mr. Justice Story that the indictment could not be maintained, saying: "The statute does not punish every perjury, but only a perjury done in a court of the United States. Plainly, therefore, it is of the very essence of the offence that it should be charged as committed in such court. Now, under the authority of the United States there are but three courts known in law, the District, Circuit, and Supreme Court; and as Congress alone can, by the Constitution, ordain and establish courts, none can exist but such as they create and name. . . . A court is not a judge, nor a judge a court. A judge is a public officer, who, by virtue of his office, is clothed with judicial authorities. A court is defined to be a place in which justice is judicially administered. It is the exercise of judicial power, by the proper officer or officers, at a time and place appointed by law." [Emphasis added]
This evidence of Todd v United States, 158 US 278 (1895) is readily available and is not attached as an exhibit.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Oath of Office required of all public officers before entering upon the duties of their offices arising under Article XII Section 5 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Oath of Office required to support and defend the Constitution of the United States arising under Article XII Section 5 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of requirement of supreme court justices and superior court judges shall be citizens of the United States and of the State arising under Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, to wit:
"SECTION 4. QUALIFICATIONS OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES. Supreme court justices and superior court judges shall be citizens of the United States and of the State, licensed to practice law in the State, and possessing any additional qualifications prescribed by law. Judges of other courts shall be selected in a manner, for terms, and with qualifications prescribed by law."
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of requirement of supreme court justices and superior court judges shall be licensed to practice law in the State arising under Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that there is no license to practice law in the State for attorneys pursuant to the letter Clerk of the Appellate Courts Marilyn May.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the official response to a Freedom of Information Request (hereafter FOIA) dated February 15, 2000 to (example of the FOIA is Exhibit 11 – all were the same) Chief Justice Warren W. Matthews, Justice Robert L. Eastaugh, Justice Dana Fabe, Justice Alexander O. Bryner, Justice Walter L. Carpeneti, Justice Pro Tempore Jay A. Rabinowitz, and Justice Pro Tempore Allen T. Compton was a letter (Exhibit 12) from the Clerk of the Appellate Courts Marilyn May empowered to answer for each of the seven (7) justices cited above stating there are no documents for any of the seven justices for the following:
This evidence of the FOIA, response and violations of law are identified as Exhibits 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that Annotated Compiled Laws of Alaska of 1949 (hereafter ACLA 1949) is only Compiled Law, not positive law, and therefore it is necessary to go to the source of the statute.
And further in Ashley v. City of Anchorage, 95 F. Supp.189 (1951), 191 , we find the following:
"ACLA is a compilation only and not positive law, and, therefore, it is necessary to go to the source of the statute."
This adjudged decision was cited in several cases. One such case is ITT v United States at 210 Ct. Cl. 410 in Federal Claims Court is as follows:
"The United States Code was not enacted as a statute, nor can it be construed as such. It is only a prima facie statement of the statute law. The statutes collected in it did not change their meaning nor acquire any new force by their inclusion. If construction is necessary, recourse must be had to the original statutes themselves."
See also Ashley v. City of Anchorage, 95 F.Supp. 189 (D.C. Alaska 1951), aff'd, 196 F.2d 809.
This evidence of the Ashley v City of Anchorage, 95 F. Supp 189 and ITT v. United States, 210 Ct. Cl 410 are readily available and are not attached as exhibits.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Laws of the United States, being the Act of Congress in Volume 23 Chapter 53, May 17, 1884 – Laws of Oregon adopted, and in particular Sec 7, which is as follows:
"Sec. 7. That the general laws of the State of Oregon now in force are hereby declared to be the law in said district, so far as the same may be applicable and not in conflict with the provisions of this act or the laws of the United States; and the sentence of imprisonment in any criminal case shall be carried out by confinement in the jail or penitentiary hereinafter provided for. But the said district court shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all cases in equity or those involving a question of title to land, or mining rights, or the constitutionality of a law, and in all criminal offenses which are capital. In all civil cases, at common law, any issue of fact shall be determined by a jury, at the instance of either party; and an appeal shall lie in any cased, civil or criminal, from the judgement of said commissioners to the said district court where the court involved in any civil case is two hundred dollars or more, and in any criminal case where a fine of more than one hundred dollars or imprisonment is imposed, upon the filing of a sufficient appeal bond by the party appealing, to be approved by the court or commissioner." [Emphasis added]
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice as this is the authority of the general Laws of Oregon declared as law in the district of Alaska. Said Act of Congress is still in force.
This evidence of the Act of Congress of May 17, 1884 Volume 23 Chapter 53 is Exhibit 15.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the of the Article XV Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, to wit:
SECTION 1. CONTINUANCE OF LAWS. All laws in force in the Territory of Alaska on the effective date of this constitution and consistent therewith shall continue in force until they expire by their own limitation, are amended, or repealed.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice said Acts of the Territory of Alaska are currently still in force as law in the territorial boundaries of Alaska.
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the second preamble in the Constitution of the State of Alaska arising under Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Alaska, to wit:
"To provide an orderly transition from a territorial to a state form of government, it is declared and ordained:"
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska and/or the Supreme Court of Alaska (State) in the case of Starr v. Hagglund, 374 P.2d 316 (1962), 320, to wit:
"Among other things he [chairman of the Committee on Ordinances and Transitional Measures] said: 'The only guarantee of security is if this were in the body of the Constitution, which of course then could still be reached by Constitutional amendment.' (emphasis added) On another occasion, he was asked by a delegate what effect the preamble to article XV would have on section 20. The chairman gave his opinion that where such a preamble was used, the only purpose was to direct an orderly transfer from a territorial to a state form of government, and when the state government came into effect, 'the entire schedule that will be offered by the Ordinances Committee will drop away from the Constitution and no longer be a part of it.' And then when asked whether the initiative provisions would apply as well as the authority of the legislature to amend the location of the capital, the chairman replied ‘That is correct.'" [Emphasis added]
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska and/or the Supreme Court of Alaska (State) in the case of State v Lewis, 559 P.2d 630 (1977), 642, to wit:
"Thus, although the capital provision appeared in the body of the Constitution, it was permitted to be changed without the necessity of a constitutional amendment." [Emphasis added]
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the fact and law that Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Alaska is still printed today by the Lieutenant Governor as purported current law
This evidence of the adjudged decisions of the case of Starr v. Hagglund, 374 P.2d 316 (1962) and State v Lewis, 559 P.2d 630 (1977) of the Supreme Court of the State of Alaska are readily available and are not attached as exhibits.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice arising under common usage and common knowledge a Constitution, Charter or Statute has only one preamble per instrument, public statute, charter or public law.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of civil Commissions of the Law of Chapter 118 of 1929 of the Territory of Alaska compiled as CLA 1933, §1658 and again as compiled law in ACLA § 11-1-5 1949 and codified in ©Alaska Statutes
The Law of chapter 118 of 1929 of the Territory of Alaska is as follows:
"Section 23. After each election, choice or appointment of any Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General or any Territorial officer, the Governor shall execute a commission, which commission shall state that the person to whom the same is issued has been duly appointed, chosen or elected, as the case may be, and the office to and the term for which he is so elected chosen or appointed.
The Attorney General shall prescribe the form for such commissions." Exhibit 18.
The CLA 1933, § 1658 is as follows:
"Sec. 1658. Governor commission officers. After each election, choice or appointment of any Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General or any Territorial officer, the Governor shall execute a commission, which commission shall state that the person to whom the same is issued has been duly appointed, chosen or elected, as the case may be, and the office to and the term for which he is so elected chosen or appointed.
The Attorney General shall prescribe the form for such commissions."
[L 1929, ch 118, § 23, p 232, effective May 2, 1929] Exhibit 19.
The compiled laws of 1949, § 11-1-5 ACLA is as follows:
" § 11-1-5. Commission to office; Issuance; Form and contents. After each election, choice or appointment of any Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General or any Territorial officer, the Governor shall execute a commission, which commission shall state that the person to whom the same is issued has been duly appointed, chosen or elected, as the case may be, and the office to and the term for which he is so elected chosen or appointed.
The Attorney General shall prescribe the form for such commissions."
[L 1929, ch 118, § 23, p 232, effective May 2, 1929; CLA 1933, § 1658] Exhibit 20.
The codified ©Alaska Statutes of AS 39.05.035 is as follows:
"Sec. 39.05.035. Commission of office
After each appointment of a state officer, the governor shall execute a commission, which states that the person to whom it is issued is appointed and the term for which the officer is appointed. The attorney general shall prescribe the form of the commission." [Emphasis added]
HISTORY: (§ 11-1-5 ACLA 1949) Exhibit 21.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the mandatory requirement that the governor shall execute a commission whether appointed or elected for any Territorial officer (state officer), the commission shall state that the person was duly appointed, chosen or elected, to office, and the term.
This evidence of the mandatory civil commission are identified as Exhibit 18, Exhibit 19, Exhibit 20, and Exhibit 21.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that state officers are listed in the Article XXI Ordinance No. 2 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska and that it replaces Section 25 of Article XV of the Constitution of the State of Alaska on certain conditions, to wit:
If the Congress of the United States seats the senators and representative elected pursuant to this ordinance and approves the constitution before the first election of state officers, then Section 25 of Article XV shall be void and shall be replaced by the following:
"The provisions of the constitution applicable to the first election of state officers shall take effect immediately upon the admission of Alaska into the Union as a State. The remainder of the constitution shall take effect when the elected governor takes office." [Emphasis added]
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the fact and law that the public officers in Article XII Section 5 of the Constitution of the Alaska are state officers.
This evidence of state officer is a public officer in the Ordinance of the Original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the requirement of a civil commission issued under the authority of the person making the appointment and empowered the person appointed under public seal for the public office.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the case of adjudged decision United States v. Le Baron, 60 U.S. 73 (1856), 78, to wit:
"When a person has been nominated to an office by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and his commission has been signed by the President, and the seal of the United States affixed thereto, his appointment to that office is complete. Congress may provide, as it has done in this case, that certain acts shall be done by the appointee before he shall enter on the possession of the office under his appointment. These acts then become conditions precedent to the complete investiture of the office; but they are to be performed by the appointee, not by the Executive; all that the Executive can do to invest the person with his office has been completed when the commission has been signed and sealed; and when the person has performed the required conditions, his title to enter on the possession of the office is also complete." [Emphasis added]
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the case of adjudged decision of Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 (1803), 157, to wit:
This is an appointment by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the senate, and is evidenced by no act but the commission itself. In such a case therefore the commission and the appointment seem inseparable; it being almost impossible to show an appointment otherwise than by proving the existence of a commission; still the commission is not necessarily the appointment; though conclusive evidence of it.
This evidence of the civil commission and appointment of the cases of United States v. Le Baron, 60 U.S. 73 and Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 of the Supreme Court of the United States are readily available and are not attached as exhibits.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the supreme court justices and superior court judges are empowered only in courts of the supreme court or a superior court, and the courts established by the legislature arising under Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska.
"SECTION 1. JUDICIAL POWER AND JURISDICTION. The judicial power of the State is vested in a supreme court, a superior court, and the courts established by the legislature. The jurisdiction of courts shall be prescribed by law. The courts shall constitute a unified judicial system for operation and administration. Judicial districts shall be established by law."
This evidence of the original Constitution of the State of Alaska is identified as Exhibit 9.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the only supreme court and the only superior court for the State’s jurisdiction arises under Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska enacted into law by the Legislature of the State/or State of Alaska in 1959 Chapter 50 and codified in ©AS Title 22 et seq.
This evidence of the supreme court and superior court for the State’s jurisdiction is Chapter 50 of the session laws of 1959 is identified as Exhibit 24.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the only court created by the legislature arising under the grant of authority arising under the Article IV Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Alaska is the Magistrate District Court of the State of Alaska created and enacted into law by the Legislature of the State of Alaska in 1959 Chapter 184 and codified in ©AS title 22 et seq.
This evidence of the creation and enacting into law of the Magistrate District Court of the State of Alaska is Chapter 184 of the session laws of 1959 is identified as Exhibit 25.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Law of Chapter 196 of 1955 of the Territory of Alaska (hereafter Ch 196 SLA 1955). Exhibit 26
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of Section 4 of Ch 196 SLA 1955, to wit:
"Sec. 4. NEW MEMBERS. After the organization of the Alaska Bar, as herein provided, all persons who are admitted to practice in accordance with the provisions of this Act, except judges of courts of record, shall upon admission become eligible for active membership in the Alaska Bar." [Emphasis added]
This evidence of the Session Law of the Legislature of the Territory of Alaska of 1955 Chapter 196 is identified as Exhibit 26.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that we as American citizens are entitled to a lawful judge in the first instance, not relying in some appellate process or trial de novo.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of case Ward v Village of Monroeville, 409 US 57, 61,62, to wit:
"Respondent also argues that any unfairness at the trial level can be corrected on appeal and trial de novo in the County Court of Common Pleas. We disagree. This "procedural safeguard" does not guarantee a fair trial in the mayor's court; there is nothing to suggest that the incentive to convict would be diminished by the possibility of reversal on appeal. Nor, in any event, may the State's trial court procedure be deemed constitutionally acceptable simply because the State eventually offers a defendant an impartial adjudication. Petitioner is entitled to a neutral and detached judge in the first instance." [emphasis added]
This evidence of Ward v Village of Monroeville, 409 US 57 is readily available and is not attached as exhibits
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that were a court is without jurisdiction in the particular case, its acts and proceedings can be of no force or validity, and are a mere nullity and void, not voidable, even prior to reversal, whether the lack of jurisdiction appears on the face of the record or by proof outside of it.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the adjudged decision of the case of Valley v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 254 U.S. 348 (1920) of the Supreme Court of the United States, to wit:
"Courts are constituted by authority and they can not go beyond the power delegated to them. If they act beyond that authority, and certainly in contravention of it, their judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and this even prior to reversal." [Emphasis added] Elliott v. Peirsol, 1 Pet. 328, 344; Old Wayne Mutual Life Association v. McDonough, 204 U.S. 8.
This evidence of Valley v. Northern Fire & Marine Ins. Co, 254 U.S. 348 is readily available and is not attached as exhibits
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the meaning of the words "for" and "of."
The meaning of "for" in Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Edition we find the following: "In behalf of, in place of, in lieu of, representing, as being which, or equivalent to which, and sometimes imports agency." Medler v. Henry, 97 P.2d 661 (1939), 662 44 N.M. 63, 662. Exhibit 29
The meaning of "of" in Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Edition we find the following: "A term denoting that from which anything proceeds; indicating origin, source, descent, and the like; as, he is of noble blood." Exhibit 30
This evidence of the meanings of words "for" and "of" are Exhibits 29 and 30.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that arising under the letter from the Alaska Bar Association by the Executive Director Deborah O’Regan of March 24, 2000 the following persons are current members of the Alaska Bar Association and that they are licensed to practice law in Alaska:
This evidence of the current membership in the Alaska Bar Association and that they are licensed to practice law in Alaska is identified as Exhibit 31.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the following compiled laws, code and original Law of the State of Oregon of October 11, 1862 as the true words of the Act. The following are the compiled laws, code and source law of the State of Oregon: ©AS 22.20.010, the compiled laws of §54-2-1 ACLA 1949, . CLA 1933 § 3305, CLA 1913 § 1539, Carter Code sec. 707, Hill’s Annotate Code § 913, Public Acts and Code of Oregon CLA 1913, § 1539
And further to validate the correct words and authority for a "judicial officer", we are mandated to proceed as follows.
Sec. 22.20.010. Judicial officer defined
"The term "judicial officer" means a supreme court justice, including the chief justice, a judge of the court of appeals, a judge of the superior court, a district judge, and a magistrate." [Emphasis added]
HISTORY: (§ 54-2-1 ACLA 1949; am § 16 ch 12 SLA 1980)
AS 22.20.020
Sec. 22.20.020.Disqualification of judicial officer for cause
(a) A judicial officer may not act in a matter in which
(1) the judicial officer is a party;
(2) the judicial officer is related to a party or a party's attorney by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
(3) the judicial officer is a material witness;
(4) the judicial officer or the spouse of the judicial officer, individually or as a fiduciary, or a child of the judicial officer has a direct financial interest in the matter;
(5) a party, except the state or a municipality of the state, has retained or been professionally counseled by the judicial officer as its attorney within two years preceding the assignment of the judicial officer to the matter;
(6) the judicial officer has represented a person as attorney for the person against a party, except the state or a municipality of the state, in a matter within two years preceding the assignment of the judicial officer to the matter;
(7) an attorney for a party has represented the judicial officer or a person against the judicial officer, either in the judicial officer's public or private capacity, in a matter within two years preceding the filing of the action;
(8) the law firm with which the judicial officer was associated in the practice of law within the two years preceding the filing of the action has been retained or has professionally counseled either party with respect to the matter;
(9) the judicial officer feels that, for any reason, a fair and impartial decision cannot be given.
(b) A judicial officer shall disclose, on the record, a reason for disqualification specified in (a) of this section at the commencement of a matter in which the judicial officer participates. The disqualification’s specified in (a)(2), (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), and (a)(8) of this section may be waived by the parties and are waived unless a party raises an objection.
(c) If a judicial officer is disqualified on the officer's own motion or consents to disqualification, the presiding judge of the district shall immediately transfer the action to another judge of that district to which the objections of the parties do not apply or are least applicable and if there is no such judge, the chief justice of the supreme court shall assign a judge for the hearing or trial of the action. If a judicial officer denies disqualification the question shall be heard and determined by another judge assigned for the purpose by the presiding judge of the next higher level of courts or, if none, by the other members of the supreme court. The hearing may be ex parte and without notice to the parties or judge."
HISTORY: (§ 54-2-1 ACLA 1949; am § 1 ch 48 SLA 1967; am § § 10, 11 ch 38 SLA 1987; am § 38 ch 50 SLA 1989) Exhibit 32
"§54-2-1. Judicial officer defined: Disqualification. A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice. Such officer shall not act as such in a court of which he is a member in any of the following cases:
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
Fifth. Whenever any party, or any attorney for any party, to any action or proceeding, civil or criminal, shall make and file an affidavit that the judge before whom the action or proceeding is to be tried or heard has a personal bias or prejudice either against him or his attorney or in favor of any opposite party, or attorney for a opposite party, to the suit, and that it is made in good faith and not for the purpose of delay. Every such affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that such bias or prejudice exists, and shall be filed within one day after such action, suit, or proceeding is at issue upon a question of fact, or good cause shall be shown for the failure to file it within such time. No party or attorney shall be entitled to file more than one such affidavit in any case. The provisions of this subdivision shall apply only to the District Court.
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions three and four the disqualification may be waived by the parties and shall be deemed to be waived unless an application be made as provided in this code." CLA 1913, § 1539; CLA 1933, §3305, am 54 Stat 16 [Emphasis added] Exhibit 33.
3. CLA 1933, §3305 "Sec. 3305. Judicial officer, definition of. When disqualified to act. A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice. Such officer shall not act as such in a court of which he is a member in any of the following cases:
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions three and four the disqualification may be waived by the parties and shall be deemed to be waived unless an application be made as provided in this title." (1539-CLA) [Emphasis added] Exhibit 34
4. 1539-CLA "SEC 1539 . A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice. Such officer shall not act as such in a court of which he is a member in any of the following cases:
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions three and four the disqualification may be waived by the parties and shall be deemed to be waived unless an application be made as provided in this code." [Emphasis added]
Carter Code, sec. 707; Charlton Code, sec 707 Exhibit 35.
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions three and four the disqualification may be waived by the parties and shall be deemed to be waived unless an application be made as provided in this code." [Emphasis added]
Laws Oreg., Oct. 11, 1862; Hill’s Ann. Laws, s, 913. Exhibit 36.
6. Hill’s Ann. Laws, s, 913 "§ 913. [886] A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice. Such officer shall not act as such in a court of which he is a member in any of the following cases: --
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions 3 and 4, and, except in the supreme court, shall be deemed to be waived, unless an application for a change of the place of trial be made as provided in this code." Emphasis added] Exhibit 37.
6. "886. A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice. Such officer shall not act as such in a court of which he is a member in any of the following cases: --
First. In an action or proceeding to which he is a party or in which he is directly interested;
Second. When he was not present and sitting as a member of the court at the hearing of a matter submitted for its decision;
Third. When he is related to either party by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree;
Fourth. When he has been attorney in an action or proceeding in question for either party;
But this section does not apply to an application to change the place of trial or the regulation of the order of business in court. In the cases specified in subdivisions 3 and 4, and, except in the supreme court, shall be deemed to be waived, unless an application for a change of the place of trial be made as provided in this code." Oct. 11,1862 [Emphasis added] Exhibit 38.
Exhibit 39.
And further this court shall take Notice that the true, correct and complete words enacted into law in Oregon are the following: "A judicial officer is a person authorized to act as a judge in a court of justice." Exhibit 37.
This evidence for a judicial officer and courts are identified as Exhibits 15, 24, 25, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that arising under the Ch 50 SLA 1959 (Exhibit 24) that the superior court for the State and the supreme court are each a court of record. Therefore it is unlawful for any judge or justice to be a member of the Alaska Bar Association in a court of record, being the superior or supreme courts of the State/State of Alaska arising under the Act of Chapter 196 of 1955 of the Legislature of the Territory of Alaska. (Exhibit 24 and 26)
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the source of the authority for appearance of Attorneys are from the Laws of Oregon And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the true words enacted by the Legislature of the State of Oregon as the source of Law stand as Law versus Compiled Law and/or Code. Today’s code to the source enacted law is traced as follows: AS 22.20.040 to § 54-6-1 ACLA to CLA 1933, § 713 to CLA 1913, § 1563 to Carter Code, sec. 731 or Charlton Code, sec. 731 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862 and Hill’s Ann. Laws, s. 1032 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862, 1001. The beginning code and end law are shown with the intermediate codes attached as exhibits, to wit:
AS 22.20.040
Sec. 22.20.040. Appearance
(a) An action or proceeding may be prosecuted or defended by a party in person or by attorney. However,
(1) the United States shall appear by an attorney in all cases; and
(2) a corporation, either public or private, shall appear by an attorney in all cases unless an exception to the corporation's appearance by an attorney has been explicitly made by law.
(b) When a party appears by attorney, the written proceedings shall be in the name of the attorney, who is the sole representative of the client as between the client and the adverse party.
HISTORY: (§ 54-6-1 ACLA 1949; am § 3 ch 99 SLA 1992)
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice true words of the Public Act of October 11, 1862 and Compiled law of the State of Oregon, 1001,] to wit:
Sec. 1001. Any action or proceeding may be prosecuted or defended by a party in person or by attorney, except that the state or a corporation, either public or private, appears by attorney in all cases; and where a party appears by attorney the written proceedings must be in the name of the attorney, who is the sole representative of his client as between him and the adverse party, except as provided in the last section.
Oct. 11, 1862
The last section referred to is as follows:
Sec. 1000. An Attorney is a person authorized to appear for and represent a party, in the written proceedings in any action, suit or proceeding, in any stage thereof. An attorney, other than the one who represents the party in the written proceedings, may also appear for and represent a party in court, before a judicial officer, and then he is known, in the particular action, suit or proceeding, as counsel only, and his authority is limited to the matters that transpire in the court or before such officer at the time.
This evidence of the appearance of Attorneys is evidenced by Exhibts xx , xx.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the source of the authority to bind a client, receive money or property, and give a discharge of Attorneys are from the Laws of Oregon. And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the true words enacted by the Legislature of the State of Oregon as the source of Law stand as Law versus Compiled Law and/or Code. Today’s code to the source enacted law is traced as follows: AS 22.20.04 to § 54-6-2 ACLA to CLA 1933, § 697 to CLA 1913, § 1569 to Carter Code, sec. 737 or Charlton Code, sec. 737 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862 and Hill’s Ann. Laws, s. 1039 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862, 1001. The beginning code and end law are shown with the intermediate codes attached as exhibits, to wit:
AS 22.20.050
Sec. 22.20.050. Authority to bind client, receive money or property, and give discharge
(a) An attorney may
(1) bind the attorney's client in any of the proceedings in an action or proceeding by agreement filed with the clerk or entered upon the journal of the court, and not otherwise;
(2) receive money or property claimed by the client in an action or proceeding during its pendency, or within three years after judgment, and, upon the payment or delivery of it, discharge the claim or acknowledge satisfaction of the judgment.
(b) However, this section does not prevent a party from employing a new attorney to issue execution upon a judgment, or to take the other proceedings prescribed by law for its enforcement, and when the party does so the authority of the former attorney ceases.
HISTORY: (§ 54-6-2 ACLA 1949)
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice true words of the Public Act of October 11, 1862 and Compiled law of the State of Oregon, 1007, to wit:
Sec. 1007. An Attorney has authority:
1. To bind his client, in any of the proceedings in an action, suit or proceeding, by his agreement filed with the clerk or entered upon the journal of the court, and not otherwise.
2. To receive money or property claimed by his client in an action, suit or proceeding during the pendency thereof, and not otherwise, to discharge the claim or acknowledge satisfaction of the judgment or decree.
But this section does not prevent a party from employing a new attorney, to issue execution upon a judgment or decree, or to take the other proceedings prescribed by this code for its enforcement, and when he does so, the authority of the former attorney ceases.
Oct. 11, 1862
This evidence of the authority and true words for an attorney to bind a client, receive money or property, and give a discharge of Attorneys of Attorneys are evidenced by Exhibts xx , xx.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the source of the authority for requiring proof of authority of Attorneys is from the Laws of Oregon. And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the true words enacted by the Legislature of the State of Oregon as the source of Law stand as Law versus Compiled Law and/or Code. Today’s code to the source enacted law is traced as follows: AS 22.20.070 to § 54-6-4 ACLA to CLA 1933, § 699 to CLA 1913, § 1571 to Carter Code, sec. 739 or Charlton Code, sec. 739 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862 and Hill’s Ann. Laws, s. 1041 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862, 1009. The beginning code and end law are shown with the intermediate codes attached as exhibits, to wit:
AS 22.20.070
Sec. 22.20.070. Requiring proof of authority The court may, on motion of either party, and on showing reasonable grounds therefor, require the attorney for an adverse party to produce or prove the authority under which the attorney appears, and until the attorney does so may stay all proceedings by the attorney on behalf of the party for whom the attorney assumes to appear.
HISTORY: (§ 54-6-4 ACLA 1949)
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice true words of the Public Act of October 11, 1862 and Compiled law of the State of Oregon, 1009, to wit:
Sec. 1009. The court or judge thereof may, on motion of either party, and on showing reasonable grounds therefor, require the attorney for the adverse party, or for any one of several adverse parties, to produce or prove the authority under which he appears, and until he does so, may stay all proceedings by him on behalf of the parry for whom he assumes to appear.
Oct. 11, 1862
This evidence of the authority and true words for requiring proof of authority are evidenced by Exhibts xx , xx.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the source of the authority for compelling an attorney to deliver over money or papers of Attorneys is from the Laws of Oregon. And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the true words enacted by the Legislature of the State of Oregon as the source of Law stand as Law versus Compiled Law and/or Code. Today’s code to the source enacted law is traced as follows: AS 22.20.080 to § 54-6-7 ACLA to CLA 1933, § 711 to CLA 1913, § 1583 to Carter Code, sec. 751 or Charlton Code, sec. 751 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862 and Hill’s Ann. Laws, s. 1056 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862, 1024. The beginning code and end law are shown with the intermediate codes attached as exhibits, to wit:
AS 22.20.080
Sec. 22.20.080. Compelling attorney to deliver over money or papers When an attorney refuses to deliver over money or papers to a person from or for whom the attorney has received them in the course of professional employment, whether in a judicial proceeding or not, a court may, by order, require the attorney to do so within a specified time or show cause why punishment for a contempt should not be imposed on the attorney.
HISTORY: (§ 54-6-7 ACLA 1949)
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice true words of the Public Act of October 11, 1862 and Compiled law of the State of Oregon, 1024, to wit:
Sec. 1024. When an attorney refuses to deliver over money or papers to a person from or for whom he has received them in the course of professional employment, whether in a judicial proceeding or not, he may be required by an order of the court in which a judicial proceeding was prosecuted or defended, or is none were prosecuted or defended, then by an order of the circuit court or judge thereof for the county where such attorney resides or may be found, to do so within a specified time, or show cause why he should not be punished for a comtempt.
Oct. 11, 1862
This evidence of the authority and true words for compelling an attorney to deliver over money or papers are evidenced by Exhibts xx , xx.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the source of the authority for the court order under AS 22.20.080 of Attorneys is from the Laws of Oregon. And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the true words enacted by the Legislature of the State of Oregon as the source of Law stand as Law versus Compiled Law and/or Code. Today’s code to the source enacted law is traced as follows: AS 22.20.090 to § 54-6-8 ACLA to CLA 1933, § 712 to CLA 1913, § 1584 to Carter Code, sec. 752 or Charlton Code, sec. 752 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862 and Hill’s Ann. Laws, s. 1057 to Laws Oreg., Oct 11, 1862, 1025. The beginning code and end law are shown with the intermediate codes attached as exhibits, to wit:
AS 22.20.090
Sec. 22.20.090. Court order under AS 22.20.080 If an attorney claims a lien upon the money or papers under AS 34.35.430 the court, in making an order under AS 22.20.080, shall
(1) impose, as a condition of making the order, that the client give security, in form and amount to be directed, to satisfy the lien when determined in an action;
(2) summarily inquire into the facts on which the claim of a lien is founded, and determine it; or
(3) direct the trial of the controversy by a jury, or refer it, and upon the verdict or report determine it as in othercases.
HISTORY: (§ 54-6-8 ACLA 1949)
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice true words of the Public Act of October 11, 1862 and Compiled law of the State of Oregon, 1025, to wit:
Sec. 1025. When an attorney refuses to deliver over money or papers to a person from or for whom he has received them in the course of professional employment, whether in a judicial proceeding or not, he may be required by an order of the court in which a judicial proceeding was prosecuted or defended, or is none were prosecuted or defended, then by an order of the circuit court or judge thereof for the county where such attorney resides or may be found, to do so within a specified time, or show cause why he should not be punished for a comtempt.
Oct. 11, 1862
This evidence of the authority and true words for court order under AS 22.20.080 are evidenced by Exhibts xx , xx.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that the entity known as "State of Alaska" has no seat of government or capital.
And further this court shall take Judicial Notice of the ©Alaska Statutes Section 44.06.010, to wit:
Sec. 44.06.010. Site of capital. The capital of the state is at the city of Juneau, Alaska. (§ 1-1-2 ACLA 1949) (Exhibit 40)
And further this court shall take Judicial Notice that the source of this Code is 10 years before Statehood. As ACLA 1949 is not positive law (Exhibit 13 and Exhibit 14), we are mandated to find the veracity of this Code to first go to §1-1-2 ACLA 1949, to wit:
§ 1-1-2. Juneau designated as capital and seat of government. The capital of the Territory of Alaska shall be at the city of Juneau, Alaska, and the seat of government shall be maintained there. 37 Stat 512, CLA 1933, 48 USC § 22 (Exhibit 41)
And further this court shall take Judicial Notice that the source of the law of § 1-1-2 ACLA 1949 is found in 37 Stat 512, being the Act of the Congress of the United States Volume 37 Chapter 387 (hereafter 37 Stat 512) beginning on page 512. Arising under 37 Stat 512 on page 512, we find the following:
Sec 2. Capital at Juneau. – That the capital of the Territory of Alaska shall be at the city of Juneau, Alaska, and the seat of government shall be maintained there. (Exhibit 42)
This evidence of the true seat of government and capital is the Territory of Alaska, not the State of Alaska is identified in Exhibit 40, 41, 42 and 43.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Oath of Office of Superior Court Judges Harold M. Brown (Exhibit 44) and Jonothan H. Link (Exhibit 45) and Master Magistrate Anne M. Preston (Exhibit 46).
And further the court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice Superior Court Judges Harold M. Brown and Jonothan H. Link and Master Magistrate Anne M. Preston do not have an Oath to the "Constitution of the United States." Exhibits 44, 45, and 46) This is in direct violation of the sixth Article of the Constitution of the United States (Exhibit 2), the very first Act of Congress at 1 Stat 23 (Exhibit 1), and Section 5 Article XII of the Constitution of the State of Alaska (Exhibit 9).
This evidence of the Oath of Office is identified as Exhibits 1, 2, 44, 45, and 46.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the form for affidavits arising Chapter 37 of 1981 of the Legislature of the State of Alaska, codified under the ©AS 09.63.030, to wit:
Sec. 09.63.030. Notarization
(a) When a document is required by law to be notarized, the person who executes the document shall sign and swear to or affirm it before an officer authorized by law to take the person's oath or affirmation and the officer shall certify on the document that it was signed and sworn to or affirmed before the officer.
(b) The certificate required by this section may be in substantially the following form:
Subscribed and sworn to or affirmed before me at on (date)
Signature of Officer
Title of Officer
(c) If the document is sworn to or affirmed before a notary public of the state, the notary public shall
(1) endorse after the signature of the notary public the date of expiration of the notary's commission;
(2) print or emboss the notary's seal on the document;
(3) comply with AS 44.50.060 -- 44.50.080 or other applicable law.
HISTORY: (§ 1 Ch 37 SLA 1981)
The evidence of this form of affidavits of Session Law of Chapter 37 of 1987 is identified as Exhibit XX.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Employee Affidavits of Superior Court Judges Harold M Brown (Exhibit 47) and Jonothan H Link (Exhibit 48) and Master Magistrate Anne M Preston (Exhibit 49). And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that said Employee Affidavit has no jurat, is not signed as "sworn and subscribed to on Date " as a minimum requirement and sealed. This is therefore in direct violation of this State for the laws on affidavits.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the Employee Affidavits of Superior Court Judges Harold M. Brown (Exhibit 47) and Jonothan H. Link (Exhibit 48), and Master Magistrate Anne M. Preston (Exhibit 49) signatures of each and that the status is only that of "Employee Signature." Therefore Superior Court Judges Harold M. Brown (Exhibit 47) and Jonothan H. Link (Exhibit 48) and Master Magistrate Anne M. Preston (Exhibit 49) are mere employees absolutely validated by their own signature.
This evidence of the Employee Affidavits is identified as Exhibit 47, 48, and 49.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice that Public Officer and employee are in direct conflict with the lawful requirements for Public Officers. "Employee" denotes one who stands in a contractual relationship to his employer, a subordinate. An Employee Affidavit stands as proof of a master - servant relationship and as of the status of a mere employee. Only a public Officer is empowered and invested with a portion of sovereignty of the state, to wit:
"There is a clear distinction between a public officer and a public employee, and a public officer as distinguished from a public employee, must be invested by law with a portion of the sovereignty of the state and authorized to exercise functions either of an executive, legislative or judicial character." Francis v. Iowa E.S.C., 98 N.W.2d 733 (1959), 735, 736 (Exhibit 50), 250 Iowa 1300; Aldin Independent School Dist. v. Standley, 280 S.W.2d 578 (1955), 583, 585 (Exhibit 51), 154 Tex. 547; State ex rel. Newman v. Skinner, 191 N.E. 127 (1934), 128 (Exhibit 52), 128 Ohio St. 325, 93 A.L.R. 331.
This evidence of the Oath of Office and Employee Affidavit is identified Exhibits 44, 45, 46 and 47, 48, & 49. This evidence of the court cases of Francis v. Iowa E.S.C 98 N.W.2d 733 (1959), Aldin Independent School Dist. v. Standley, 280 S.W.2d 578 (1955) and State ex rel. Newman v. Skinner, 191 N.E. 127 (1934) are identified as Exhibit 50, 51, and 52.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of Section 3 of Article III of the Constitution of the United States (Exhibit 2), "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open court."
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the USC Title 18 § 2381 on Treason (Exhibit 53), "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of USC Title 18 § 2382 (Exhibit 54) Misprision of treason,
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years or both."
And further in Blacks Fourth Edition Law Dictionary, we find the following:
Misprision of treason. "The bare knowledge and concealment of an act of treason or treasonable plot by failing to disclose it to the appropriate officials; that is, without any assent or participation therein, for if the latter elements be present the party becomes a principal." Black’s Fourth Edition.
And further this court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of USC Title 18 § 4 (Exhibit 55) Misprision of felony, "Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more that three years, or both."
And further this court shall take Judicial Notice of the case of Ex parte Bollman, 8 U.S. 75 (1807) arising under the Supreme Court of the United States (Exhibit 56). In this case, Chief Justice Marshall stated the following:
Crimes so atrocious as those which have for their object the subversion by violence of those laws and those institutions which have been ordained in order to secure the peace and happiness of society, are not to escape punishment, because they have not ripened into treason. [Emphasis added]
This evidence of Constitutional Treason is identified as Exhibits 2, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55 and 56.
This court shall take mandatory Judicial Notice of the facts and law. And further as the purported judicial officer is in violations including, but limited to the Constitution of the United States, 1 Stat 23 and the Constitution of the State of Alaska; and further this outlaw court is without subject matter jurisdiction or personal jurisdiction.
Therefore including, but not limited to any Order, Judgment, or Process is void. And further as this court is without lawful authority, without jurisdiction, and this Court would should proceed at it’s own risk as such conduct would be actionable.
In such event, I intend to protect my rights by taking all peaceful and lawful measures available to me including, but not limited to, the following actions: