Four Motions For Bond Pending Appeal Only Signed By Clerk Of the Court Returned Denied; Raises Questions If Received or Reviewed By Federal Appellate Judges - NBC Right Now/KNDO/KNDU Tri-Cities, Yakima, WA |

Four Motions For Bond Pending Appeal Only Signed By Clerk Of the Court Returned Denied; Raises Questions If Received or Reviewed By Federal Appellate Judges

Posted:

This article was originally distributed via PRWeb. PRWeb, WorldNow and this Site make no warranties or representations in connection therewith.

SOURCE:

Advocacy group, A Just Cause, asks federal government to open investigation into operations of Clerk of the Court for the Tenth Circuit Court Appeals

Denver, Colorado (PRWEB) July 03, 2014

Advocacy group, A Just Cause announces today that it is asking the federal government to open an investigation into operations within the clerks office for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. In our opinion the handling of the IRP6 case by the clerks office for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals raises serious questions about how that office is operating," says Sam Thurman, A Just Cause.

Court records show that attorneys for the IRP6 filed a renewed motion for Bond Pending Appeal with the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals requesting that the IRP6 be released based new facts and circumstances demonstrating that this case presents substantial appellate issues which satisfy the legal standard to grant Appellants bond pending appeal. (Appellants Opposed Renewed Motion For Bond Pending Appeal, D.C. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, Appellate Case 11-1492, Document 01019270889). Records show that the motion was filed on Saturday, June 28, 2014 and was returned Denied on Monday, June 30, 2014. There is evidence associated with events around this motion that raises questions as to whether or not the 3-judge panel ever saw this motion," exclaims Thurman.

The Court Order of Denial asserts, This matter is before the Court on Appellants Opposed Renewed Motion for Bond Pending Appeal. Upon careful consideration, the Court denies Appellants motion. (United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Court Order, D.C. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, Appellate Case 11-1492, Document 01019271529). Records show the order was Entered for the Court and signed by Chief Deputy Clerk Chris Wolpert on behalf of Clerk of the Court Elisabeth A. Shumaker.

Questions regarding the actions of the clerk of the court were raised when the court order came back so quickly and without an opinion," says Ethel Lopez, A Just Cause. The actions by the clerk of the court in this matter seem to be inconsistent with the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Tenth Circuit Rules, information obtained from the offices of the appellate judges and the judgments and orders that are posted to the Tenth Circuit courts website," adds Lopez. (Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure - http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_26, Tenth Circuit Rules of Appellate Procedure, http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/clerk/FRAP%20RULES%20FINAL%20REDLINE%202014-11-15-2013.pdf)

Court records for the IRP6 case show that the appellate court three-judge panel for the IRP6 case includes the Honorable Senior Judge Bobby R. Baldock, Honorable Judge Harris L. Hartz, and Honorable Judge Jerome A. Holmes (D.C. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA, Appellate Case 11-1492).

I found in contacting the offices of Judge Hartz and Judge Holmes that bond motions like the one regarding the IRP6 are filed at the clerk of the court and then emailed to the 3-judge panel for consideration. After the judges review the motion(s), the three judges have to sign off (granting or denying). This process is consistent with procedures found in the federal and local rules for appellate procedure, but in the case of the IRP6 motion for Bond Pending Appeal only the clerk of the court signed off (Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure - http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frap/rule_26, Tenth Circuit Rules of Appellate Procedure, http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/clerk/FRAP%20RULES%20FINAL%20REDLINE%202014-11-15-2013.pdf). This makes one question why the judges offices had no record of receipt or review of this motion," ponders Lopez. Three additional motions have been filed previously over the past several months on behalf of the IRP6, but the judges staff show no confirmation of receipt, review, or sign off by the judges," adds Lopez.

"I have obtained evidence and conducted interviews that have raised more questions than answers," says Tracy Collins, international freelance investigative journalist, UK. After hearing how quickly the court denied the IRP6 motion, I inquired of the court as part of my investigation. Deputy Clerk of the Court Chris Wolpert offer no explanation as to why there was no written opinion in the court order, nor could he recall when he emailed the judges the motions," adds Collins. At the time of this press release no additional information was provided.

This turn of events is very bizarre," says Sam Thurman, A Just Cause. This is a serious matter when the offices of the appellate judges are saying that they havent seen a motion that they supposedly ruled on and returned to the appellants as Denied,'" adds Thurman. A matter in which the Deputy Clerk of the Court signs the order on behalf of the Court and the Clerk of the Court, but cant recall when he emailed the judges and has no explanation for why the order has no opinion is not a light matter and we strongly implore the federal courts, and Attorney General Eric Holder to launch an immediate investigation. People should be outraged at egregious acts like this where there is a total disregard for constitutional rights to due process," Thurman expounds.

On Tuesday, July 1, 2014, A Just Cause hand delivered the motion for Bond Pending Appeal, and all previous motions, to the office of Judge Hartz. As of this press release, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals had not responded to the motion. Attorneys for the IRP6 are submitting letters to the court regarding this matter. A Just Cause is contacting the office of the United States Attorney General Eric Holder, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, and Circuit Justice Sonia Sotomayor (Associate Justice, United States Supreme Court and Circuit Justice for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals), among other federal offices to file complaints and request an investigation.

The case of IRP Solutions (IRP6) is currently under appeal (US District Court for the District of Colorado, Honorable Christine M. Arguello, D. Ct. No. 1:09-CR-00266-CMA; Case Nos: NO. 11-1487, Case Nos. 11-1488, 11-1489, 11-1490, 11-1491 an 11-1492). Appellate Court panel includes the Honorable Senior Judge Bobby R. Baldock, Honorable Judge Harris L. Hartz, and Honorable Judge Jerome A. Holmes

For more information about the story of the IRP6 or for copies of the legal filings go to http://www.freetheirp6.org.

Related press releases: http://www.a-justcause.com/#!press-release/c21pq

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/07/prweb11993405.htm

Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider. WorldNow and this Station make no warranties or representations in connection therewith. If you have any questions or comments about this page please contact pressreleases@worldnow.com.

Powered by WorldNow
All content © Copyright 2000 - 2014 WorldNow and KHQ. All Rights Reserved. For more information on this site, please read our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.