Theres'a Letter to the State II

8/14/2019 Theres'a Letter to the State II

1/8

From: Theresa M. Martin May 11, 2009

10918 Norwood Avenue

Port Richey, Fl. 34668

Hm. Ph. (727) 857-4193

[email protected]

To: Joshua Houston, State Attorney

Citrus County Prosecutors Office

110 N. Apopka Avenue,

Inverness, Florida 34450

Office no.: (352) 341-6675

Fax No.: (325) 341-6675

Re: Martin v. State Appeal No.: 2009- AP-2088

Dear Mr. Houston:

This correspondence is in response of my last motion for stay pending appeal which

you know is presently before Judge Yerman in the trial court. Also by now I assume

youve had a few days and a chance to listen to the CD I have as exhibit A in my

affidavit in support of the motion. My exhibit A as Im sure you remember I swore

to its accuracy and authenticity as much as possible as anyone can until they introduce

it into evidence in a court hearing. What's more, Im sure that you recognize Mr.

Baghdadis voice as his. Im also sure that you probably have more than likely talked

to him about the phone message on the CD and how this case on appeal is moving

along. In addition, one can reasonably assume that you have probably asked him to

listen to it and then asked him if the recording is his voice and if it accurately portrays

the voicemail message he left on my cell phone on March 11, 2009.

I also assume since, you are around each other on a routine basis in numerous

county court appearances and that both of you have discussed my case, and Im sure

by now he knows that Im appealing my plea agreement and arguing at least one ap-
mailto:[email protected]


2/8

2

peal point of ineffective Counsel arguing that my legal counsel failed to argue a mo-

tion to dismiss the States case based on the Outrageous Government Conduct De-

fense. I might add you probably have told him, or asked him or even showed him

that Judge Yerman in his last order denying my motion to withdraw my plea after sen-tence did in fact agree that a judge is/or can be the government and Judge Yerman

cited in his order a California case Ortiz v. Almager, 2008 WL 789746, *6(C.D. Cal.

2008) verifying that Government misconduct can rise to the level of a constitutional

violation only where it so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting

conviction a denial of due process.

Furthermore, you might have even told him, or he has seen for himself in the court

file that I cited the famous trail lawyer Richard F. Dickie Scruggs (who has been in

prison for a while now serving a five (5) prison sentence) who was involved in the

famous tobacco cases a few years ago. Mr. Scruggs was charged in a criminal case by

the U. S. Government in Federal District Court in Mississippi for the Northern Dis-

trict. Where the argument by the defense was over the Chief Judge in Lafayette

County, Mississippi was he a legal agent as defined by federal law for the United

States Government. The government used the Mississippi Chief Judge in order to getevidence on Mr. Scruggs and his law firm on corruption charges of bribing Missis-

sippi Judges in order for him and his firm to get large attorney fees in his civil cases.

One of Mr. Scruggss arguments was that Lafayette County Chief Judge Henry

Lackey was not an agent subject to the reach of 18 U.S.C. 666. Senior Judge Neal B.

Biggers Jr. denied the Scruggs motion and agreed with U. S. Governments analysis of

the law as applied to this legal question on whether to dismiss the indictment based on

the defenses arguments contained in their motion. The federal district court denied the

defenses motion not because the (OGCD) was not a valid defense, but they failed to

prove it was indeed government misconduct by the United States Governments

agents actions of the Chief Judge in Lafayette County, Mississippi.


3/8

3

I think Mr. Houston you can understand and see that there is a lot more to this case

that what Mr. Baghdadi has presented to you on the surface. I again affirm that I sin-

cerely believe that Mr. Baghdadis superiors above him gave him the wrong advice on

my case, and now I have to suffer by the courts displeasure with me as Judge Yermanwrote his unjust and unnecessary judicial comments with no evidence to support his

allegations at the very end of four of his April 23, 2009 Order denying my motion to

withdraw my plea. Furthermore, I might add that these unjustified statements are un-

becoming of a county judge and most assuredly and clearly shows bias and prejudice

by a judge in getting a fair trial. If this case is reversed on appeal then I would defi-

nitely file a motion to disqualify. At this present time, my motion for stay if it is de-

nied, it can be appealed to circuit court. Therefore, I see no need to do it at this time

but might reconsider in the very near future.

I would like to ask that the State join me in conceding that in the interest of justice

based on my last three pleadings and the recording of Mr. Baghdadi verifying that he

indeed is wrong, by the fact he failed to grant me an adequate defense, and he did fall

short based on the performance prong of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668,

104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984). I additionally state and can and will argue in my brief that mytrial counsel was constitutionally [in]effective because he failed to file any motions,

issue any subpoenas, or pursue any discovery in order to put forth the Outrageous

Government Conduct Defense as outlined by due process violations as written in ar-

ticle 1 section 9 of the Florida Constitution and which should have resulted in a mo-

tion to dismiss the States criminal charges. Munoz v. State, 629 So.2d 90 (Fla. 1993).

The High Court in Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25 (1972); Justice Douglass de-

livered the opinion of the Court and in opining on the issue of how a defendant re-

ceives justice by a visitor looking at the process from the outside, he determined the

following:

First "`Wherever the visitor looks at the system, he finds great numbers of defen-

dants being processed by harassed and overworked officials. Police have more cases


4/8

4

than they can investigate. Prosecutors walk into courtrooms to try simple cases as they

take their initial looks at the files. Defense lawyers appear having had no more than

time for hasty conversations with their clients. Judges face long calendars with the

certain knowledge that their calendars tomorrow and the next day will be, if anything,longer, and so there is no choice but to dispose of the cases.

Second "`Suddenly it becomes clear that for most defendants in the criminal proc-

ess, there is scant regard for them as individuals. They are numbers on dockets, face-

less ones to be processed and sent on their way. The gap between the theory and the

reality is enormous.

Third "`Very little such observation of the administration of criminal justice in op-

eration is required to reach the conclusion that it suffers from basic ills.'"

Fourth that picture is seen in almost every report. "The misdemeanor trial is char-

acterized by insufficient and frequently irresponsible preparation on the part of the de-

fense, the prosecution, and the court. Everything is rush, rush." Hellerstein, The Im-

portance of the Misdemeanor 407 U. S.25, 36 Case on Trial and Appeal, 28 The Legal

Aid Brief Case 151, 152 (1970). (emphasis added). Based on Justice Douglasss fac-

tual observation by an outsider, the State should understand my similar position. Ifirmly believe one of the key problems with the public defenders office is there

caseload is way too large, to adequately give any amount of time to each individuals

case and my case requires an enormous amount of research into areas that public de-

fenders usually arent required to know or have to learn. In my case, a public de-

fender as well as the State will have to learn many facets of family law, Rules of Pro-

fessional Conduct, federal law, and the list can go on even further, in order to prepare

for a motion to dismiss.

In Strickland v. Washington, the United States Supreme Court held that a criminal

defendant is deprived of the right to effective assistance of counsel where "counsel's

conduct so undermined the proper functioning of the adversarial process that the trial

cannot be relied on as having produced a just result." 466 U.S. 668, 686 (1984).


5/8

5

I further ask the State, if they feel the above request is not the proper avenue then

at least join me in the appeal by conceding that the trial court erred for failing to grant

an evidentiary hearing on the issue of ineffective counsel. You have to admit that

there is enough evidence, especially now, based on the recording that verifies all myprevious post trial motions did have legal merit, and I did, in fact, receive wrong legal

advice in my case from Mr. Baghdadi. Ask yourself an honest question based on what

you know from my pleadings and the CD recording of Mr. Baghdadis voicemail he

left me on March 11, 2009 would you want him as your defense counsel when your

criminal (free) record is at stake? I dont think so. The State surely doesnt entertain

the idea or thought I would try and fake and/or alter a recording in order to pull a fast

one on the State and the court by committing fraud? Therefore, on this point I would

kindly ask the State to concede in this appeal at least by its answer brief by agreeing

that the trial court erred by failing to at least grant my motion for a new trial and/or

my motion to withdraw my plea after sentence. Furthermore, if the State will do this

concession in their appeal it will be both professional and the correct response in the

interest of justice.

I hope you will feel that this is an appropriate measure to avoid further harm inseeking legal justice for this defendant. I know that the State has a legal duty to seek

justice to anyone when, someone is illegally convicted. I will be more than glad to

work with you on this urgent matter and will provide you with whatever documents,

evidence, or witnesses you would need to bring this to a conclusion that both of us can

live with.

I do state, for the record, that I would prefer to have a hearing before a judge in Cit-

rus County in order to prove Outrageous Government Conduct by former Judge

Renke pertaining to my final judgment in my second civil divorce action in 2005. Fur-

thermore, his final order was based on grossly illegal and unconstitutional rulings and

was the result of more than likely judicial corruption with a strong circumstantial like-

lihood of a financial payoff to former Judge Renke. I now can prove it after all of


6/8

6

these years, but it would cost me a small fortune, and it is necessary for a federal hear-

ing down the road a few months.

Finally, I admit, I never should have been intimidated by Mr. Baghdadi and the

other attorney on the eve of my trial, the morning of March 16, 2009 by the CitrusCounty Public Defenders Office coercing me to take the plea offer. One must re-

member what is a non- lawyer to do, but trust her court appointed lawyer, and he was

clearly wrong by his advice. Im sure by now that you have to realize that there is

definitely a problem in this case with my representation by the public defenders of-

fice. However, since, it has happened, I now have to live with the consequences of my

decision, for the time being.

It is ironic that the State did not win this criminal conviction by proving that they

had a good case, based on evidence supported by the law but just the opposite. First

this conviction came on the heels of my public defender, who decided that a judge is

not the government in (OGCD). Therefore, I had no valid defense, no motion to

dismiss ever filed and argued to the court, no form discovery ever done, and now WE

ALL KNOW HE WAS WRONG whether we want to believe it or not. Secondly,

the judge I believe erred by failing to grant a new trial and/or at the very least basedon case law, the court should have granted an evidentiary hearing in order to give this

defendant a surviving chance to prove my claims of ineffective counsel were with or

without merit as stated by my motion. In researching this case for appeal it wont take

you long, if you dont already know by common sense the court committed reversi-

ble error and if the circuit court in its appellate capacity should vacate my sentence,

and we then start all over again.

I will soon learn you and/or offices position on my case and will learn if you really

believe that lady justice is really blind and stands for justice for all (not just for those

in the system) and everyone is to be placed on equal footing or if you and your office

will continue to protect the system and let me fall by the wayside in order to protect

the legal brethren involved, in the inside of the SYSTEM while as a pro se litigant,


7/8

7

Im on the outside. It seems that since, my former public defender miserable failed, to

even come to close in trying (to half way) represent my interest, of proving my inno-

cence, and now I try to prove my innocence and what does the court do, but try and

scourge me for claiming that my trail counsel was ineffective. The trial court tries tothreaten me with possible sanctions as stated in its last order on April 23, 2009. I

would remind you of the late Justice William O. Douglas in a dissenting opinion in

Pierson v. Ray, 386 U. S. 547 (1967); stated that not all judges, under all circum-

stances, no matter how outrageous their conduct is immune from suit under 17 Stats.

13, 42 U.S.C. 1983,24 Justice Douglas asked, rhetorically: What about the judge

who conspires with local law enforcement officers to railroad a dissenter? What

about the judge who knowingly turns a trial into a kangaroo court? Or one who inten-

tionally flouts the Constitution in order to obtain a conviction? This applies a lot in

my Pasco County case by former Judge John Renke III, but it also applies to Judge

Yerman as to a kangaroo court by the fact of illegally denying my valid motion to

withdraw my plea after sentence. Isnt this really flouting the constitution in order to

obtain a conviction? Isnt this what due process is all about a hearing and the right to

be heard in this great country of ours? You and your office can correct this miscar-riage of justice if you will only realize what is meant by your sworn oath to the Flor-

ida and United States Constitutions.

I would remind you Mr. Houston not to forget this statement; it needs to be remem-

bered by the late Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. while writing a letter from his Birming-

ham Jail in April 16, 1963, wrote that Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice eve-

rywhere.

Lastly, I would remind you and your office whatever other legal matters that might

arise, I will have to address along the way, and there could be some hard legal lessons

for some people involved in this case to learn. The ball is now in the States court, do

what you think is the right direction for the State, me, and as well as the Citrus County

Tax Payers (who ultimately are the ones who have to financially pay for all of this) in


8/8

8

order for this case to come to its final just conclusion based on the facts and as ap-

plied to the law.

This letter will be sent to you by regular U. S. Mail and will also be sent by fax in

order to verify that you did actually receive this letter. Therefore, upon receiving thefax I will give you and/or your office fifteen (15) days to send me a response. The fif-

teen (15) days will start the day after I send you the faxed copy. After the fifteen (15)

day period has elapsed, if I have not received any correspondence from you or your

office by U. S. Mail or by email, I will assume you no longer desire to settle this mat-

ter amicably, but wish to proceed with the appeal on opposite points of view.

If you should feel we need to have a personal meeting on this, I would be glad to

come to your office and meet with you on this delicate matter.

Sincerely yours,

Theres'a Letter to the State II

Documents

Transcript of Theres'a Letter to the State II