Grasshopper's Appeal & Habeas Corpus petition

The True Story. .... sublimely hilarious, if only it weren't so sad...

Retroduction

pages in binder prior to text. note at top in pencil: denied 10-28-2010 [ form ] MC-275

APP- 08 —006671 SF Jail # 2333405

Court of Appeals 350 McAllister Petition for writ of Habeas Corpus [denied] Judge J. McBride or Presiding

Judge of the Superior Court — 400 McAllister

i underlined the instructions, these words: Challenging a Criminal Conviction…

Petition concerns —a conviction. — a sentence. —Jail or prison conditions. —other (specify) attempt to appeal.

name: Grasshopper

where: mostly 850 Bryant, SF

reason: PC 422 criminal threat with intent to terrorize. I was convicted of misdemeanor terrorism. PC 422.

sentencing: 850 Bryant, Judge Yaggy, also Judge Wong; also the Taxi Commission revoked my Grasshopper Taxicab Company.

case#: SF Jail #233405, App 08—006671

date convicted: 11-27th-2007

sentenced: December 2007

Length of sentence: 9 months, i served 6 months, over half in solitary confinement

when do i expect to be released: 5-19th-2008

counsel? yes. no.

standby counsel— C. Zadik Shapiro 819 Eddy SF 94109

Also i represented myself until Judge Yaggy threw me off my own counsel.

Plead: Not guilty.

Trial: Jury

Grounds for Relief:

I was forced to accept inadequate counsel, after being thrown off my own defense by Carol Yaggy. Please read the accompanying statement, entitled Grasshopper’s Appeal. I allready felt Zadik to be inadequate from a prior trial and did NOT want him to represent me, but he was forced to do so. I was never offered a different lawyer and did not know i could request one.

Supporting facts:

a: please see accompanying statement entitled Grasshopper’s Appeal. Facts: I was forced to accept inadequate counsel after being thrown off my own defense. Zadik Shapiro has a speech impediment, and had already failed to follow my wishes on the prior trial regarding my defense. NO evidence was ever presented at my trial , except her (Janet Vandebos’) word over mine. Although the trial ended in conviction on PC 422 misdemeanor threat, many additional false allegations were tossed liberally into the witchhunt, for other crimes not committed nor ever legally charged in the course of the trial proceedings , by Karen Hallett. Although it was “stricken” from the record, the prosecutor KH falsely claimed , in front of the jury, that i had actually “TRIED to kill” Vandebos, and that i had in fact crashed into the center divider. I was never able to voice any opening statement, nor was Zadik. The prosecution got theirs without interruption; mine was disrupted and banished. Zadik requested a new trial because my defense did not get any opening statement.

b: General well known principles of American Jurisprudence violated by my ordeal, Ground 1, include inadequacy of counsel, the right to due process, the right to represent oneself, the right to a fair trial, to an opening statement, freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, and many more.

- - - -

These frequent arrests, and specifically the Vandebos charge & re-charge are

2. a violation of my freedom of speech, not because i was running for Mayor, but because i could not represent myself without constant harassment from Yaggy, who 3. violated my right to remain silent by throwing me off my own counsel in front of the jury.

supporting facts: a:

The cops refused my request to download and view the photos in my Taxicab camera, which only the SFPD themselves can access; they must do so within 24 hours or else the pictures are lost; they refused my request to save and view these photos, which would have proven that i never touched her, as alleged.

The initial Vandebos taxi ride was on July 26th, 2007. Although charges were initially dropped, my Grasshopper Taxicab business was suspended, and in the Thigpen i was charged with driving taxi illegally in my “Grasshopper for Mayor” mobile. My business remained suspended despite having no Vandebos charges pending, until i parked in Ed Jew’s driveway in early September 2007.

They then arrested me and tortured me, and re—charged me with the Vandebos. There has never been any evidence to support her claims, it was her word over mine. Although they had to drop those Ed Jew charges, they managed to convict me on the Thigpen, which Zadik provided inadequate counsel for me upon. I did NOT want him to represent me in the Vandebos, so i defended myself. Yaggy kicked me off my own counsel in front of the jury and forced Zadik to represent me, although i did not want him to and he himself did not want to.

b: I have a right to act as my own counsel or attorney, which was denied to me. The attorney who represented me against his will made a motion for a new trial because we got NO opening statement. Importantly, my right to remain silent was not a possibility for me in this trial, after defending myself. I was not offered a Marsden motion, nor was i able to remain silent, as i may have chosen to do, if i had not [already] acted as my own counsel.

— — — —

issues raised: 1. continuing continuances

Excessive harsh punishment & judicial harassment from Carol Yaggy

2. Inadequacy of counsel, due process violations, free speech stifled

3. it was a totally unfair trial.

were you represented by counsel on appeal? Yes [not really]

Kathleen Page 225 Bush 16th floor. PO Box 2837 sf ca 94126 [Kathleen practiced lawfare only, thanks Ms Page]

Note 8-4-2015 i finally got Art “ace” Lipton to file a half-hearted appeal that was never granted, nor even seriously considered. [they gave us a half hour in court on a Friday and announced Monday next that they’d denied, so hence never seriously considered, obviously]

I am filing this form in hopes of actually securing progress upon, & expediting a filing of my appeal, which has no deadline for to be filing at this time.

Actually , i constantly asked for paperwork specifically detailing or explaining the reason for my solitary confinement, so that i could challenge that “ad- - seg” administrative segregation; an explanation was consistently denied to me in written form . I did receive an oral explanation that I was being held in solitary under orders from Sheriff Michael Hennessy BECAUSE i ran for Mayor, this as my punishment, as i was deemd some sort of “important personage,” (which i am not.)

did you seek the highest level of administrative review available? YES

- - - -

other appeals? YES

small claims court; small claims; no hearing was granted to me for my color scheme change. (a) yet they were trying to keep the application fee, claiming my hands were dirty (sic). (b) To Impeach is Patriotic, bumper expressing free speech on my cab.

Judgement ruling in my favor ordering from the SF Taxi Commission the return of the $790- color scheme change application fee. CSM 08-827497

b. San Francisco Board of Appeal: appealed shutdown of my Grasshopper Taxicab Company destroying my dreams.

Zadik suggested to avoid declaring my innocence because of pending appeal.

I lost , no written order was given. late 2008.

Do you have another matter: Thigpen APP 09-006981 also SF # 2334541

Due process is being denied to me still. Please read my text, and grant a hearing upon my appeal and mercy upon my soul, still not yet forthcoming. Please have mercy.

10-23-2010 Grasshopper Alec Kaplan

petition for writ of Habuas Corpus page 6 of 6

[this was denied utterly , totally, and entirely, after many years of daily effort to appeal; the word for this now is called Lawfare and also, narrative control….]

[ Thus concludes the retroduction. we’ll type for your viewing pleasure the first 133 pages of the Appeal, in segments, and hope you gain something useful from the time you spend reading, if you do. Blessings and regards, G]

[Today is 6-5-2022; these were — above—- the first few pages from the Spiral Bound document, which represent the failed Habeas Corpus petition. They wouldn’t grant me Habeas Corpus because i wasn’t in jail , is my layman understand…]