aca __—_—_—___———___ *_,

DALLES Lbitake OS

Var dU, dUud dub bade
Juuimors DEPARTMENT OF ConAECTOND
Parole Violation Report
Sectian A: Violation Detalis >
Releases: Buncy Rebiman AMA_same IDS B1Se54.
Paremt Facitty: Cenvalin_ Date of Birth: Dg/ZAlL965

Gender: ®Male DFamele lace: CiCauasian flAlcan American DAsan American Ci Hispanic CONsive Amarcan Oita.

FB: OSL92MAR 1B: 819080 cose
Releases Date: O1/1G7004 samence Exp. Date: 01/7/2006 Violation Date: OUTOG
Custady Facility: Custedy Date:

offenvs(s): ml#i ands?
N
IDOC Warrant *& MLo4N 236. Date Warrant tamed: 91/5/04.

Description af the Alleged Violation (include daw, time, place and description of the violaban; oscaption and mothad of weapons used: Idendry end injury 10
viotin(s); arrest date and atrestng agorey, criminal charges, and custody/eourfbond information): On Jasusry 16, 2004 the shoved named releasee was released
from Centralia Corrections] Center with instructions ta report to 1006 S. State at the Ritz hotel. “This was un inappropriate placement for this
individual since ho did not have in bis possession sufficieat fimds to reside at the foremention pote). He was also {nscnucted to contact AMS
answering service apon arrivial and he has failed to contact this ageat since his release. On Innuary 27, 2004, the staff at thc Ritz bore! wes contacted
by this agent and lt was reported by the hotel staff that he had not checked in releaser, therefore his current whereabouts are unknown and be should
pe consided an instant absconder.

Other Arrests or Paroje or Mandatory Supervised Release Violations During the Current Supervision Term: NIA

Community Adjustment (uvonita cy N/A vA ‘ v

AMENDED (4/19/04): Offender arrested 4/19/04 by Inv Dewalt.
offender was on AWOL status for 82 days, and is currently
peing held at CPD 1st. No new charges at this time.

Agent’s Recommendation (sanctions. Javel, AAD dats, ett.):
Icis recommended that the subject that the subject forfeit some good ume to ‘impress. upon bim the importance ofremaining ia compliance with the
males governing his supervision. .

Attachments Gaently); warrant, notice of charges:

| hereby dectare under the penalty of perjury that the foragoing description of geae
true and correct to the best of my knowledge and bellaf.

Vivien Themes. Prt Parcie Agena Name a’

Supervisor Comments (f amy):

Section 8: Notice of Charges must be completed at the sam time this section Is completed

Distrbution; Raloasea; Raloasing Authorty; Rolaasne’s Care Fils; Page 1 of 2 DOC 0078 (EH. 1/2002)
Paront Field Barvices Representative: jougsse (Rephens DCA $91; DCI 119, and 142)
Hosting Offeer: # FOS, Interstate Campact Pritved on Recycled Paper

ecasTaAtd ££:88 pe@z-@f-NUL



IN THE ( “
CIRCUIT COURT COOK COUNTY

CRIMINAL DIVISTON, TLLINOTS

STATE OF ILLINOIS )
Plaintiff )
) Case No. MioY O/ 93
v )
)
. . )
“Busney “Roloson )
Defendant
PROOF/CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
TO: Ms. Dorothy Brown, Clerk TO: Mr. Richard Devine

Circuit Court Cook County

State's Attorney Ck Cty
2650 So. California Ave., Rm. 526

2650 So. California Ave., Rm. 11-D-

Chicago, IL 60608 Chicago, IL 60608 ey
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE thaton_ (\-\© , 20.63 have filed with the
U.S. Mail through the Wemrmx War, Correctional Center the following "p
documents, properly addressed to the parties above: ,
Demon Ween Tun | Sean RS

I further declare, under penalty of perjury, that I am the Plaintiff in the above action, that
I havéread the above documents, and that the information contained therein is true and
correct. 28 USC 1746 and 18 USC 1621.

DATE: \-\O-OS ty Lucene Albena
. . NAME: BurAen Kobiws0
; DOCH B= /56SY .

Henry Hill ___ Correctional Center
s =. P.O.BOX 17000
Galesburg , IL 61401

Kesleesl . oe
Appeal ete
7 ‘ale



Page | of 1

Obstruction to administration of justice
Obstructing Process;

Mr, robinson believe that the peoples case is defective from custodial and beyond
the custody of mr. robinson in the cook county jail was procedural defective by evidence and
time held in custody of the chicago police department. we ascert that on the date of july 12,01.
to the date Dec 22.01. The state's attorney was aware that mr. robinson rights were violated
and illegal search and seziure and a arrest that violates mr. robinson miranda rights. mr.
robinson was under medication from the hospital and was'nt control of his persons. this
information was witheld because it proves that the state's attorney violated mr. robinson fifth
amendment rights a pre- determination of gulit was made before a hearing. the adminisrator of
documents and fact material showed bias in bring this charge the conflict of law was a profile.
By which the state's attorney persecuted mr. robinson the circuit court of cook county was
not abreast of the scope of the indifference. because the remedies and legality was not fully
reviewed because of the confinement multiple times in the wake of a favorable outcome for
mr.robinson. Civil procedures jurisdictional denied and ‘ommitted based on liablity. we ask this
court based on the jurisdictional clause to determine if the detainment by the illinois department
of corrections on 4/19/04. under the county of cook case# . We
believe that the detainment was not of mr. robinson fault but of the case as a whole and the
defectiveness there of the state's knowingly refuse to make corrections in pre-trial hearing.
circumvent the powers and determination of this court for conflict. mr. robinson is entitled to
telif because of a systemitic dismissal of charges. we ask this because of state's admission
and the state's attorney admission. facts were sealed by the state. Witness and third party
witnesses testimony is answer of conflict to the evidence and it's presentation.

As you consider we request the court consider illinois complied statue civil procedure;

735 ILCS 5/3-104, 735ILCS 5/3111, 735 ILCS 5/4 211, 735 ILSC 5/3 110, AND 745 ILCS 10/4
104.

AND federal case 04-c-5146 u.s district court of northern district of illinois.

we believe that mr. robinson is entitle to damages for imprisonment before trial or hearings while
ina state insitution based on state control of mr. robinson.

respectfully submitted

BURNEY ROBINSON

boa aaininads



Page | of 2
. >
U.S DISTRICT COURT FOR F I
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF D

ILLINOIS '2
JAN 2 4 2072

1-A4-/
THOMAS G. BRITON
CLERK, US. DISTR:Ci CouRT

BURNEY ROBINSON
Suge,
vs. yaw &
COOK COUNTY STATE'S ATTORNEY Valder

AND ILLINOIS DEPT. CORRECTIONS,

I} - ¢v- 0093208

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT

I'M BRING THIS SUIT BASED ON FOURTH AMENDMENT VIOLATION AND INTENTIONAL,
DELAY BECAUSE OF THE STATUE OF LIMITATION THAT THE STATE VIOLATED
INTENTIONALLY. | MR. ROBINSON WAS DELIBERATELY DETAIN IN A MANNER THAT
VIOLATED MY RIGHT TO DO PROCESS THE PRETENSE OF THE STATE DISCOVERY

IS A LEGAL CONFLICT IT RE-INVENT A CLAIM AND THE MECHANIC OF THE
PROCEDURES

TO UPHOLD A POSITION WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE PRIMA FACIA EVIDENCE. WHICH
CONFLICT THIS CASE BECAUSE OF STATE CONTROL OF MY PERSON THE RIGHT TO
BE BEFORE THE COURT TO DEFEND ARGUEMENT AGAINST ME AND MY LIBERTY IS
MY RIGHT. WE ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE MAGISRATE ACT WAS VIOLATED BY THE
STATE

BY NOT PROPER CLARIFYING THE DETENTION IF THE STATE'S ATTORNEY HAD
ADDRESSED MR. ROBINSON AND THE COURT MR. ROBINSON WOULD HAVE BEEN
ABLE TO PRESENT A DEFENSE. THE ACTIONS OF THE STATE WEIGHED ON THE
MENTAL STATE OF MR. ROBINSON AS THE COURT REVIEW THE CONFINEMENT.
HUDSON VS. MeMILLIAN, 503 U.S 1, 1992, AND FARMER VS. BRENNAN 511 U.S 825, 835-
836, 1994. THE MENTAL STATE WAS A CAUSE OF THE FAIL ADMINISTRATIVE
MECHANISMS OF THE STATE AND STATED GRIEVANCE THAT WERE INTEROGATION
BEFORE A HEARING TO CONFINEMENT. THE REMEDIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN PLAIN,
SPPEDY AND ACCURATE BECAUSE OF EVIDENTARY DISTINCTION THAT ARE DRAWN
FOR CONCLUSIONS BY THE COURT. THE PROLONGED STATE CUSTODY WAS
PUNISHMENT. WE BELIEVE THAT LEGAL DEFECTS IN THE CASE WAS NEVER
CONDUCTED AND GUIDELINES FOR PROCEEDING WERE NOT FOLLOWED SUCH AS
THE RULES FOR HABEAS BEFORE THE COURT. BECAUSE OF STATE CONTROL MR.
ROBINSON COULD NOT PRESENT HIMSELF TO THE COURT. WE ARGUE THE
CONDITION THAT ASSISTED IN DENYING A CIVIL HEARING FOR POSSIBLE DAMAGES.
AND DISMISSAL OF CHARGES THIS HAPPEN IN THE STATE COURT AS WELL AS THE
FEDERAL COURT THE RELEVANT OF CONTINUED STATE CONTROL. THE MAGISRATE
COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN FULL THAT CLAIM.

https://writer.zoho.com/editor.im 1/14/2012



Page 2 of 2

TITLE 28 U.S.C 636 B, 1... THE PARTICPATION IN THE PRE-TRIAL HEARING AS IN THE
NUSSLE CASE. | MR. ROBINSON COULD NOT IDENTIFY PROPERLY THE CONDITIONS
UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS THIS ENHANCE THE MENTAL ANXEITY OF THE SITUATIONS
WITH MISCONDUCT DO TO PROCEDURE VIOLATIONS. AND JURIDICTIONAL CONTROLS
THE STATE LIABLITIY IS A CIRCUMSTANCE OF MOMENTARY VIOLATIONS OF MY
LIBERTIES THE DAMAGES WERE THE OCCURRENCES PLACE BY DOCUMENTARY
MATERIAL MALICE IN THE WORDING OF THE DOCUMENTS FALSE IMPRISONED

ME. THIS EFFECTED THE STATUE OF LIMITATIONS FOR THE STATE WE EXCEED
THERE

IS A SOLUTION FOR A SUM CERTAIN AND A STATE'S JUSTIFICATION TO RESOLVE THE
CHARGE FORTHWITH ON EVIDENCE FROM THE CLAIM AND POST-CONVICTION
REVIEW

OF PRIMA FACIA EVIDENCE

RE! CTFULLY SUBMITTED

BURNEY ROBINSOI

CASE# 11- CV-08208

https://writer.zoho.com/editor.im 1/14/2012



IN THE CIRCUIT URTOFTHE First JUDICY’ §

CuK COUNTY, ILLINOIS ri CEIVED

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS )

) t YAN 1 9 p05
y. ) Case No. Af (04 © 4ay ERK OF
Burney “Acbinsen CM CIRCUIT eouny
Defendant ) £ Bivisian
- of
DEMAND FOR SPEEDY TRIAL AND/OR QUASH WARRANT we'd 0 4a
Dud prh€l~
The defendant, Bur Ney “Kobiasen , petitions this court and demands a speedy
trial pursuant to 730 ILCS 5/3- “8-10 (2001) (Intrastate Detainer) and 725 ILCS 5/103-5 (2001) 2 LEM EA if
(Speedy Trial) and Article 1, Section 8 of the Illinois Constitution. LIME MRE é
In support of this demand the defendant states the following: RETURNED
JAN
1. He is presently incarcerated at the Ce (es bw ca Correctional Center, 03 2012
imeieniouv , Ulinois Giiet . ;
2. He was convicted of Parole Viciatwon in the County of .
Cook :on_ { fay , 20.04, and sentenced to years. *
3, A term of \ years remains to be served for this conviction.
4, The following charges are pending against the Defendant in your county: :
Rearele Violation Wascicunt * MAONOja 3
WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully demands that the State's Attorney of
Geek County proceed to bring him to trial on the above stated charge(s) within
the 160 days as allowed by law.
Busy, Qenaor
Burney Poiwsow No. {3716654
Defendant
Gales oure Correctional Center
P.O, Box_i1¢0
Galera —__ Dlinois

Subs joed and swomito before me this

day of 2005
oT ER Colmer

Notary Public
otary "OFFICIAL SEAL"
x Tenard E, Palmer
jotary Publ \f
Revised Jan 2002 . My Ghia Ep. air