# - fl5'L 2 

# La 

# Salet+e- 

# \-\-D\kbnY'- ' \X' f1f102_J**<bz~** 

# ;m2-sbC)b 

# a--, o-c

# + cr 

# d-o 

# \S



# E Y'l L 

# \os-eJ 

# -fbI

. \S Y\'1 \ 

# Pe+ih6 Y\ 

# fb r \'0 GY\

# c\oVv-tu_

# S**~**



# .**\\\~**

# \_ \ e RECEIVED IN**~** cireJ8>;0URTOF CRIMINALAPPEALS 

# ocr 23

# 201s AbetAcosta,Clevk 

# ?m?he+ 

# RcV\0\LJ**_D~~~ w~~~eLer** 
This document contains some pages that are of poor qualit}j

.**a~~** thtt time**oilmeJf3)11i"i~.**/**~~!M1Pi;t** '·**~~trict** of.Te.Jii!S·; 

### II ?

. 

# I 1'0 

# I 

# \-\f \

# ~**~:7JM:t/l** T



# - W 0 k_ L D 

# G 

# 0 

# u 1Z\ · 

# o\-**~ ~·r**  ..,.,

## c L../ 

## "I

# o

1'

# ~**~E\Zt<\f\\\o""'JtL** 

# Cou\Z-T 

# or**~ftiltc~·~** 

# 'j G-v

# v 'c: '?-- "-' "" 

### 12 (\_ \ ' 

# o 

# r1\'\f:**S\~~** 

# or-**h_~f\'cR\Cf\**

. I 

# 0 f-**,~** 

# \c t::

# s 0 \- 

# ?**~**

# E-:s\0 E

## ~\

# T ,.g A?,

## '•"~ t 

## l" 0 

# g 

# gd 'C\ 

## c

## ·\~ 

# ob-a.rnd! 

# v, (.t**~r** 

# ts \**oE~\'** 

# --:5' o <2- · 

# '0\ de 11 ;

# C0~1 6-K c-SS

- t+vvSE

# ~ ,

. . If\."TTTI\**"-'~I** &8,.(,T 

# Sf**~1\L\··TE** 

# y S W**~ R~\'<\** **~** 

# Co u \Z_ 

## I 

# J**"~E**

# 'Xf-1-S 

# (5()"1 E 

# K t\..1\C 1'--t 

# T/ 

# 0 F F t 

# c c 0 P 

# G-o\FeR 1Vcf(i.1 

# A \**{D~** 

# W't:**-~ b-E~~~~'t\L**  

# C**ou~T** 0 f--· I 

# 'c Rl 

### VV\ r 

### "-<cA-L

# Kf~

# 5> ( Su**r~~M~** Co 

# UK\I

# f\RS~,N**~-dv{CT** 01-

# ~.oo,-~c AT

# \~vSlDYL OF APPEAL l '\. Y C J \ L.--> 1ST**cOU~~N** TEXAS

# ~;;**~** ioi5 

# TtY4$ 1
A pRINE -:1 ;/"\ \ CtiRISIOPtiER

. 0 I

.I C

# -r~ ft 

# r 

# l33 R D ( 

# l 'l.L{T 

# t-1/

# (w5"

# I HI 

# 333RD/ 

## ""''D 3 3 71 II 

# JU !)I

# c;14(__

# 0~'5TK rc I ( out2 

# r· (J 

# F·

./f7:11lt2

# r.Y Ct?ZJ 

# Air/

. :JU;?IJ 

## 0 reT! or/ 

# a F 

# WtJKL-tJ**C~l** -t-he-- 

### J.a >') 

# --n-v · ..

.fl7

# y /Jl_t?mdYt

# ~ /1 

# /iJ**~ ~5**  J (/Yc] 

## c/td7!Vj

# ~**-~ Svi:;_;-·ee~**  J11q//ev /5

# Va5v~/ bvf



# . . 

# 1/_ /J· 

# a !Ju-m8n:5 

## r/:YIJ--1-5 

# dJ;Pv/--e-/ 

# vhe;er}?**~e ~~~**  

# '7' -/-h.£

# :;;;_~,;{{::f.e/_;t??kesES / T5 

# Pe?tJ;;le

. -···-,......... . ...... --j_1\j \ \-\ 

## E.**r~** {:\LS

### ~o(. 

### \\\E ' i

## ~ \ \

# -rE.D SIA\ES 

# CDu\Z.l" O\-

## ~ '£ Ul'\l 

### FIFTH CJ!ZCU\l. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTONDIVISION f\J'-\

### V \AJ 

### oR LD LOUR. 1 

## fnR I. RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD, §

### -~ TDCJ-CID NO. 623968, § 

### § Petitioner, §. VS. § CTVIL ACTION NO. H-94-2767 

# g § 

### H-15-01.351-C\i WARDEN GARY JOHNSON, § 

### ' §

## ND11c..~espo~nt.**A.~rEAL t\~\**  D

## C0tv)9L~t~T r=oR. JuD\C\AL 

# Mts**C..O~OUC..T 0~**  ORDER 

## \...\.S.**\))~\Z\LT** 

### 3"\Ju&E 

### MEL11JDA 

# HAKMON/ TDG-ETHEK \f,._\ 

### \T\-\ 

### f\\\f\U\f.JS ru\T\Dt\.\ t\N\) 

## lr**~** Thispro se petitioner has been barred from filing any notice ofappyals, motions, or other pleadings. (Docket Entry No. 124). Therefore, his "Motion for Rehearing of Final Judgment," "Motion for Leave to File Documents," and "Motion to Reopen All 'Closed' Cases" (Docket Entry Nos. 127, 129, and 130) are DENIED. Furthermore, the Court ORDERS these motions

1 (Docket Entry Nos. 127, 129, and 130) STRICKEN from the record. The Clerk will provide a copy ofthis order to the parties. SIGNED at Houston, Texas, this 14th day ofOctober, 2015.

MELINDA HARMON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


## \ll 0LATloN5 

# DF \-\uMJ\t---l

## \\\&-\-r\~ 

# Of Tf\E. 

# t\M GfZ \

CA

## -~\ 

# ?E C>

## \'Lt:

111

# lAJl+ost: H ••. 

# L£G-A L 

# S**~STEtf\** \

# s COf\Ku9T lj

# E**~**0

# ND 

# f\ E 

# C.JXJ-**~**\'T\

## DI\.L " 

# f\ 

# cCofZD 1\'.1 b- 

### Pr 

## LSt) 

# 'To L\.S. 

## C..I"KC\..J1T ._jLJD&E E\DTt1 

# J.DlJES 0\-Tt\t: 

# r\ r-**T~** 

# C\KC:.\.HT 

# u.S**.Cou~** 

## Of**~** 

## Pft::{\L 

# S

### "court ofappeals ofthe united states" in the**~h** 

### circuit f-; 

## Ptk

UNITED STATES OFAlvfE!llCA**.~in**tiff/Appellee

vs .DeBBj' Ray: Hardin All rights reserved UCC 1-308 Appellant
"One supreme Court" Art.icl.e 3, 

### .Case 12-1320 

# See A-)\ 

# cc\s-e Nos

. 

# E-el oW

DEMAND FORDETERMINATION OF VOID JUDGMENT 

### L-ast- 

### y>ll)Phe...t

## \Zon~u1**Dw'Cltt'\~ w~·~tv:dd;**  COMES NOW Demy=Rley

_'Mardin, sui juris; to demand determination of "void**~n~** .**~~** judgme 

# 7 ' that was filed in the district courtjn Feef't!M)i lOth, 2012 and was submitted to the court ofappeals as**~Khihit** 4 with the "Notice ofAppeal"_

COURT HAS NO DISCRETION TO REFUSE TO VACATE A VOID JUDGMENTExport v. Reef, 54 F.3d 1466, 1469 (9th Cir. 1995) held: "Wereview de novo, however, a district court's ruling upon a Rule 60(b)(4) motionto set aside ajudgment as void, because the question ofthe validity ofajudgment is a legal one. Retail Clerks Union Joint Pemion Trust v. Freedom Food Center, Inc. 938 F.2d 136, 137 (9th Cir. 1991)." (end quote Export Group v. Reejlnd.) Orner v. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (lOth Cir. 1994) held that "when the role providing for relieffrom a voidjudgmentis applicable, reliefis not discretionary, but is mandatory." Jaffe v. Van Brunt, 158 F.R.D. 278 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) held: "Judgments entered where courts lack either subject matterjurisdiction, orthat were otherwise entered in violation ofdue process oflaw, must be set aside." (end quoteJaffe) "without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; andform no bar to a recovery 1sought, evenprior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and allpersons concerned in executing suchjudgments or· sentences, are considered, in law, as trespassers. " [Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 US. 328, 340 (1828)]
"Ajudgment rendered in violation ofdue processis void in the rendering State and is not entitled to full faith and credit elsewhere. Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U.S. 714, 732-733 (1878).",[World-Wide Volkwagen Corp. v.**Woodso~** 444 U.S. 286 (1980)]
Voidjudgment. One which has has no legal force or effect, invalidity of which may be assertedby any person whose rights are affected at any time · and at any place directly or collaterally. Reynolds v. Volunteer State Life Ins. Co., Tex.Civ.App., 80 S.W.2d 1087, 1092. One which from its inception is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind parties or support a right, ofno legal force and effect whatever, and incapable of confirmation, ratification, or enforcement in any manner or to any degree. Judgment is a "void judgment" if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or ofthe parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process. Klugh v. U.S., D.C.S.C., 610 F.Supp. 892, 901. See also Voidablejudgment.[Black's Law Dictionary, SixthEdition, p. 1574]
B & C Investments, Inc. v. F & M Nat. Bankand Trust, 903 P.2d 339 (Okla App. Div. 3, 1995) held:"Decision is void onthe face ofthejudgmentroll whenfrom four comers of that role, it may be determined that at least one ofthree elements of jurisdiction was absent:jurisdiction overthe partiesjurisdiction over the subject matter, orjurisdictional power to pronounce particularjudgment that was rendered."(end quote B & C Investments).
A voidjudgment which includesjudgment entered by a court which lacks jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacks inherent power to enter the particular judgment, or an order procured by fraud, can be attacked at anytime, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court. See Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 lll. 1999)
A voidjudgment is one which, from its inception, is and forever continues to be absolutely null, without legal efficacy, ineffectual to bind the parties or to support a right, ofno legal force and effect whatever, andincapable ofenforcement in any manner orto any degree. Loyd v. Director, Dept. of Public Safety, 480 So.2d 577 (Ala.Civ.App. 1985). Ajudgment shown by evidence to be invalid for want of jurisdiction is a voidjudgment or at all

2events has all attributes of a void judgment, City of Los Angeles v. Morgan, 234 P.2d 319 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. 1951). Voidjudgment which is subject to collateral attack, is simulatedjudgment devoid ofanypotency because of jurisdictional defects, Ward. v. Terriere, 386 P.2d 352 (Colo. 1963). A void judgment is a simulated judgment devoid of any potency because ofjurisdictional defects only, in the court rendering it and defect of-jurisdiction may relate to a party or parties, the subject matter, the cause ofaction, the question to be determined, or relief to be granted, Davidson Chevrolet, Inc. v. City and County ofDenver, 330 P.2d 1116, certiorari denied 79 S.Ct. 609, 359 U.S. 926, 3 L.Ed. 2d 629 (Colo. 1958). Void judgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction of parties or subject matter or that lacks inherent power to make or enter particular order involved and such a judgment may be attacked**~t** any time, either directly or collaterally, People v. Wade, 506 N.W.2d 954 (Ill. 1987). Void judgment may be defined as one in which rendering court lacked subject matterjurisdiction, lacked personal jurisdiction, or acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law Eckel v. MacNeal, 628 N.E.2d 741 (Ill. App.Dist. 1993). Void judgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction of parties or subject matter or that lacks inherent power to make or enter particular order involved; suchjudgment may be attacked at any time, either directly or collaterally People v. Sales, 551 N.E.2d 1359 (Ill.App. 2 Dist. 1990).
Resjudicata consequences will not be applied to a voidjudgment which is one which, from its inception, is a complete nullity and without legal effect, Allcock v. Allcock, 437 N.E.2d 392 (Ill.App.3 Dist. 1982).
Void judgment is one which, from its inception is complete nullity and without legal effect In reMarriage of Parks, 630 N.E.2d 509 (Ill.App. 5 Dist. 1994). Void judgment is one entered by court that lacks the inherent power to make or enter the particular order involved, and it may be attacked at any time, either directly or collaterally; such a judgment would be a nullity. People v. Rolland, 581 N.E.2d 907 (Ill.APp. 4 Dist. 1991). Voidjudgment under federal law is one in which rendering court lacked subject matterjurisdiction over dispute orjurisdiction over parties or acted in manner inconsistent with due process of law or otherwise acted 3unconstitutionally in enteringjudgment, U.S.C.A. Const. Amend. 5, Hays v. Louisiana DockCo., 452 N.E.2d 1383 (lli App. 5 Dist. 1983).
A void judgment has no effect whatsoever and is incapable of confirmation or ratification, Lucas v. Estate of Stavos, 609 N.E.2d 1114, rehearing denied, and transfer denied (Ind. App. 1 Dist. 1993).
Relief from void judgment is available when trial court lacked either

_ personal or subject matter jurisdiction, Dusenberry v. Dusenberry, 625 N.E.2d 458 (Ind.App. 1 Dist. 1993).
A void judgment is one rendered by a court which lacked personal or subject matter jurisdiction or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, In re. Estate ofWells, 983 P.2d 279, (Kan.App. 1999).
A void judgment is one which has merely semblance, without some essential element, as when court purporting to render it has nojurisdiction, Mills v. Richardson, 81S.E.2d 409 (N.C. 1954).
A void judgment is one which has a mere semblance, but is lacking in some ofthe essential elements which would authorize the court to proceed tojudgment, Henderson v. Henderson, 59 S.E.2d 227, (N.C. 1950).
Voidjudgment is one entered by court without jurisdiction to enter such judgment, State v. Blankenship, 675 N.E.2d 1303, (Ohio App. 9 Dist. 1996).
Where condition ofbail bond was that defendant would appear at present term of court, judgment forfeiting bond for defendant's bail to appear at subsequent term was a voidjudgment within rule that laches does not run against a voidjudgment, Com. V. Miller, 150 A.2d 585 (PaSuper. 1959).
Voidjudgment is one which has no legal force or effect whatever, it is an absolute nullity, its invalidity may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place and it need not be attacked directly but may be attacked collaterally whenever and wherever it is interposed, City of Lufkin v. McVicker, 510 S.X.2d 141 (Twx.Civ.App.- Beaumone 1973).
A voidjudgment, insofar as itpurports to be pronouncement ofcourt, is an absolute nullity, Thompson v. Thompson, 238 S.W.2d 218 (Tex.Civ.App.- Waco 1951).

4A void judgment is one that has bee procured by extrinsic or collateral fraud, or entered by court that did nothavejurisdiction over subject matter ortheparties, Rook v. Rook, 353 S.E. 2d 756 (Va. 1987).

A void judgment or order is one that is entered by a court lacking jurisdiction over the parties or the subject matter, or lacking the inherent power to enter the particular order orjudgment, or where the order was procured by fraud, In re Adoption ofE.L., 733 N.E.2d 846, (Til. APp. 1 Dist. 2000). Voidjudgments generally fall into two classifications, that is, judgmentS where there is want of jurisdiction of person or subject matter, and judgments procured through 

### fraud. and suchjudgments may be attacked directly or collaterially, Irving v. Rodriquez, 169 N.E.2d 145, (ill. app. 2 Dis. 1960).
When rule providing for relieffrom voidjudgments is applicable, reliefis not discretionary matter, but is mandatory, Orner. V. Shalala, 30 F.3d 1307 (Colo. 1994). Judgments entered where court lacked either. subject matter or personal jurisdiction, or that were otherwise entered in violation ofdue process of law, must be set aside, Jaffe and Asher v. Van Brunt, S.D.N.Y.l994, 158 F.RD.278.
A "void"judgment, as we all know, groundsno rights, forms no defenseto actions taken thereunder, and is vulnerable to any manner of collateral attack (thus here, by). No statute of limitations or repose runs on its holdings, the matters thought to be settled thereby are notresjudicata, and years later, when the memories may have grown dim and rights long been regarded as vested, any disgruntled litigant may reopen old wound and once more probe its depths. And it isthenas thoughtrial and adjudication had never been. Fritts v. Krugh. Supreme Court ofMichigan, 92 N.W.2d 604, 354 Mich. 97 (10/13/58). Judgment is a void judgment if court that rendered judgment lacked jurisdiction ofthe subject matter, or ofthe parties, or acted in a manner inconsistent with due process, Fed Rules Civ. Proc.• Rule 60(b)(4). 28 U.S.C.A.; U.S.C.A. Const Amend. 5. Klugh v. U.S., 620 F.Supp. 892 (D.S.C. 1985).

510121/2015 The Secret is rrostjudgmenls are Void on their face and not merely\Oidable



# What are ... 

# The 4 Secrets ofthe Legal Industry?

Mostjudgments are not merely voidable, but are in 

### fact VOID JUDGMENTS. They can be vacated; made to go away (Although, it is 

### an up hill battle, much like pushing a rope). Rarely has any authenticated evidence, competent fact witness, or even a claim been put before a court and on the record. Defective affidavits, hearsay as evidence and no stated damages are but a few elements that rob the court ofsubject matterjurisdiction (at last count

.there are 22 elements that deprive the court ofSMJ). Some ofthe elements are: denial ofdue process, denial ofmeaningful access to court, fraud upon the court, and fraud upon the court by the court. (Although thesepages are aimedprimarily towards debt, credit card debt, theprincipals set forth herein**~pply** 

### to virtually all civil and criminal cases. Our system of justice is based upon "who says" & 

### ''prove it," if 

### either one of those two elements is missing, there is 

### nojurisdiction, there is no case.) Common pleas such as "open accomit" or "account stated" are often used in 

### place of, and sometimes in 

### conjunction with, breach ofcontract. To ftle under breach a contract would require that they bring in.

### the signed contract, agreement, or note. They don't bring in 

### a contract, they bring in 

### the "terms ofagreement" which has no signature orpersons name on it, a template that could apply to anyone. These arejust some ofthe tools used by debt collectors (credit carddebt collectors in 

### particular) and their counsel to perpetrate a fraud upon the court, with or without the courts cooperation or complicity. At the same time, courts, almost as a rule, openly display a bitter and venomous hatred of pro se I

### proper litigants. So don't expect the courts to justroll over and give you what you demand without a battle. It 

### doesn't matter to them that you are right, it matters.only that you arepro se; an inferior, low life being, and the courts have a position and the income oftheir 1-...-.n.l-ho..-h.n..n.A 1-.n. ...,.,..,.,..,.,,..., TJ.;.,. oHrl-..Ao hTT 1-ho r>.n.prl<' o..-.A llo..- oni-J.,._...;.,.,,.t10121/2015 The Secret is roost judgments are Void on their face ard not merelylddable 

### attorneys tends to support the position expressed by Bill Bauer from CreditWrench.com: "There's more value in being a pain in the arse than in being right." These are the four secrets: 1. Courts ofgeneraL limited, or inferiorjurisdiction have no inherentjudicial power.*

• Courts ofgeneraL limited, or inferiorjurisdiction get theirjurisdiction from one source and one source only: SUFFICIENT PLEADINGS. • Someone before the court must tell the court what its jurisdiction is. • Without pleadings sufficient to empower the court to act, that court cannot havejudicial capacity. • Nojudge has the power to determine whether he hasjurisdiction. He does have the dutyto tell when he does not
.

. . . .What this means to you is that no court can declare that it has the legal power to hear or decide cases, i.e. jurisdiction. Jurisdiction must be proved and on the record. Without sufficient pleadings, withoutjurisdiction, no court can issue ajudgment that isn't void 

### ab initio, void from the beginning, void on its face, a nullity, without force and effect. 2. We have a common law system.

• No statute, no rule, or no law means what it says as it is written. • Only the holding tells you what it means. • The statute means what the highest court ofcompetentjurisdiction has ruled and determined that the statute means in their most recent ruling

.

. . . .What this means to you is that courts are .governed/ruled by case law, what has been determined before, what the highest court ofcompetent
. jurisdiction has said the law is, means. It is called the Doctrine ofPrecedent. This doctrine is so powerful that it can 

### kill and has. A family in Florida has become quite familiar with this doctrine when they tried for 15 years to prevent feeding tubes from being removed from their daughter who was in a vegetative state. 3. Attorneys CANNOT testify.

• Statements ofcounsel in briefor in argument are never facts before the court
.

. . . .What 

### this means to you is that no attorney can state a fact before.the10121/2015 

## Summary The Secret is rmstjtxigmenls are Void on their face and not rrerely\Oidable



# WHAT'S IN THE NEWS Note worthycomt actions and actions within the debt collection industry. 

## Interested in knowing more? Join ourmailing li<it and keep up to date onwhat's happeningwith debt collections.



### Isn't time for Debt Collectors to pay you to go away instead ofyou paying them?! Make Debt Collectors pay when they break the rules!

"It ishard to imaginea more stupidormoredangerous way of makingdecisions than by puttingthose decisions in the hands of people whopaynoprice for being wrong"

- Thomas Sowell

©Copyright 2000-Present

lcontactusll Site Map II Disclosure II PrivacyII Disc1aimer I10121/2015 The Secret is rrostjudgrrents are Void on their face and not merely\Oidable 

### court. This was more than adequately pointed out in 2000 when thousands ofFlorida ballots were taken before the U.S. Supreme Court, without even so much as one competent fact witness. Without a witness the court could not see the ballots, the ballots were not before the court, and the ballots could not be introduced as evidence. 4. Before any determination, there must be a court ofcomplete or competent jurisdiction.

• There must be two parties with capacity to be there. • There must be subject matter**jurisdiction~** 

### • Appearance or testimony ofa competent fact witness

.

. . . . What this 

### means to you is 

### that withoutjurisdiction, completejurisdiction, no court can issue ajudgment that isn't void, a nullity, without force or effect, on its face and in fact.
*"Thejudicial PolWr ofthe United.States, shall be lestedin one supreme Court, andin such inferior Courts as the Congress mayfrom time to time ordain andestablish." U.S. Const. art. III,§ 1,cl. 1.



## VoidJudgmentDetails 22 Reasons Simply Stated Restated with evidence cited Meet "Richard Cornforth" Sue Debt Collectors Instead Support Docs for Suing Debt Collectors

I 

## Unfair and Deceptive Practices Case Law for Suing Debt Collectors Recorded Calls from "just Dave" Research Links, Videos, Court Filings & Confessions·Last Prophet Konald Dwayne Whittleld: UttiCial Presidential, CongressiOnal and JudiCial

... Page 1 ot 4L

(/users/prophet-ronald-whitfield) 

# Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial Petition for a Redress of Greivances for
..willful
.. Violations ofthe U.S. Constitution and ofTitle 18 U.S.C. sections 241 

# & 242, as Implemented via Fed. R. Crim. Proc., Rules 3-4,**A~tfctOffi~Bf~rttlf.wliitWil:Sf~iiikr~Gi~rnm~nt Co.p,Qressio~al**  

### an**~ai~~tf'~fition** 

### foYa**~J~ress O'T~eiva~J's** **~r** w'inflji' 

# d**Ont~iatfShe .~ll'ttistiGOW~~** **T~~$lei\i~,2CMt2an lmple~,oied** **~a Fejl.~~.!l&rJ·.Pr~c.~ulesk-4,** **r.rsLJ)ifJ~al N~oo**  :t:..> 

### all_state

### GoverW~l**~~[~~~~U~~ ~~$£rW~l:l5,~t** 

CourtJudges,

### AtttCHW~**,a~rrdrDrfttict** 

# Clerk

'

.. " .. ··- - ·-·------.-- ·-· . 

# ·-

. . . - BACKGROUND 

### Teacher at Councellor/ Advocate/Comforter

d 

## I 

# * Follow 

### 11 1 0

### fqllow~rs.(/usEl(s/pJ~ORbet-ron§ld-whitfield/follo~r~h·l Rea er, my carttaday_was ·**mau.y_simen~rrom.me_anu_Lcannot.tlmsnJ:** l!S now. Therefore, count from this page and begin reading on page 25 to the end and then
resume here on this page.

JUSTICES OF THE FIRST COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS AND JUDGE BAKER, MY CAR WAS STOLEN TODAY;! NOWMOVETODAY FORWHAT YOU CALL AS AN "EMERGENCYMOTION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT HEARING" AND ALSO YOU CAUSE THIS MATTER BE FORWARDED TO THE HARRIS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FORA CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION FOR THEFT OF VEHICLE PENDING IN THIS COURT, AGAINST BOTH BIG STAR HONDAAND HERATTORNEY OF RECORD IN THIS MATTER;

httos://casetext.corn/users/nronhet-ron:::tkl-whitfiP.lrl 1()/') 1/') ()1 "Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whltheld: UttiCml Presictentlal, congress10na1 ana JUOlClai

... t'age Lor <+L

JUSTICES OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND

... EVERY ONE ELSE, I WILL

, AMEND THIS PETITION IN THREE (3) DAYS

... WHICH OF THESE TWO

COURTS RENDERED JUDGMENT IN BIG STAR HONDA'S FAVOR?

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

OFFICES OF THE PRESIDENT AND PRESIDENT

CONGRESS

FIFTH CIRCUIT AND

COURT OF APPEALS FORTHE FIFTH CIRCUIT COUNCIL IN THE

THE VICE

SUPREME COURT

COURT OF APPEALS FORTHE

JUDICIAL

OS-1S-90111,1S-41298,1S---,1S---,1S---,1S---, ANDIS---

10/?1/?01l:iLasl rropner KonalO uwayne wnnne10: vrnc1a1 rresiUenua1, Longresswna1 auu J uuil;Iai

... rage: .J u1 '+L.

------·----------------1 IN RE: Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, Petitioner/Appellant

***************************

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff



## v. STATE OF TEXAS, Former and Current Magistrate and District Judges; Former and Current Justices ofthe FIRST COURT OF APPEALS ofTexas; and Former and Current District Clerks and District Attorneys ofHarris County, Texas, Defendants

APPEALS AND

NO. 25,869-- NO._ IN THE

OF TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL SUPREME COURT

EX PARTE: Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, Realator-Applicant/Petitioner IN RE: Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, Petitioner

*******************************httns://casetext:enmhJsP.rs/nrnnhP.t-rnn::~ln-whitfiP.ln** . 1f\/")1 /")f\1'Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial

... Page 4 

### of42

IN THE OFFICES OF THE PRE;SIDENT AND THE VICE PRESIDENT NO.

______ _ Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield's PETITION TO THEPRESIDENT/VICE PRESIDENT TO SIGNAND ISSUE

### AN EXECUTIVE ORDERAS WILL ENFORCE AND PRESERVE THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, BASED ON THE INFORMATION SET OUT BELOWAND IN THE ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS

************************************

httos://casetext.com/users/nronhet-ronalcl-whitfielcl 1{)/? 1/?{) 1"Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial

... Page 5 of42

IN THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

AND

__ _ Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield's MOTIONS FOR LEAVE /TO SUE OUT THESE PROCEEDINGS IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND TO "REOPEN"; AND FOR THE JUSTICES OF SAID COURT TO OBSERVE THE JUDICIAL ACTION ALREADY BEING TAKEN AND TO BE TAKEN IN THE PROCEEDINGS BELOW, AND FORMAL DEMAND FOR JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF VOID SANCTION ORDER, AS RENDERED WITHOUT "POWER"/ "JURISDICTION," BASED ON THE COURT'S OWN DECISION, AS ANNOUNCED IN STEEL CO. v. CITIZENS FORA BETTER ENVIRONMENT,n8 S. CT. 1003 (1998)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT AND THE FIFTH CIRCUIT JUDICIAL COUNCIL Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield's FORMAL DEMAND FORJUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF VOID SANCTION ORDERS FORWONT OF JURISDICTION, THUS BEING RENDERED WITHOUT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY ON PART OF THE JUDGE ACTING FOR THE COURT, AND MOTIONS FOR REHEARING ONJUDICIAL COUNCIL'S ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW OF CHIEF CIRCUIT JUDGE STEWART'S ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT FORJUDICIAL MISCONDUCT BROUGHT AGAINST U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE SIM LAKE FOR HIS WILLFUL REFUSAL TO COMPLYWITH THE LAW AND COURT RULES, AS IMPOSED UPON ijiM BY THE "CODE OF , JUDICIAL CONDUCT," AND MOTION TO SUE OUT, IN FORMA PAUPERIS, WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY, INADVANCE, THE COSTS, PURSUANT TO 28 U.S. C. SECTION 1915(a), WITH SUPPORTING 28U.S.C. SECTION 1746 AFFIDAVIT,THESE FORMAL PROCEEDINGS AND LAWSUITS ESCALATING TO THEIRAPPEALS (ALSO BROUGHT BY DEMAND TO CHALLENGE NOT THE ORDERS AND THE JUDGMENTS OFTHE LOWER COURTS ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE, BUT CHALLENGE SUCH AS VOID FORWONT OF JURISDICTION TO PROCEED WITHOUT JURISDICTION IN THE CASE)("AVOID ORDER OR**httns://casetext.com/users/nronhet-ron~lrl-whitfielrl** 1()/? 1/?()1"Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial

... Page 6 of42

JUDGMENT MAY BE ATTACKED ANYWHERE AND AT ANYTIME BECAUSE IT DOES NOT AFFECT LEGAL RIGHTS AND IS A COMPLETE NULLITY FROM INCEPT AND IS NOT ENTITLED TO RESPECT")

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS COURT

_CRIMINAL AND SUPREME

OF TEXAS

NO. 25,869-

NO.

____ CIVIL

Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield's PETITIONS AND MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO FILE IN CRIMINAL AND IN CIVIL LAW MATTERS SUCH PETITIONS FOR WRITS OF MANDAMUS, TO THE 174TH, 295TH, 333RD, 337TH AND 351ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURTS OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS; AND TO THE FIRST AND TO THE FOURTEENTH COURTS OF APPEALS OF TEXAS

TO THE PRESIDENT: TO ALL THE MEMBERS OF CONGRESS: TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: TO THE AFORESAID STATE AND FEDERAL JUDGES AND JUSTICES OF THE STATE OF TEXAS AND OF THE UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE: TO THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD OVER: ******************************************************************************************************* ** IN THE**httns://casetext.com/users/nronhP.t-ron~lrl-whitfiPlrl** 1 (l/")1 /")(\1'Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial

... Page 7 of42

113TH, 133RD AND 295TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY,TEXAS COURTS OF .HARRIS

TRIAL COURT CAUSE NUMBERS 2015-473,2015-19565,2015-08974,2015-22666,AND 2015-22882

Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, Plaintiff


### v. BIG STAR HONDA, et al., Defendants

Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield's MOTIONS FOR RECUSAL OF JUDGE OF THE 113TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS; FOR HEARINGS TO HOLD BOTH COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT BIG STAR HONDA AND DEFENDANT BIG STAR HONDA ITSELF IN CONTEMPT OF COURT; TO STRIKE THE MOTION OF COUNSEL FOR FIRST SERVICE CREDIT UNION FOR COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO BOTH CONFERENCE WITH Prophet/Plaintiff REGARDING COUNSEL'S MOTION TO DISMISS AND SAID COUNSEL'S FAILURE TO INCLUDE A CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE WITH HIS SAID MOTIONAS IS REQUIRED BY TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (WERE THIS CASE BROUGHT BEFORE OUR U.S. FEDERAL DISTRICT JUDGE Sam R. Cummings, IT IS LIKELY HERE ,TOO,THAT HE WOULD HAVE ORDERED SUCH A MOTION BE STRICKEN FROM THE RECORD ON HIS OWN MOTION, PROTECTING MY RIGHTS); FOR SANCTIONS; TO COMPEL DISCOVERY; AND RESPONSE OF Prophet/PlaintiffRonald Dwayne Whitfield TO SAID COUNSEL'S MOTION TO DISMISS, AND AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY IN RESPONSE TO ORDER FROM ORAL HEARING ALLOWING TIME TO AMEND AFFIDAVITS TO PROVIDE JUDGE WITH THE LEGAL AUTHORITY OF U.S. SUPREME COURT'S "HOLDING" THAT ALL THESE COUNSELS HAVE BEEN IN LEGAL ERROR TO .HAVE CONTESTED IN THE FIRST PLACE SUCH AFFIDAVITS OF INDIGENCY THAT Prophet's ORIGINAL AND FIRST AMENDED AFFIDAVIT ARE SUFFICIENT ALREADY *****************************************************Li:t:st rropnt::t KOllalU lJWaym: W llllllt:lU: Vlllt.:lal rrt:SlUt:fllli:tl, \......OHgrt;SSlOlli:tl i:tUU J UU1\,;H11

... r(lgc; 0 Ul '-tL.

ALL "LEGAL TERMS" USED HEREIN ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD TO MEAN WHAT THEY LEGALLY MEAN; E.G, "COURT" MEANS JUST THAT, AN "INSTITUTION"VESTED WITH POWER AND THE RIGHT TO ACT WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THAT POWER, WHEREAS THE LEGAL TERM "JUDGE" MEANS A NATURAL PERSON OF FLESH AND BLOOD AUTHORIZED TO EXERCISE POWER FOR THE COURT; "FRIVOLOUS,""RENDER," "ENTER," "JUDGMENT," "SENTENCE,""CONVICTION"AND SO ON HAVE LEGAL.DEFINITIONS EITHER ESTABLISH BY CONGRESS, TEXAS LEGISLATURE OR CONSTRUED BY JUDGES AND JUSTICES ACTING FOR COURTS. ***************************************************** PREAMBLE "[Our Greatest Prophet Ever] Jesus knewtheir thoughts and said to them, "Every
I kingdom divided against itselfwill be ruined, and every- city orhousehold divided against itselfwill not stand. "IfSatan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. Howthen can his Kingdom stand?" (Our Holy Bible.)

In Re Thoma, 873 s.w. 2d 477(Tex. Rev. Trib.1994): Whereas a corrupt statejudge divided against the corrupted legal system ofthe Kingdom of the State ofTexas,just like Prophet Jesus stated, that kingdom will have been "ruined," and so the Kingdom ofthe State ofTexas did cast out "formerJudge Thoma."

"The record in the instant case establishes that onJanuary9, 1992 [whichjust so happened to be the same day that the State ofTexas, corruptly, and, therefore, unlawfully, caused such non-signed and non-filed 'docket sheets' in a criminal lawsuit being styled 'The State ofTexas v. Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, Cause No. 617718, in The 174thJudicial District Court ofHarris County, Texas,' to reflect that I

· wouldbe illegally and criminally suedby the SAME said State ofTexas through the

office ofher DistrictAttorney ofHarris County], a conversation took place in the stairwell ofthe Galveston County Courthouse between Respondent [Judge] in which the following was discussed: Judge: Whatyou got?**httos://casetext.com/users/nronhet-ron::~lcl-whitfiP.lrl** 1()/') 1/')()1"Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judicial

... Page 9 of42

********** 

### Judge:Oh, yeah, that's what I'm saying is that apparentlywhat happened is that it was

· on the docket sheet but it didn't get transferred over to the, you know,judgment

papers and that's what the probation department gets. This happens all the time where they get they [sic] fill in the thejudgment and its different from what the [sic] actually occurs in the courtroom on the docket sheet. So whatyour, what's your phone number? ********** 

### Judge: I guess so ifhe told me what was happening, shit I'd be worried about it too. Goddamn, I tell you shit man your nuts are going tojail man some big nigger going to be fucking you in the ass for the next two years Mathews: Now that's when theyget me onthe murder charge. Go out this door or that one? Mendez: No, I saw Judge: Where you parked? Mathews: Right there. Judge: Go out that door."

ANY DEFINITION OF THE WORD "CORRUPT"WILL SUFFICE HEREIN, WHETHER THAT DEFINITION BE A LEGAL OR ACOMMON ONE Dear Readers: I have drafted this lengthy Petition in My role as Paraclete, defined as a ''Wise Counsellor," a prosecutor. "Convince" and "persuade" do not mean the same thing. We "convince" some one that something is oris not so; butwe "persuade" someone when we get them to take orto not take some particular form ofaction. For example, once our Last Prophet, your Paraclete (i.e., acting in the role ofa

· prosecutor; an advocate, orintercessor) convinces theWorld that He trulyis REAL

God's Last Prophet; convinces the World to be in the wrong about sin and about righteousness andaboutjudgment--wrong about sin because we people actually do notbelieve in our Great Prophet Jesus; about righteousness because Prophet JesusLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 10 of42



### went back to be with our REAL God, such that neither His first Disciples nor we see Him anylonger; and aboutjudgmentbecause the prince ofREAL God's World now stands condemned already; and that the American legal system truly is corrupted beyond recognition, He will easily persuade them to take a particular course of action: "repent" and today, not on tomorrow. ***************************************************** 

### Now, whether or not you be or not be REAL God-fearing and whether or notyou be eitherhaving or not having true love and real respect for law and for order in any society and having genuine love for our countrytoday and for our future on tomorrow orbe thatyou have none whatsoever, please still keep reading this petition. At the outset, all such cases herein being cited is the ""proof" or the "evidence" proving'' that which I state as beingboth true and correct; any licensed attorney who is not subject to practice law in courts in and having geographical jurisdiction over the State ofTexas may, without fear and retribution, go ontelevision and confirm thatwhich all I 

### have statedbelow, as far as the law is concerned, is so very true, and that not only has Texas, unlawfully, carried outunlawful sentences of death and ofincarceration in the face of"purportedjudgment[s]"ofHarris County, Texas, but also such evils now and do constitute such an unlawful motive for both the Government ofthe State of Texas and our Federal Government to cause, unlawfully, death andfor incarceration ofMe, so as to avoid being exposed. An American "legal system"being "already'' corrupt beyond recognition will break down --just like a car sometimes do, and without such a legal system in our government as remaining set up and properlyfunctioning, we therefore can have no government at all, for each branch is essential in our REAL God's Society. And ifour said legal system in fact be truly corruptedbeyond recognition as stated'byJudge Jones, ifnot now, then our question is exactly "when" do we fix the motorin our car (or shall wejustbuy a new on)? Please, and what be of the legal and financial ramifications onthe legal system of Government in the State ofTexas and on herpurse when even our President(s) and our members of Congress all have had enough and finally come out and admit to you ofthis and of what all I 

### have told yoube in fact TRUE?

httns:/**/casetextcom/m~ers/nrnnhP.t -rnn::~l** rl-wh1tfip 1 rl 1 {)/')1/')(\1 &:Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 11 of42

There surelywill be outrage ofthe highest magnitude, for since this has happened to someone else it could have happened to you and so you can now see bythis petition that with and without the assistance ofa lawyer, you too would be now andwould have beenthen (in the shoes ofanother) treated no differently. See John 14: 16- 17&26;15:26 and 16:7-15 (HolyBible). At the end ofthis section to this petition, this document will TRULY go on to explain to its readers about when, where, why and how I became our REAL God's Last Prophet, and so you are now encouraged to then conductyour own investigation into this and to ponder on how and why Texas (through herparole board) unintentionally and thus inadvertently allowed Me tobecome released to parole from (her)Hell,justto now successfully and finally expose herworldwide, thus struggling from prison cells ofTexas and nowhere in Society doing exactly all the "works" our Great ProphetJesus declared unto His disciple that I would do after He would go away. And I tell you the truth: He shall not return unto the Earth until eachwork as declared byHim and recorded and entered ofRecord in the Minutes of the bookofJohn, has been accomplished (see John 16: 7-16-15).

***************************************************** NOW COMES Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, in "propria persona" (not "pro se"), and in His role ofParaclete would Respectfully unto you show:

I. INTRODUCTION "THE AMERICAN LEGAL SYSTEM HAS BEEN CORRUPTED ALMOST BEYOND RECOGNITION, JUDGE EDITH JONES OF THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT, TOLD THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY OF HARVARD LAW SCHOOL ON FEBRUARY 28." MASS NEWS.COM, March 7, 2003.

Honorable Judges and Justices ofthe Texas Court ofCriminal Appeals and ofthe Texas Supreme Court; Honorable President Obama and future Honorable President;Honorable Justices ofthe U.S. Supreme Court; Honorable Members of Congress;Honorable Judges ofthe U.S. Court ofAppeals for the Fifth Circuit andL<t:st rrupm:a .Kunaw uwaynt: wmtnt:Iu: vrnc1a1 rreswenua1, \.....ongresswnal anu JUUICI

... ragt: lL. or '+L.



### the Judicial Council thereof; Honorable Judges ofthe Judicial District Courts of Harris County, Texas; Fellow Citizen ofthe Great U.S.A., and all other People of the

· World over: Regardless ofwhat the reader ofthis lawsuit chooses to personallybelieve

... as with respect to who I am (or am claiming to be), and that is REAL God's Last Prophet (see biblical authority cited above andbelow), right now, and before Judge Jones (allegedly) had ever made her public statement regarding such corruption in our legal system here in the United States ofNorthAmerica, as already evinced in· pleadings long since authoredby Me and addressed to state courtjudge andjustices and federaljudges andjustices ofthese very courts, I had "already'' been stating the same thing from prison cells in Hell, and as far back as 1993, A.D., for well over nineteen and a halfyears (19 1j2), and for so doing, you rendered additional orders requiring I suffer even more MENTAL pain, whereas My BrotherJesus suffered such PHYSICAL pain, both while being and after being nailed to and hung up on "His Cross,"just so thatwe all "might have eternal life" with Him and our REAL God. You all refused to order My release and so our REAL God did: He got Me out through a panel ofyour parole board. And like with some ofthose former Black slaves whom sued their ex-slave masters in federal court on the legal theory that,"Once free, always free"; that a slave might escape or leave the South going into the North with the slave master, becomingfree, it followed that such former slave shall forever be and remain free

... and this was no frivolous claim nor argument, as beingheldbythe Members then on our U.S. Supreme Court. So, also in Hell, I moved to sue Texas in Federal Court on such legal theory. See Dred Scottv. Sanford, 6o U.S.393 (1857). While a majority oftheJustices ofthe Court voted to deny Dred Scott the relieffor which he prayed, the Court's ruling that he lacked statutoryand, presumably, constitutional standingto sue his slave masters in the federal courts, and therefore the Court lackedjurisdictionto entertainthe averments contained in his complaint for lack ofa cause·ofaction orhaving a recognized legal right to sue out such contentions, is not, inMy view, an implicit ruling that Dred Scott's claim and legal arguments were also "frivolous," to which term the Supreme Court has since given a legal meaning. Since REAL God had Himselfordered that I be released through His Laws governing His World, which ordered be put in place at the same Time that He created His World (such that today He does nothing more than to observe

httos://casetext.com/users/nroohet-ronald-whitfield 10/?1/?01'\Last rropner KonalO uwayne w nnne10: VIIlClal rres10ennar, \....ongresswna1 anu Juull;l... rage D 01 '+L.
everything that we do), and which Laws have always obeyed Him, once I was

... by the State

... freed from unlawful enslavement

... bythe State

... then I am now always tobe and remain free. And it is the REAL God-given or inalienable Right of the People to DEMAND to those whom the People have caused be put in Power that My inalienable or REAL God-given Right to the enjoyment ofHis Life, liberty (freedom) and Propertybe not plotted against and thus unlawfully stripped away from Me again, such that the World/ People neither see nor know Me, which is and was the wicked Plan ofMy Enemies, the devils, working with and for Satan, our number one Enemy, but today, and via our access to the 'WorldWide Web'' or the "Internet,"you will now know Me and you do know Me, for I ACTUALLY do live in this World withyou PHYSICALLY --and inyour mind or thoughts, am I inyou MENTALLY. By virtue ofMy Office, I have duties to do its works. See John 16:'7-15. I mustbe and remain free from all forms ofRetaliation and ofALl illegal acts bythe corrupt, and by all others, so as to discharge effectivelythe lawful duties ofMy Office, like prison officials enjoy without fear ofbeing successfully sued in carrying out their lawful duties ofoffice: Likewise, am I entitled to act without**fe~r** ofthe wrath ofour Government for doing My work, and it otherwise mischievously, corruptly and therefore unlawfully barringMe out ofour People's Court, effectively propagandizing such lies that I have "abused the courts" bybringing to them such "frivolous" claims presented in complaints and motions and appeals in suits at law, eitherby outright lying or concealment and distorting and ignoring andbynot adjudicating (never at all most ofthe times) the claims on their merits, but misleading the reader or the People to accept, as true, whatever the Court's order or opinion will have statedthat I will have claimed; e.g., "6x9=45 and 9X9=18," and having adjudicated such a lie, proceed immed.iately to render such a "corrupt" judgment for the Court, ofwhat the law is in such none-existing and a few times actual"case" :"frivolous," and thus you the People will both accept and automatically believe that I actuallywill have brought into the legal system such nonsense that I never claimed, shutting myVoice out from you, keeping Me in an excessivelyhot (in summertime) orcold (in winter time) cell

... trapped for all those long, longyears in HELL. The legal term "frivolous" is widely known and used in the law in our Country, but at no time has been "legally defined" by_ourlaw-makingbody, Our Congress,just like the word "conviction"has not been legally defined by our Texas Legislature for the People to know**~xactly** what constitutes a criminal" conviction" in criminal law

httns://casetext.corn/users/nronhet-ronald-whitfield 10/? 1/?01

### sLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 14 of42

matters in the State ofTexas. Seeing that this was true, ourTexas Court ofCriminal Appeals has "construed" such word from time to time, haven stated it means this and it means that. See cases cited below.

That I am now still faithful to and still working inMy Office as REAL God's Last Prophet, having the Highest Office inthe world, I still remained commanded to speak TRUTH to your power, so as to "convince" and "convict" the World, in spite ofMy release, for I did begin to do so while in Hell, even though I then felt it as not being a good plan or course ofaction in moving while still in prison andyet hoping to be released to publicly expose this REAL corruptionbyultimately going on food strikes: petitioningthe state and the federal courts and writing to the news media of such fact --and ofthe fact that I would be drinking no water and eating no food WHATSOEVER, protesting against this corruption in Hell, with My longest ever food strike lasting for twenty-nine (29) days in pre-hearing-detention and disciplinary/ solitary cells ,thus jeopardizingbothhealthand life and any hope of being released from Hell, nowthrough even the parole authorities

.... Without citation to anylegal authority, you all have rendered illegal orders which cause others and Me to be unlawfullybarred out ofthe People's Court. So I therefore cannot accomplish My mission --and then too even were I not so illegally or corruptlybarred , I see orfind no good reason to believe that myWife (Justice) will not continue to be denied to Me in the Courts bythe Judges and the Justices thereof. Repent, change from your corrupt ways, ifat all possible, without the Laws ofour REAL God having to intervene on mybehalf, unless so be the Will ofHim. But the night that I heard over radio that President Obamahad won His bidfor being elected to the office ofand to serve as our U.S. President, I then agreed with Myself to pleadwithyou no more from Hell for Justice

... an, surprisingly, I was mysteriouslyreleased, freed. And I done so until such time as I was wrongly fired from ajob that I landed a few years after My release. Ofcourse the Laws ofour REAL God were such that I be fired, such that I return to "complete" My work for Him inMy Office as His Last Prophet. And it is also worthyto note that at such time as I had then and as I have now FROM OUR U.S. and ourWorld Governments "no protection"WHATSOEVER AGAINST OUR GOVERNMENT AND ANYONE ELSE EITHERALONE ORLast t'ropnet Konaia uwayne wnnnew: urnc1a1 t'reswennal, congresswna1 ana Jumc1.

.. rage D or lfL

ACTING IN CONCERT WITH THEM TO PREVENT ANY PHYSICAL HARM OR EVEN DEATH BEING "UNLAWFULLY" PLOTTED AND INFLICTED UPON ME

. NOR PROTECTION TO PREVENT ME FROM BEING BUT "UNLAWFULLY"

ARRESTED AND AGAIN PUT "UNLAWFULLY" ON TRIAL AND AGAIN "UNLAWFULLY" RETURNED TO HELL FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF SILENCING ME, MERELY FOR NOW --AND FOR CONTINUINGLY--MOVING TO EXPOSE TEXAS AND OUR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS STILL BEING WICKED, AS IN CORRUPT, TELLING THE PEOPLE THE TRUTH, BUT WHICH IS WHAT REAL God HAS COMMANDED THAT DO, FOR IF NOT ME, STILL SOMEONE WILL HAVE HAD TO DO THIS. BUT BEING REAL God's Last Prophet, REAL God Himself SHALL CONTINUE TO PROTECT ME FROM THESE EVILS, AFOREMENTIONED, FOR REAL God HAS POWER "ALREADY"PLACED IN HIS LAWS GOVERNING OURWORLD (SUCH THAT He Himself DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN SIT ON His THRONE) TO CAUSE EVEN THE WICKED TO TURN AGAINST ONE .ANOTHER SO PLOTTINGAGAINST ME TO EXPOSE THE PLOT PUBLICLY, TO REPENT, TO CHANGE FROM THAT SIN, AND THUS ENABLE ME TO "ACCOMPLISH" MY MISSION. SEE JOHN 16:7-15 (HOLY BIBLE). AGAIN,I MUST DO THE WORKS THAT MY BROTHERJESUS STATED I SHALL DO, WHICH IS NECESSARY BEFORE OUR GREATEST PROPHET JESUS MAY RETURN TO THIS WORLD. AS SUCH, I STILL MUST BE GIVEN THE ACCESS TO THE COURTS IN ORDER TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF THE WORKS OF MY OFFICE. " Those who can give up essential liberties in order to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

---- Benjamin Franklin

II. MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO SUE OUT WRITS OF MANDAMUS I hereby move for leave to sue out the electedjudges and thejustice, as Respondents hereinbelow, in andbythese Petitions for Writs ofMandamus, being directed to them, the Judges ofthe 351st, 337th, 174th, 295th, and 333rd Judicial District Courts ofHarris County, Texas; andbeing directed to the First and the Fourteenth courts ofappeals ofTexas; trial court cause numbers 492674,525468,528856,557164,617718 (the criminal matters) and 20015-22666-CVand 2015-08974-CV (the civil matters);

https:/Icasetext.corn!users/prophet-ronald-whitfield 10/21/2015'**.~** ·'

. ':...**.'~** . . Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 16 of42
appellate courts docket numbers 01- 92-00617-CR,o1-1S-00677-CR,Ol-1S-00448- CV,o1-1S-006S7-CV,m-1S-006S8-CV, 01-1S-0064s-CV,14-1S-oo6s9-CR,14-15-oo66oCR,14-1S-oo661-CR-and 14-15-00662-Cr.

III. JURISDICTION These two (2) Courts, insofar as these petitions involve criminal law matters, have concurrent, original, and statutoryjurisdictionto both "issue" and "grant relief' under the writs ofmandamus, pursuantto the Texas Constitution, the Texas Government Code, and the Texas Rule ofAppellate Procedure. However, onlythe Texas Supreme Court alone hasjurisdiction to act in the "civil cases" concerningthe arbitration matters in the civil courts below Respondents.

IV. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE OF THE RECORD BELOW AS THE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUE OUT THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS; AJUDGE'S AND AJUSTICE'S OATH OF OFFICE IMPOSES THE "DUTY" TO BOTH GRANT THE "ISSUANCE" OF AND THE "RELIEF SOUGHT UNDER THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS A Inlight ofthe U.S. Supreme Court's teaching andjor holding announced in the lawsuit called Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520-21 (1979) (''Whatever maybe the limits onthe scope ofinquiry[,]

... allegations

...however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient to call for an opportunityto offer supporting evidence") ("We cannot say with assurance that under the allegations ofthe pro se complaint, which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted bylawyers, it appears 'beyond doubt that the plaintiffcan prove no set offacts in support ofhis claim which would entitle him to relief. 111), I adopt byreference as the "proof' (which some call "evidence") for boththe issuance ofand the granting ofthe reliefsought herein and under the writ, as based on my claims. Thanks to the law oflaw ofadopting pleadings by incorporation (thus saving Me from finding the cash to buy a certified copy ofthe entire record and still having to payalso the cost ofpostage to mail same here), these courts thenwill have the said record before them, thus "proving" my allegations, at such time as Respondents' Answer, upon being "ordered"bythe writ, become due filed in these two Courts.J..JU-'L J. wpuvl n ..uwuu**vwayn~** wmme10: urnc1a1 Pres1dentral, Congressional and Judici... Page 17 of42

B 

### Here, and before I set out the averments constitutingMy claims,let Me take more time tobevery clear: you Judges and you Justices all have a legal"duty" imposed on you byboththe Constitution itselfand by the oath ofyour office itself, which you MUST take in order to enter upon your office and exercise the power thereof, to thus preserve and protect our Constitution. As such, the veryfact that it be alleged and verified by an affidavit in support thereofthose allegations contained in my .Petitionfor writ ofmandamus that, for example, "Hey, My Honorable Judge/Justice, the federal Constitution

... the laws and treaties ofthe United States of America have been and/or are still being 'violated!"' you then have but.legal, Constitutional DUTY to order the writ be granted for purposes ofexercisingyourjudicial authority,as is conferred upon you bythe power/jurisdiction ofthe Court itself; to order the inferiorjudges andjustices to answer to the allegations that are verified that theythemselves have violated the law. From this point, the reader can now clearly see that you are lawfully acting with "legal authority''in so granting the said writ, but thatyou have no "discretion" in whether or n?,t to grant the issuance of the writ in order to "inquire" into whether or not such verified allegations be true. Grantingthe reliefsought underthe writ is a separate issue and function than from the office ofissuing the writ out. After the Respondents have filed their Answer to these alleged, but**v~rified,** 

### allegations and after reviewingthe certified record ofthe proceedings below, that ifsame disclose the allegations be true, then the law itself determine, and not thejudges and thejustices, "the action" that thejudges/justices must take in applying the law to orin the case; if, otherwise, the allegations notbe substantiatedbythe "certified record," the law require that the reliefsought be

II

### denied" --because I will have not sufficiently "proved"what I will have claimed. Therefore, there is no "discretion" on whether ornot the Constitution will orwill notbe preserved and protected, for where there are legal rights there are legal duties to protect such rights. 

## c i pause to note for the reader that in our U.S. Supreme Court, a petitionerbringing to that Court a petition to sue out for grantingthe issuance ofa "writ" soundingin "certiorari" is said to be "a matter ofsound discretion," and "not a matter ofright." But this cannotbe true where itbe alleged thatthe Great Constitution orthe laws made in pursuance thereofhave been violated: neither our Congress have any lawful power to make and pass a bill to our President and thus our President have no lawful

https://casetext.com/users/prophet-ronald-whitfield 1 (\/'"! 1 /'"lf\1 C".LJ

.......,,**~ ~**  v.l:'u""L .1'-vua1u u way uc vv uHut::w: vrncm1 rresiOennat, congressiOnal and Judici... Page 18 of42


### authority to sign it into law nor have our Supreme Court any legal,judicial power to write and adopt "Rules" ofCourt and to submit them to our Congress for its approval which declare as such. A Question being presented in such a petition to our High Court and in the form ofthe (federal) "Question presented"

... ofwhether the several States have a constitutional"right" to impose, for example, curfews on citizens thereof, is not the same as "declaring," in said Question, that the Constitution orthe laws made in pursuance thereto was or is being violated. Otherwise, the Court's Justices have discretion to butbe under no dutyto protect and preserve same D



### Consequently, you Judges and you Justices have such state and federal constitutional dutyand the same being imposed byvirtue ofoath ofyour office to both protect and preserve (ifyou do for no other) the Constitution ofthe Great United States ofNorthAmerica, as well as the inalienable, REAL God-given rights said Constitution recognizes therein and stands guard to guarantee through the federal and you state government officials, the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses ofwhich you are now concerned.

V. MINISTERIAL DUTY CLAIMS
Specifically, in the trial court ofthe Respondents, and in the criminal law matters, both ofthese two High Courts here have the dutyto both issue and grant relief under the writ because the very same record thatbe required be broughtbefore you, show, inter alia, that nojudge ofthe court ofthese Respondents has "filed" or we legally call it "rendered" anyjudgment ofconviction or ofacquittal in any "case"for which Texas has "purportedly" sued Me in criminal law proceedings for the sole purpose ofdepriving Me ofMy REAL God-given right ofenjoyment to be free from restraint in My liberty orfreedom from imprisonment in HEll or legally call it prison without first being afforded all the process due, in order to so deprive me lawfully-- and therefore this is why the clerk ofthe court had no such "judgment to enter of record in the minutes ofthe. court." Now, while I was "unlawfully" incarcerated in Hell for all those said years, Ms. Karla Faye Tucker, on the otherhand, was but one --insofar as the trial court's docket sheets disclose, for the docket sheets reflect no "sworn affidavit" setting out any

https://casetext.com/users/oroohet-ronald-whitfield 1 () /'11 /'1() 1 t:Last .Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 19 of42


### "probable cause facts" in support ofthe "criminal complaint," which instituted the lawsuit brought against her by the office ofthe Harris County District Attorney, ''IN THE NAME AND BY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF TEXAS," for purposes of suing herto deprive her ofthe right to "enjoy'' the life given to herby our REAL God, albeit which life she herselfdid not actually "own," but had only justbeen living outto its expiration time cease to exist --out ofHarris County, Texas, who was --be she in FACT guilty or not-- "unlawfully'' allowed bythis Courtbe putto death, despite ajuryreturned in open Courtwith its fact-finding verdict ofguilt, butwhich verdict was not set out "in the minutes ofthe trial court," for I have "already'' obtained a true and complete, certified copy ofthe minutes ofthe trial court in her case. here set out for you readers the law so you can see for yourselfthat I am not mentally disturbed orcrazy or sick orwhatever, butin fact that I amjusttellingyou like either a majority, concurring or a dissenting opinion ofour court not what I am just statingthat the law states and means, but I am telling and explaining to a for you what the Courts' opinions and holding themselves have stated what the law state and mean through thejudges ofher Courts. Please, a court"judge"sjudicial function and duty is to not prosecute the case but simply cause the facts in dispute in the case properlybrought to and filed with the clerk be brought to adjudication and then applythe law to those facts and the law declare the winner. Now watch this

.... In Moore v. State, 245 S.W. 2d 491 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952), when theJudges ofthis Court ofCriminal Appeals actuallyhad respect for the law itself and were REAL God-fearing, that in such a case as this, the Judges would not have allowed Karla Faye Tuckerbe "unlawfully'' putto death, for the opinion would also have read , in such a case as below ( where eitherthe Judges themselves may have failed to have noticed thatthe Court lackedjurisdiction over the attempted appeal owing to no judgmenthaving been either "rendered" or "entered ofrecord in the minutes ofthe trial court" orboth, but instead where same were noticed by either counsel for defendant or the.defendant himself/ herself) as follows:

"Appellant, for the first time byhis motion for rehearing, insists that no final judgmenthas been enteredin the minutes in this case and that, for this reason, the appeal should be dismissed.

https:/ /casetext.com/users/prophet-ronald-whitfield 1 "/'11 /'1 1"11 cLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 20 of42



### "The transcript contains what, upon its face, purports tobe ajudgment ofthe court [ like theyhave in the past, and like they still do today, and in all those proceedings involving criminal lawsuits now coming to you from the district courts ofHarris County, Texas], showing that appellant was duly tried and c;onvicted by ajury, upon which verdict the trial court [hadboth 'rendered' and ] entered thejudgment [ although this too was not done in My own presumed cases, but I need not take exception ofthe dereliction atthis time].As it appears in the transcript, the [same aforementioned ]judgment does not show to have been entered in the minutes of the court. [ Thus, although the prison officials and the federal courts do receive these 'paper' instruments purportingto be Judgments as actuallybeing a true and certified copy ofthe original purported 'judgment on file in my office,' and commanding prison officials to confine the person named therein orthem to cause the death ofKarla Faye Tucker, but, in actuality, they be not what they 'purport'to be --because there be no 'record' oftheir existence,just like with any purported 'paper money,' for which there be also 'no record' oftheir printing, which can easily be verified bythere being no record ofthe 'serial numbers' as found thereon, being held tobe 'counterfeit money.' Texas law defines what a 'judgment' in a criminal case is. Not until orunless such 'purportedjudgment'be 'entered ofrecord in the minutes ofthe court' do it cease to be purported, actually become a 'judgment' of the Court.] "Accompanying the motion for rehearing is the certificate ofthe county clerk certifying thatthejudgmenthad notbeen entered in the minutes ofthe courtbut,by inadvertence, had been omitted from such record. "It is apparent, therefore, that ajudgment has notbeen entered ofrecord in the minutes ofthe court in this case [just like here, and, therefore,· meaning that I had and unlawfully severed avoid sentence in absence ofanyjudgment and therefore, so in violation ofboth the Due Process and the Equal Protection Clauses, for nineteen years and a half (19 1/2) in Hell and Karla Faye Tucker having been put to death likewise]. 'Entered of record, as applied tojudgments in a criminal case, means 'entered in the minutes ofthe court.' The case ofEllis v. State,140 Tex. Cr. R. 

### 339, 145 s.w. 2d176, appears to be here controlling; itwas there held that a docket entryin a misdemeanor case did not constitute ajudgment entered ofrecord. " [We are REAL God-fearing Judges and not so corrupted.] Appellant's motion for rehearing is granted; the [ nowvoid opinion [we] heretofore rendered in this case is withdrawn; and the appeal is [ordered] dismissed [for wont of jurisdiction].Last .t'ropnet Konata uwayne wntuH::1u: vun.acu rrc;;:stuc;;uw:u, vuu!S1v.,.,1vuu1 uuu ...........v ............ 0 "'**~** ... "''-**·~**


### " Opinion approved bythe Court." Inthese instant criminal lawsuits (albeit the record proves that I had not actually been at all suedby Texas for neither "life, liberty nor property"), these Respondents have willfully refused to take any corrective action whatsoever,so as to discharge the duties under the oath oftheir office. In an attempted appeal in cause number 617718, wherein a purportedjudgment of conviction was brought to the Respondent, the First Court ofAppeals ofTexas ( having notbeen "filed" with the clerk ofthe trial court, and therefore not "rendered" and not "entered ofrecord in the minutes ofthe trial court"), Appeal No. 01-92-00617-CR, that said Court also even failed to "render" its very own "Judgment ,"whichwas and still is essential in order to affirm the purported judgment ofthe trial courtbelow it, Respondents sued herein, to dispose ofthe attempted appeal, puttingit out the courthouse. Please, onA1,1gust 26,1993, only an "opinion" hadbeenhanded down by Respondent ( and having only been "typed" as sign,evidently authoredbythejustice assigned to write the opinion for law clerk which the Justice approved but failed to personally sign and ) which said opinion did no less and no more than to state for its readers "the rationale followed bythe court in reaching its decision.i' Finally, on March 9,1994, the clerk ofsaid appeals court typed up, hand-signed and issued such a void "mandate," and instead ofrecalling this void check or mandate, the Respondent stands behind it anyway. Finally, in light ofthe Seventh Amendment guarantee ofthe REAL God-given right oftrial byjury, and in light ofTitle 9 U.S.C. relating to the law ofarbitration, I sued two (2) car dealers and one (1) bank in connection therewith. In one case, no contract exits at all. ( "This contract is notvalid unless you andwe sign it." ) And in the other case, three (3) contracts exist and all ofthem somehow reflect to have been executed "January 14, 2015," with two (20 ofthe with like VIN and the third contract ofanotherVIN. With all three ofthem dated on I

### anuary 14, 2015, but none ofthen reflectingthe time so executed andwith two(2) ofthe containing the same VIN and the third containing some otherVIN yhs thus establishing that two different vehicles hadbeen sold to Me the same night by the same dealership and My having sued outbefore Respondent the two (2) contracts containing one particularVIN and the defendant failing to counter- sue Me against the otherVIN and counsel for defendant failing to get Me tojoin issue with defendant onthe contract forwhich theywished to take to arbitration and further

10/21/2015

### Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 22 of42

still since counsel for defendants forgot to still offer its contract into and have Respondent admit into evidence, REAL God and I both fail to see how any previous jurisdiction that the trial court may have had here had not nonetheless become lost on its way to "judgment" and thus Respondent having EXCEEDED hisjudicial authoritygiven him bythe Court to act for the Court, does not constitute a void order, for which Texas law is such that the "writ will lie to review.' Also,both ifwe follow these three(3) contract to their logical conclusion orwherever theybe going, then said attorneys for the said car dealerships would appear to be then arguing that I somehow, in fact, bought from said dealerships (whose business is each located in different cities in Texas, some twenty (20) 

### mile apart from each other), not two (2), 

### but in fact three(3) newvehicles, though I do have at least two,but it is REAL God who gave them to Me. In short, REAL God Himselfgave to Me these two automobiles, because, seeking to perpetrate fraud upon Me; under Texas law ofabandoned propertyrelating to vehicles, the dealerships each abandoned their propertywhen theirvehicle remained,"illegally," on propertyunder My control"for more than forty-eight (48) hours." ( In one case I returned to the dealership with the newvehicle and it refused to accept it, arguing itwas My "car!" ;thus, and without them knowing so, I then created a video tobe admissible in a court oflaw as the best evidence, the proofoftheir actions.) Now as to howthese Respondents rendered orders in violation ofthe Constitution warrantingthis Court to exercise her mandamus powers, bothunder Texas law relating to arbitration and underfederal law relating to the same,the defendants belowMUST ESTABLISH, among otherthings, the existence ofa con tract and an agreement to submit to arbitration some dispute, beingthe subject thereof. Inboth cases both attorneys were caused by REAL God to forget to "offer''into and get received and "admitted" into "EVIDENCE" at the hearing any contract and arbitration agreement. in fact defendants did not even botherto appear in court: instead , they sent their attorneys. However, and needless to say, their attorneys could not and they did not take the stand and be sworn in and testifyto any ofthe facts that they did not personally observe. Instead they merely stoodbefore the trial judge arguing about some papers that might be on file attached to some motion to compel arbitration. Protested everything and repeatedlyinformed the trialjudge that I 

### I did notjoin Issue with the motion to compel arbitration be cause I was not counter-sued and that the contract the defense counsel wished to putin issue was not valid.Again, counsel for defendant with the void contract failed to cause defendant to counter -sue Me to get before the court thecontract that theydesired

./ Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 23 of42
OnlyMy contract was in dispute and I never took delivery ofthe vehicle containing the DNA orthe VIN stated in the first and the second contracts executed. The socalled contract, which counsel failed to offer into evidence and uponwhich motion the respondent below granted, but remember having notbeen admitted into in evidence, was but fraud in the execution thereof,does not even constitute an amendment to even an existing, valid contract in that Texas law defines exactlywhat she considers to be a "contract,"forthe third instrument made no new nor additional offer, acceptance for anythingbargained; rather it merely altered the DNAfVIN

.

.Here, the law ofTexas on January 14, 2015,as it is still today, is such that I must sue the trialjudges for their legal errors in granting motions to compel arbitration by way ofmandamus, and not byway ofappeals. I broughtboth a lawsuit on appeal and a lawsuit in mandamus. the Respondents belowput outthe courthouse the mandamus lawsuit and will render orders dismissing the lawsuit s in the appeals, as ifREAL God can do nothing to stop this. Just like all the otherlitigants having sued out writs ofmandamus before Respondents where trial courtjudges have granted ot)ler motions to compel arbitration, our Due Process And our Equal Protection Clauses guarantee to Me the same "treatment" in face ofMy inalienable rights. ******************************************** IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield'S MOTIONS FOR REHEARING ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF ORDER ON PETITION FOR JUDICIAL MISCONDUCT BY U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE SIM LAKE (WHO FAILED TO "COMPLYWITH THE LAW AND COURT RULES," INVIOLATION OF THE CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT) AND MOTION TO SUE OUT THE APPEALS IN FORMA PAUPERIS, AND NOTICE TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT AND THE COURT ITSELF: AND HER JUDGES WITH RESPECT TO RELEASE FROM HELL/ PRISON, AS FARAS TITLE 28 U.S.C. SECTION 1915(A) IS CONCERNED, AND OF JUDGE JOLLY HAVING VACATED THE PRIOR SANCTION ORDER AND OF JUDGE JONES' SANCTION ORDER BEING VOID FOR WONT OF JURISDICTIONLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 24 of42

Attached hereto are the papers on the law ofthe land regarding "void orders andvoid judgment,"which I am now suing t out in this Court, such that her Judges**va~ate** ·them. Now, the first reason that these sanction orders are void is that theyviolate the federal Constitution, First and Fifth Amendments. This Court, unlike our U.S. Supreme Court,is a creature by anAct ofour Congress. Thus, Congress,and not this Court, confers, bylaw, to this Court itsjurisdiction, whichjurisdictionyoujudges derive

### y~urjudicial authority. The onlyfederal court therefore that has "inherit jurisdiction" is our U.S. Supreme Court. Therefore, in order impose any sanction upon Me it mustbe first authorized by anACT OR LAW OF CONGRESS OR RULE OF THIS COURT. Here, I received a copy ofno order**whi~h** cited Me to any legal authoritythat give this Court the power and the "right" to impose a sanction upon Me. And ifthe court should claim that anything I sued forwas"FRIVOLOUS," not only entitled are both the reader and I to true facts ofthe clams presented and a discussion bythe court demonstrating its legal beliefthat such allegations are indeed frivolous, but also ifour Supreme court has declare a legal definition for the term "frivolous" and should ithave argued'

... PROBABLY

...THIS SEEMS CALCULATED; DEFENDANT BIG STAR HONDA AND HER ATTORNEY STOLE MY CAR TODAY STOLE MY CAR AFTER I LEFT TO GO MOW MY COUSIN'S LAWN. THUS, I WILL NOW PRINT THIS AS IS AND CAUSE ALL TO RECEIVE IT A,S IS FOR NOW. MY INTENT IS TO KEEP THIS PETITION CONSTRUCTED AS FOLLOWS: (ORIGINAL VERSION PUBLISHED.PRIOR TO THE AT'I'EMPTED THEFT OF MY CAR ON "10-8-15, HOUSTON POLICE INCIDENT REPORT NO.: 1300793-15) (THAT ISW, THIS IS PAGE 

### 1) This is a Petition for Redress ofGrievances, in our Executive, our Congressional and ourJudicial Branches ofGovernment, serving as a Whistle Blower, a Public Notice, thus Demanding Redress, supportedbyAffidavit pursuantto 18 U.S.C. sec. 1621 (criminal) and 28 U.S.C. sec.1746 (civil), "describing'' crimes against the United States, inviolation of18 U.S.C.sec.242.
1. AND ANY PARTS OF THIS CRIMINAL "COMPLAINT" NOT RELATING TO ALLEGED "FACTS" RESPECTING CONDUCT ASSERTED IN VIOLATION OF 18 U.S.C.sec. 242 IS NOT BEING PRESENTED TO THIS HONORABLE COURT but is separately to the world; i.e., the American People, their news media and EVERY government official.

1 (\/'") 1/'1()1**~**Last Prophet Konald Dwayne Whittield: OttiCial Presidential, Congressional and JudiCl... PageL) ot 4L

2. REDRESS 3· "PEACEABLY" 4· WHEREAS, deprivations of any "rights" recognized bythis statute, where committedby state actors under color oflaw, an element essential to constitute an offense against the United States-- such is the ONLY information being presented to this Court. 5· I, Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield, pursuant to penalty ofperjury, declare that the allegations made below are true and correct, and are not misleading, under 18 U.S.C sec. 1621 and 28 U.S.C.sec.1746, and that I am over eighteen (18) years ofage, ofsound mind and am competent to testify as a witness herein. 6. fs/Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield 7· INTRODUCTION 8. After our Last Prophet, Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield (hereinafter called "Prophet Ronald"), had beenunlawfully detained bythe sheriffof Harris County,Texas, and then after unlawfully delivered to**~-** and unlawfullyplaced in the custody of-- the director ofthe Texas prison system (a place He refers to as "Hell") on Friday, 2 October 1992, A.D., our Prophet thereafterbegan being directlytrained by REAL God Himself-- and later had He entered into His Office as REAL God's Last Prophet, in 2004, A.D. 9· CONVICTION 10. DEFINED 11. While our Prophet had been existing in Hell (others**r~fer** to this place as a "prison"), REAL God had taught Him, inter alia, that, in Texas, in ajurytrial(a "criminal lawsuit" or a "criminal action" beingbrought "In the name andby authority ofthe State ofTexas" through offices of either her county attorney orher district attorney), a then-criminal defendant shall have been "convicted" ONLY where "theverdict ofguilt convicting'' him orher shall have been BOTH "RECEIVED AND ACCEPTED" bythe trialjudge. Jones v. State, 795 s.w.2d 199 ( Tex.Cr.App.); Ex parte Rawlison,958 s.w.2d 198 (Tex Crim. App. 1997). 12. An "official act." 13. Here,verdict was NOT "ACCEPTED." No "CONVICTION" occurred. 14. Notwithstanding,still,Texas law mandates that the court clerk "SHALL" enter ofrecord "in the minutes" ofthe trial court suchjudicial "act" ofacceptance of

. thejury's verdict. 15. THE LEGAL RESULT

https://casetext.com/users/oroohet-ronald-whitfteld 1 0/?.1 /?.Oll:iLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 26 of42

16. 

### If, after an examination ofthe court reporter's notes ("statement offacts") and the clerk's record ("the minutes ofthe court proceedings"), itbe shown that the trialjudge either forgot orfailed to "accept" the jury's verdict and in open court and on the record, NO CONVICTION will have occurred at all. 17. 

### Title 18 

### USC§ 242 

### WAS AND IS VIOLATED. 18. 

### For Texas to ''WILLFULLY" refuse orfail to correct this dereliction, is an OFFENSE. Any failure ofthe court clerk to recordthe official act of acceptance ofverdict and record both in the "minutes ofthe court" and the finding(s) that ajuryhad made-- "SPREADING" in "the minutes" the VERDICT outverbatim convicting the**"defendant'~** 

### --results in no "conviction" as well. 19. 

### The judge presiding at our Prophet's trial failed to."ACCEPT" theverdict of guilt convicting our Prophet thathe "received." Therefore, under Texas LAW, our Prophetwas NOT "convicted" at all. And both records (referenced above) PROVE this. See John 14.16-17,26; 15.26; 16.7-15. 20. 

### Today, these state actors have "willfully'' refused and failed to take "corrective"ACTION

... in orderto solely "avoid" the legal inevitable. BUT THEY HAVE A"DUTY" TO. 21. 

### Please, where a criminal"conviction" exists in FACT, owing to the above procedures having been satisfied, itwill not be "complete" until a hearing to determine "punishment" of "convict" has been concluded-- and "sentence pronounced." Only after such "punishment" has been "assessed" may "sentence," in open court, and on record, be "pronounced" against convict, and mustbe pronounced in his orher presence, which i.s "order ofthe court orderingthat the punishmentbe carried into execution in the manner prescribedby law." (It maybe suspended.) 22. 

### In a "criminal proceeding''in Texas, a "judgment" on a "conviction" is not orallypronounced against convict (and certainly not in his orher presence), but it is an eventbeing''rendered" against convict through "a written memorandum," in the convict's absence. 23. Administratively, the trialjudge has a ministerial DUTY to "sign" written judgment ofconviction and cause it be both "RECEIVED AND FILED" in office ofdistrict clerk, which may be inspected by public. When it is RENDERED, it "MUST

## pe entered ofrecord in the minutes ofthe trial court." 24. 

### InJones, the Court held "writtenjudgment" does not itselfadjudicate guilt of convict. Rather, "we are ofthe opinion that a defendant has been adjudged guiltywhen the verdict convictinghim [or her] has been received and acceptedLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 27 of42
by thejudge ofthe trial court." Compare Tex. Code Crim. P. art.1.15. ("No person canbe convicted ofa felony except
....") 25. (Prior to the verdict, defendant was called defendant, but after verdict of guilt, the now-convict is lawfully called "convict," for his orher status will have changed, from first a "suspect," to an "accused," to a "defendant," and finally to "convict.") 26. (In Hell, a convict is most often called an "offender" or a"prisoner.") 27. In the District Clerk's office-- in Harris County,Texas--"JUDGMENTS" are NEVER FILED IN CRIMINAL 28. "CASES." But once filed, theyMUST also be "entered in the minutes." Not here. But, failure of judge to cause judgment signed(whether in chambers , open court, or at home sitting in bath tub)tobe "RECEIVED AND FILED" in Clerk's office, AND EQUALLY the failure ofclerk to "enter"it in the "minutes" will continue to result

-- like it has "already'' resulted

-- in "people" being UNLAWFULLY put to death and imprisoned-- even where the "minutes ofthe.court" orthis "proof" PROVE a conviction did occur. (We say "people" because the "minutes" tell us "what took place in court.") Wilson v. State, 677 s.w.2d 518 (Tex. Crim. App. 1984). 29. This is because no JUDGMENT was ever "rendered"by court upon the "LAW," and then"ENTERED" respecting the question of"fact" and law that thejuryorthe trialjudge, when sitting as fact-finder(i.e., a trial byjudge where juryhas been lawfullywaived), had determined. Itisjustthe LAW. 30. In the United States, inboth state and federal courts, speaking through its judge,ajudge MUST declare the law in every "CASE." Granted, in absence of a "written record" ofthese "historical facts," it cannotbe said a citizen has been "disqualified" from holding public office byreason ofhaving a "criminal conviction" or from obtaining some othergainfulemployment, without a showing ofthe "PROOF." 31. This is not to saythat a "conviction" did not lawfully occur. Rather, it is onlyto say that Texas will have no "record" of judgment that a conviction had occurred in fact; i.e., 

## a"writtenjudgment."And only a "writtenjudgment" of conviction thathas been "FILED," and therefore "RENDERED and ENTERED" maypublicly supply the "proof." 32. Aclerk's "file mark" might PROVE filing. But the "minutes"provejudgment was "entered."Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 28 of42



### 33· The necessary "judgment may never be 'rendered' nunc pro tunc"(ifitbe a JUDICIAL error or determination, as distinguished from a CLERICAL mistake)

-- which is a Latin word meaning "now for then." 34· The Supreme Court ofTexas is, bylaw, charged with making and promulgating the rules ofadministration for conducting court proceedings.The Supreme Court ofTexas has declared an administrative rule respecting "rendition of

; 

### judgment." That Court declared that ajudgment is "rendered" when it is either orallypronounced , in open court, orwhen the written memorandum has been signed by the trialjudge and "FILED with the clerk ofthe trial court." See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art.2.21(a)(1). 35· As a rule, a document, after it has been "received" bythe court clerk, is "FILED" when it has been stamped as**'~FILED,"** 

### thus bearing the clerk's filemark orfile-stamp, "evidencing its filing." Then it will be noted onthe court's docket sheets, as FURTHER evidencing the "OFFICIAL ACT" ofits filing. 36. In the Prophet's "case"-- but our Prophet has learned that no "cases" were ever actually "FILED" against Him and for which "personaljurisdiction" could attach --the elderly retiredjudge (in such a hurryto complete the trial so that he could catch his plane back home to Odessa, Texas)just completely failed to orjust simply did notknow he had to "accept" the verdict ofguilt, and therefore it could not be and it had not been "entered ofrecord in the minutesofthe trial court," the latter ofwhich is a ministerial act tobe performed bythe trial court clerk. Wilson v. State, 677 sw2d 518(Tex.Cr.App. 1984)· 37· When thejuryis not "polled" then the trialjudge, on the record, must "accept"the verdict ofguilt. Upon the acceptance ofthe verdict ofguilt, the convict is then "convicted," butthe "conviction is notyet complete." 38. But assuming that a conviction did exist, since no "judgment ofconviction" had been "rendered" and "entered," no "appeal" could have been legally taken from the trial court to any other court, much more, to the First Court of Appeals ofTexas. And said appellate court also failed to render its own judgment

-- altogether. But since no conviction occurred at all, there canbe nojudgment on that which Texas has declared does not exist

-- depending on the status or name ofthe complaining party. Ifeither us or our Prophet was one oftheir own, ajudge or otherwise some wealthyperson, and thus had gotten caught and made to standtrial and later discovered what REAL God has taught and showed our Last Prophet, can one now see why thejudiciary would release us or our Prophet, a prisoner, immediately?Last .l:'ropnet KonalO uwayne wnnne10: urnc1a1 .l:'res10enna1, congresswna1 ana Jumcl... .!:'age L':J or ttL

39. But neither the trial court, Court ofAppeals, nor the Court ofCriminal Appeals has ever obtained "subject

-- matter jurisdiction" to act lawfully. For its acts to be "lawful," a court must first acquire "power" or "authority'' or "jurisdiction"to act. It must first be "authorized"bylaw to conduct its business. 40. For example, a "convict"-- as distinguished from a· "defendant"-- may not lawfully be "punished"byimprisonment orby a "sentence ofdeath," unless or until that convict has actually been "adjudged guilty ofthe offense of 'burglary ofa buildingwith intent to committheft' or of a 'capital murder' as found by verdictofthejury. I will ACCEPT-- and now do ACCEPT for [not myself, but for] the court-- thejury's verdict ofguilt for the felony offense of'capital murder' at this time and on the record.The clerk ofthe court 'shall' now enter it upon the minutes ofthe court for the court. This Courtwill now stand in recess until called back to trial, at which time it 'SHALL' proceed to conduct a hearing to determine the punishment. In this case, the attorneys for the State [sic] are seeking the death penalty. This Court now stands adjourned." 41. Although He admits that He did in fact commit the felony offense ofburglary ofa buildingwithintentto (rescue no babynor put out anyfire, butto) commit a theft for which He hadbeen arrested on Tuesday, 10 December 1991, A.D., however, our Last Prophetwas never in fact "CHARGED" with and "CONVICTED" of actually committingthat offense. 42. Please, veryfirst procedural step in process for "charging'' "suspect," as distinguished from "accused" and "defendant," is that the "complainant" swear out an "AFFIDAVIT" before an attorney employed by the district attorneyor the county attorney, which, here, Texas, nowknows our Last Prophet can LEGALLY prove had not been done. Art.15.01, Tex. Code Crim.P. And ifthe allegations statedbythe complainant in anAFFIDAVIT (being supportedby "probable cause") establish an offense described in our penal code, it is then "called a complaint." Tex.Code Crim. P. Art. 15.01. That attorney must then present same to the court clerk to be "FILED." Today, staffofboththe "DA's office" and the District Clerk's office have been daily arguing to our Last Prophet thatthere are deputy district clerks "working'' alongside assistant district attorneys, twenty-four (24) hours ·a day, seven (7) days a week-- there just so that theycan file complaints against us and our Last Prophet. This important filing cannotwait a few hours until clerk opens office during normal business hours. Again, "deputydistrict clerks are working in D.A.'s office!"

https:/ /casetext.com/users/prophet-ronald-whitfield 1 0121 /?0 1';Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 30 of42



### 43· In any event, after a complaint has been stamped as "filed" it is actually filed. Those are the procedural steps in the process for bringing a lawsuit,"filing charges," and ifsuch allegations in the "probable cause affidavit" constitute an offense described by our Texas penal code , it is then called a complaint and the matterbecomes a "case," a criminal lawsuit or a criminal action; a controversy now exists. 44· And unless an information or otherwise an indictmentbe filed, the presiding judge or trialjudge sits only as a magistrate

-- and not as a district --judge. Before this point, the court has no "subject matter- jurisdiction" over the "offense" but only over the "parties" named in the "complaint." No indictment nor information has been presented to thejudge by a grandjuryyet. But after an information or an indictment has been filed and "presented"to the trial judge or the presidingjudge duly orlawfully acting for the court, the court at once obtains its full powers in the case to adjudicate the facts and to administer the law tobe applied thereto. 45· And eaci: time the court acts it must always first be in "session" and it must always.second be "called to trial" to conduct its business in open court. Failure to do so, the court cannot lawfully act orproceed. ( But many do anyway, through incompetentjudges and court bailiffs.) (Our Last Prophet has not been able to find any lawyers raising these "jurisdictional defects," much more, gettingfiled and non-filedjudgments reversed therefor.) 46. Please, where a defendant has been found "guilty''by either ajudge or ajury-- or has otherwise entered a "voluntary," ''knowing'' and an "intelligent" plea of

· "guilty," or "nolo contendere" ("I do not contest") or "not guilty'' to an

offense, yet ifno "charge" was or "charges" were ever actually "filed" against him/ her in the first place, even ifa conviction subsequentlybe obtained, that conviction is still void

-- and "void for want of jurisdiction." There was never a lawsuit filed and thus pending. Only a "COMPLAINT" may commence or institute a "case." So, such "jurisdictional defects" may not lawfullybe "waived," butbecome most disturbing for thejudiciary and the prosecution, especially after time and wherejudicial resources have been expended, and where the presumed case has to be filed and then conducted all over again or else the "guilty'' goes scot- free and now legally entitled to civilly sue the countyfor anyunlawful detention,"a violation ofthe constitutional protection" to be free from "unlawful deprivation oflibertywithout due process oflaw."**httos://casetext.corn!users/nronhet-ron::~lcl-whitfiP.lcl** 10/? 1/?01"Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whittield: Otticial Presidential, congress10na1 anu JUUlla••• r<1g,c J 1 u1**'"~""-**


### 4

7. Our Last Prophet became most hatedby ourjudiciarybecause ofthe knowledge that REAL God had given Him, such thatjudges began doing many blatant, illegal acts tobar him completely out ofthe courts, thus hiding Him from the public's eye, the Spirit ofTruth. See John 14.16-17. 

### What was happeningwas most unreal, with the most disturbing implications, making the most educated appear as both stupid and ignorant. Thejudges ofour courts had refused to be impartial in administering the law, as applied to Him. It was so bad that our Last Prophet had come tobelieve He had become the victim ofa "real conspiracy''by many ofourjudges in ourjudiciary, onboth state and federal levels. He would be dealt with as no ordinaryprisoner anymore. 48. And our Last Prophetbecame to believe and accept that due to what REAL God had taught Him. So, He hadjust accepted that He might also be murdered before He wouldbe released, in spite ofthe numerous "food strikes" for which He self-imposed, as a means to call public attention to the matterthrough the world news media, but all to no avail. In the face ofHis repeated self- imposed food strikes, Texas might have believed that she might be able to deceive the people (were He ever to finally expose her in public) into believing that our Last Prophet had suffered "from some form of mental illness," therebyturning such attention from her onto Him, a real "distraction," a game, in the game. 49· However, because both REAL God and His other (still loved) Son Satan (formerly named "Lucifer") see and treat life as a game (he has long since been renamed as "Satan," who is not tobe mistakenlyreferred to as THE, norA, "devil"--for devils are the OTHER fallen"angles" whom were cast out of Heaven along with Satan after they all rebelled against REAL God);i.e., " a contest," and whom both made our Last Prophet their subject therein, but because ofourfree will;--neither Satan nor REAL God could in advance actually knowwhat our Last Prophet would ultimately do. (JJ 

### ould He either curse or not curse REAL God for what He was being daily putthrough in "Hell.") Needless to say, REAL God won the bet; Satan lost. 

## so. Our Last Prophet would thenhave to beboth anointed and finally ordainedby REAL God Himself, as REAL God's Last Prophet and freed from**~ell,** 

### all at once. And He was. 51. But do not assume that our Last Prophet was being "tested"by REAL God. For some reason, our Last Prophet does not believe nor accept any proposition or position and argument that REAL God tests now andfor has ever tested His own children**httn~://ca~etextcom/u~er~/nronhet-ronald-whitfteld** 10/21/2015Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 32 of42 \· 52. 

### Also, He contends and maintains that REAL God does not know everything. Specifically, He teaches, for example, that it is not that REAL God "cannot know'' the outcome ofsuch games that Satan and He might struggle in together ( for the two are in a contest ) to see who will win; it is only that since REAL God gives us all free will to make our own choices, He simply has Himselfchosen to not know what the outcome ofour works or deeds or actions will ultimatelybe, by INTENTIONALLY limiting His very own "foreknowledge" in this respect. For example,justlike when He was arguing with our Last Prophet's brotherMoses (whom initially did notwant tobecome any prophet for REAL God), had not REAL God considered or contemplated what Pharaoh might and might not do before He sent Moses to him, demanding that he release REAL God's people, thus arguing to Moses "if' Pharaoh do this or do that? As such, while REAL God does not know what'we will and will not do, He does, however, know ofall the "possibilities" ofour actions and non-actions, with respect to whatwe might and might not do. So, again, REAL God will have INTENTIONALLY limited His very own foreknowledge in this respect. 53· 

### Therefore, it cannot be said and argued that He is. a little less than perfect. Here, as Satan had during the game in which the servantJob was their subject, Satan had hoped to win and thus defeat our Righteous God, as to overthrow Him and as to "disqualify'' our loyal, Last Prophet from becoming qualified to become our Last Prophet. 54· 

### One might well ask (and should really want to know): "Whatwould have actuallyhappened had [REAL] God lost thebet that He made with Satan

-- that Job and our Last Prophet would not curse Him if He were tojust only remove the protection that both enjoyed from Him?" 55· 

### And to be very· clear: any member ofthe the public is free to choose to inspect the trial court's records here, which are kept in the office ofthe clerk ofthe trial court. Here, although a signed, writtenjudgment ofconviction is presentlybeing ''kept" in the "file" itselfthat is relating to His "cases," yet those "instruments"have not actually ever been"filed" in the record in the office ofthe court clerk. They all reflect no time, no date and no name ofthe personwhom, in the past, had actuallyplaced them in the file ofthe record and therefore they are not a record ofthe court "and represent nothing more than hearsay evidence. And hearsay evidence has no probative value." See Wilson, supra.Last !'ropnet Konald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 33 of42

56. 

### And since His release from Hell on Thursday, 12 

### May 2011, 

### A.D., our Prophet has notunlawfully removed from nor caused someone else to unlawfully remove from the said file any official nornon-official record. But He could have. He saw it would bejustthat easyupon visiting the Harris County District Clerk's office. The deputy clerks are not watching the public that come inspecting the record that these people had checked out. (While such office has a video camera system therein, the onlytime anyone would have occasion to review anything is that a matter presented itself. By then, the recordings likely would no longerbe available. No discussion here is now offered regarding the "imaging" ofsuch records.) 57· Today, neither the American people themselves northeir local, state and ' federal government officials have any way ofever knowing the date, the time and the name ofwhatever employee whom performed the act ofplacing any one ofthe thousands of writtenjudgments in said files, unlike some ofthe other official records, which inform theAmerican people that REAL God will have once again chosen, like He had in choosing Moses, yet another "criminal" for His (buthere,our Last) Prophet, whom He raised up and directlytrain.ed Himself, to "guide [us ] into all truth," such people living in the Greatest country on the face ofthe earth

-- and for**H~m** 

### to therefore qualify to occupy the world's highest Office, for He shall not speak to us on His own authority. But onlywill He tell us ofwhatever He shall hear from our REAL God. 58. Again, onlythat shall He declare unto us. 59. Accordingly, without REAL God first needing to send

-- and then actually sending-- to us (theAmerican people first) our Final Messenger or our Last Prophet, there can be no Judgment Day

-- and so it follows that no "judgment" then can ever be rendered against us -- according to ourgood and ourbad deeds

-- i.e., ourworks

.Accordingly, anyone whom will have failed to have done more good deeds orworks than he or she will have done bad deeds orworks while on Earth-- that upon and during"JUDGMENT DAY" of REAL God, that person's name will nothave been recorded and/or entered of record in The Book ofLife, the Minutes of REAL God's Court, but such a person then shall simply have his orherpunishment assessed, and his orher sentence imposed and pronounced against him orher, which is to be eternally cast into the "lake offire," for that person has"already'' been adjudged to be guiltyfor having done more wrong in life than good. (See Revelation 

### io.12-15.) 

### (Our Holy Bible.)**.uc.o."~** r lU.IJucL Kunam uwayne Whittleld: Official Pr,esidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 34 of42

6o. Please, and no one now dead is yet somehowpresently sitting in Heaven. What, without "Judgment"first being "rendered"? The dead remains dead for now-- and all are aware ofnothing. They must await for their "resurrection." Now, of course, after theirresurrection, John said He"

... saw the dead, small and great, standingbefore [REAL] God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book ofLife. And the dead werejudged according to [not their faith and/orbeliefin our ProphetJesus, but 'werejudged according' to] their works, bythe things which were [ and therefore now are and have 'already' been] written in these books. 61. "The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Ha'des delivered up the dead who were in them. And they [too] werejudged, each one accordingto his [orher] works. 62. "Then Death and Ha'des were cast into the lake offire. This is the second death. 63. "And anyone [ i.e., the name ofthe dead

-- but nowresurrected -:.- person ] not found written in the Book ofLife was cast into the lake offire. " 64. As such, for instance, our dead great grandmother orwhomever it maybe is not "already'' in Heaven but is inthe graveyard still dead and yet has been "already'' adjudged byand for herworks; we do good and bad works. Our "faith" and this "grace" cannot save us. 65. Remember, the assessment ofpunishment is part ofourjudgment, which is distinct from the sentence Thus, while we all will have "already'' been adjudged guilty or not guiltyfor ourgood and ourbad deeds,yet none ofus "already'' adjudged guiltyhas "already'' had our "punishment"ALSO assessed. The Judgment is not yet "complete."And there is no contradiction here. 66. While we are yet alive, ifthe minutes reflect we have performed 357 good works to our736 bad works, we are "already''adjudged guilty. Ourname will not be found in The Book ofLife, because ourbad deeds in their numberhave exceeded those ofourgood works. The good news is thatwe are notyet dead and therefore can change this gamefscore byceasing from doing**~ad** works. Instead, we can SWIFTLYbegin doing ONLY goodworks-- all day and everyday. This is howmuch REAL God loves us, giving us a chance and time to win our own salvation in this game.The second our goodworks exceed our badworks will our namebe entered ofrecord in The Book ofLife. Butbecause some ofus love the dark and will not listen to the Light , we can only saythat we"MIGHT" be saved from eternal separation from REAL God.Last .Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 35 of42



### 67. "But God have MERCY on me! I was taught thatbecause You had so loved the world that You gave us Your onlybegotten Son Jesus, and that whosoever believed in Him, that He in fact is Your Son, would not die [sic] ('perish'), but 'should' have everlasting life with You! I believed in this and I believed in Him. I was taught that my faith alone would save me because ofYour 'grace' and 'mercy' and thatwas because Jesus had 'paid' You for Your demand for the price of Adam and Eve's sins, becomingvisited upon the heads ofYour children, which disobedience had given birth to sin and which required the penaltyofdeath and therefore our separation from You until You came up with this genius plan so that after ourresurrection we all but MIGHT be reunited with You forever. 68. "But Ijust do not see and understand why am I nowbeing**~punished'** 

### byYou for mybad works, the act ofevil itself that You will have 'already' determined would result in my separation from You, and which You will have 'already,' in my absence, found me guilty of

... and nowhere in Your own Court to assess mypunishment for having committed more wrong or evil works than good or right works, and to impose and pronounce Your sentence against me, orderingthat I be cast into some 'lake offire' forever as my 'punishment' when I was ALLOWED to believe that I was saved though. And so You call thisjust or fair orrighteous? I still do not at all understand this

....It is confusing! 69. "Look, ifor since Jesus had lived such a good orperfect life, a condition that the vast majority ofthe World thought You had imposed upon Him in order to save orrescue us FROM these sins ofours, dying on the cross, suffering pain but later rising from His grave, resulting in Him accomplishing His mission, having 'paid'You for these sins-- then I fail not onlyto see now as to 'why' I still had to 'die' on Earth a physical death [a death on account ofthese sins], but also to see why I should live again but only later to stand trial and be 'already' adjudged for that which You supposedlyhave 'already'been paid for, and yet somehow I am now here to be punished for these sins through a sentence --whichwill result in my being cast into Your lake offire

... and forever. 70. "This makes absolutelyno sense to me! Again, I had 'faith' inJesus. I did TRULY believe in Him, that He was and still is Your son. I did not, however, believe that He was You, but I onlybelieved that He was Your Son. 71. "I nowhave nothing else further that I would like to say, other than I am sure that everyone else here whom have 'already' been adjudged to be guilty before we all came here to stand trial for 'Judgment,' the standard ofwhichLaSt rropnet Konald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 36 of42



### was and is merely failing to get our name recorded in The Book ofLife, in light· ofour 'works'

-- feels the same way that I 

### do and would argue the same as I have. We were all clearly DECEIVED byYour Word, since You obviously granted the "Prince" ofYour World (Satan)with additional powers, which here permitted him to even tamperwith your Word-- our Bible. 72. "But with all due respect, 0 Mighty God, this 'game' in past life was and is wholly unjust!"**73~** 

### But there shall be no "legitimate" excuse orjustification as to 

### avoid your "punishment" here. 74· While it is true that our Prophet Moses once talked REAL God out of destroying His chosen people such that He "changed His mind" and did not carry outthe destruction against them that He had threatened, Ex.32.1-14,·yet no one shall have a legitimate excuse orreason as to why REAL God's Judgment and Sentence OUGHT notbe rendered, pronounced in open court against him or her and then executed, being carried outby our Merciful, REAL God. 75. Listen, people, our ProphetJesus never preached, taught, nor suggested to us to do no independent thinking, research and studying ofthe Word. 76. Onlybut a few ofus do not say "aman"or "amen" to EVERY single word that our leaders in church utter. Many ofthem claim to have been called (and many ofthem in fact have been truly called ) by REAL God, but not all ofthem have actuallybeen "chosen"by Him to be servants ofHis, and to teach us about anything relating to REAL God. Indeed, our ProphetJesus warned us tobe aware ofthem and offalse prophets. 77· Those whom have "already" died believing and those ofus now still living and believing

-- as "we" were taught that our Prophet Jesus died for our sins (believing that His death somehowpaid ourpenaltyfor which REAL God had imposed therefor)-- that theythenwere-- and**"we'~** 

### also now are --"saved"· from our continuing deeds or acts ofsins

-- by" our 'faith, 111 

### owing to

-- and on account of-- "our 'belief'" that our Prophet Jesus was and yet still is the Son of REAL God, and therefore obtaining this "grace" or "mercy"-- 78. we find this assumption orbelief(orwhatever itbe) to be both stupid, i.e. , "struck senseless, deficient, or dull in understanding [because we had in our own mind] formed [and, here, a belief] or done [ something else, which is contraryto truth, without [thinking or] reasoning [and thereby making our own understanding and decision or] judgment [tobe] foolish," which, in fact,

... "is rather an unremarkable proposition on its face and yet disturbing in itsLast Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 3 7 of42
implications," and ignorant ("having the want but absence of ['correct' knowledge because we were] unaware oruninformed"). This mistaken assumption in our ''belief" ( orwhatever it be) is wholly untrue. So, where did such come from? 79. Okay. It came to us from "Paul"? But Paul was an enemyofJesus. Nor had Jesus taught Paul as a "disciple," which simply means a "learner." Indeed, Jesus directlytaught Paul absolutely nothing. As such, Paul certainlyhad never graduated ori up to an "apostle," which he claimed to be. Still, Paul himself claimed neitherJesus nor REAL God had anointed and ordained him as an "apostle"(whose Office isjust one step below that ofprophet), authorizing him to enter into that Office ofApostle. But by contrast, Jesus made very clear ofHis own "authority''to preach the Kingdom ofGod was and still is at hand, in that He: (1) said that He was a "prophet"whom is (and that they are) "respected" everywhere else except in His (and in their) very own home town; and (2) said He was "sent"by REAL God. 8o. Look, people, Jesus's "death" did not "pay" any "price" for anyone's sins. No one has a license to commit acts ofsins-- period. Rather, it is (and was) simply that

... REAL Godjust so trulyloved (and still loves) the World (His children) that (due to the sins ofAdam and ofEve, beingvisited upon the heads ofthe children throughAdam and Eve's "disobedience" to Him), He came up with this plan that could ( i.e., being capable ofreuniting or able to) reunite our separation from Him (which, again, is on account ofsin) that He gave up (and sent to the children) Jesus-- the best He knew He had

... who could "possibly'' endure trials (but the term is not to be confused with "tests") ofsins, and were He to fully resist such temptations to sin Himself, He would and should( thus, shall) "QUALIFY" to teach us the RIGHT waywe had ought live in the game oflife, a contest. But our ProphetJesus's circumstances here mayin no wise be seen as a "test," for for what logical purpose would REAL God have in testing us (to see what?) and "lead[ing] us into temptation'' Himself, as distinguished from "deliver[ing] us from all evil"? 81. Look, and please: recorded at John 14.16-17, our ProphetJesus said He would "pray'' to our "Father and [our Father] w[ould] give [us] ANOTHER Counselor."Thus, in orderfor our Fatherto "give [us] 'another' Counselor," Jesus Himselfhad to be also a "Counselor," since He stated He would ask our Fatherto give us "another'' (Counselor). For example, the one ofyou who be
a police officer going offduty andyet be stoppedby someone else, might explain this best

...."Hey, I am offdutynow and am going home. But I will call
https://casetext.com/users/prophet-ronald-whitfield 1 ()/") 1 /")()1"Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 38 of42


### dispatch and it will send 'another' officer to this location. And when he or she has come that officer will

...."So, we OUGHT read the Scriptures (John 14.16- 17,26;15.26; 

### and 16.7-15) 

### to CORRECTLY determine whether or not these prophecies have "ALREADY" come true or are now COMING true. And after we do, ifwe determine that theyhave "already'' come true, as Paul would have us believe that theyhave at "Pentecost," thenwe need not listen to our Last "Prophet Ronald," for He would be a "false prophet." However, ifwe find from the evidence(i.e.,what He "ALREADY" did WHILE in,Hell and is presently doing now OUT ofHell) --that this other "Counselor" has come onthe scene and now doing--and had in Hell been doing-- EXACTLY what our Prophet Jesus stated that that "Counselor" would do, explaining to His disciples BEFORE He (Jesus) was arrested, tried, convicted, punished, sentenced to death, and remanded to prison to await the execution ofHis death sentence

-- 82. 

### we still have free will to choose to disregard the evidence and are free to still lean on our OWN understanding. 83. Our Prophet Jesus had occasions to teach His disciples in ordinary situations, for we can see that He taught them that if this situation should occur to them orWHENEVER one occur to us, to ALLOW the righteous philosophy He taught them to determine their and our own actions, for our philosophyitself is what determines our thought pattern. So, ourthought pattern determines our attitude. Our attitude determines ourbehavior pattern and ourbehavior pattern determines our actions

-- whether we do right orwrong, good orbad. Those actions become our "works." 84. DO RIGHT AND GOOD WORKS. 85. He taught right FROM wrong and good FROM bad. Thus, wheneverwe do a "work," eitherwrong orbad (or evil), we not only "already'' know BEFORE we do the "work" ofits nature, but also do we knowthatwe then commit a sin, which contemporaneouslywill be countedAGAINST us as such, while our good and righteous "works" will be counted to BENEFIT us, offsetting and eliminating such other, previouslyrecorded acts ofsins, all in the GAME, which we ourselves determine what the outcome will be. And our doing our good works publicly-- and not onlyjustprivately

-- is not only good deed in itselfand a demonstration in the presence ofour "neighbors" so watching, but also such good works publiclyteach a would-be "mensrae" actor thathe/she too may and can do likewise or the same.Last t'rophet Konald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 39 of42

86. Jesus had been free to do right and good and alsofree to do bad and evil but chose instead to do onlythe former, not the latter, for He lived a sinless life, qualifying to BOTH preach to and teach us. (But He once asked: 'Why do you call me 'Good Master'?" and then stated,"No one is 'good' except God.") For Him (and it can also be for everyone else), doing good and right was not (and is not)"hard!"Whatwas HARD was for Him NOT eating and J?-Ot drinking water for forty (40) days and for forty (40) nights. So was this "good" andjor "right"? 87. The answer to this question is obviously

.... "NO." Itwas not good nor right FOR HIS OWN HEALTH sake, but He was determined to qualify for His Office so as to accomplish His mission. He was Justified. 88. ProphetJesus, not being our REAL God Himself (whom so many other people now dead butwhen alive had believed and so manyofus still alive continue to believe),could have died

... and had He so died, He could NOT at all have accomplished His mission on Earth, which was to "qualify," so as to DEMONSTRATE for us how we too could-- and still can --live a good and righteous life. (Notice that Satan did not dare come to tempt Him until after He had ended His "food strike," and yet BEFORE He had eaten anything at all. Thus, ProphetJesus had dealt with Satan tempting Him while very, very hungry, at His weakest.) 89. And itwas only afterJesu shad qualified to (and then did) enter into His Office as ProphetJesus (Son ofMan) had He come and went "preaching'' the Word orthe Kingdom ofGod; i.e., howwe both could and ought live on earth, without committing any acts of sins

-- thatwhosoever in the past believed and whosoever in the present shouldbelieve and in the future believes in Him (that is, what He taught, which was about and of"the Kingdom of [REAL] God," howwe should

-- and ought now -- live in a World ofsins) should not perish buthave eten1allife. 90. The word "should,"beingthe past participle tense ofthe auxiliaryverb "shall"

.... 91. Well, todaypeople clearlyknow that they ought not (morally) and"should" not (imperatively) smoke "cigarettes"but theydo smoke them anyway. 92. It is REAL God's desire that we ought not perishbuthave eternal life with Him; we are free to decline. But ifwe obey--submitting to what is right--we all shouldin the present tense, in the future tense, and in the past tense have everlastinglife.Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 40 of42

1-"' II 93. In any event, "[f]or God sent [not Himselfbut sent] the Son into the world, not to condemn[judge] the world, but that theWorld MIGHT be saved through Him," and therefore ifwe alllearn and know what is right and wrong and good and bad (or evil) respecting our WORKS, and do MORE good than evil which a record is being RECORDED and kept orpreserved about-- thenwe no. longer "might"but "will" and "shall" have eternal or everlasting Life with REAL God. 94· WhenAdam and Eve ate fruit from the tree ofknowledge theybecame AWARE ofgood and evil, and ofright and wrong. Sins had then entered into theWorld. 95· "He [or she] who believes in Him [will seek to conduct himself/ herself accordingly and thus]is not condemned [to the lake offire];[ but] he [or she] who does notbelieve is condemned 'already' [to the lake offire], because he [ or she] has notbelieved in the name ofthe only Son ofGod. And this is the JUDGMENT, THAT THE LIGHT COMES INTO THE WORLD [Jesus was and still is this light],and [yetboth] men [and women] loved darkness rather than light, BECAUSE THEIR DEEDS WERE EVIL." See John 3.16-21. 96. The writer here made clear in the language that whosoeverbelievesin either ProphetJesus orin His name believes in what He TAUGHT. 97. Look, people, we ought "already'' know, for example, that if we believe in a bridge having a deep body ofwater below it as being able to PROTECT us, we are thenbelieving in its capabilities for protecting and saving us from death. We take a chance in and with life; we trust it [the bridge] to keep life or save life. Likewise, when we believe in either P:rophet Jesus orin His name, we I believe inwhat He taught, which was howto do good and right. Still, some of us will and do 1 believe and yet not conform to His teachings, even though His teachings is the "light." 98. Thus, we need not allow Satan to continue to "deceive" or"trick" us, for he does not at all play in the game"fair." We have beenbefore (by our Holy Bible, although it, in parts, has "already''been poisoned bySatan) and again are now (through our Last Prophet) placed duly on "notice"by our REAL God

... that (1) Jesus Himself is not REAL God, but He is our Greatest Prophet, our Greatest servant, the Son ofREAL God, whom was sentto us by REAL God on a special mission, and (2) there is no otherwayin which we "MIGHT" obtain
our eternal salvation with our REAL God than thatwhich has "already'' been recorded in Revelation 20.12-15. Compare with John3.16-21. In sum, we all determine ourvery own destiny. It is within ourpower.Last .Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 41 of42



### 99. So, simplyput, we are the ones, not REAL God, whom decide on whether or notwe will obtain eternal salvation with ourREAL God orwill not
... bybeing separated from Him, eternally, in the lake offire. Ourgood works MUST outweigh those ofourbad ones in their NUMBER. One cannot be heard to claim nor argue that merely doing what we "already'' knew was right or good was somehow "hard." 100. 

### So, this is such a plan that ourREAL God hath devised which makes itvirtually IMPOSSIBLE for even the most silliest orfeeble intellectual to fail to get our name written orrecorded in The Book ofLife. It can get no**eas~r** 

### than this to obtain our salvation

-- or destruction. 101. 

### Just simplydo good and right byALL otherpeople, as well as by our REAL God's animals and by His Earth, including doing right by and to OURSELF. For example , since the "life" in which we live or exist is in fact not our ownbut belongs to our REAL God alone, we therefore have no "God-given right" to commit acts ofsuicide nor any otherright to kill the person ofanother, except where ithave become our dutyto defend or protect such life

... and onlythen when all other means have failed. Did we or our REAL God give or create such life? To whom does it belong? Then to do otherwise be a bad or wrong deed, and so such shall "already''be counted orweighed heavily against us, to nothave our "name" recorded in the Book ofLife. That is an example ofa bad deed orwork. 102. 

### Finally, although "criminal cases" presumablywere "filed" against our Last Prophet Ronald, no "criminal convictions" have, however, been obtained against Him. Thus, He was born to become a "thief" andyet notbe LAWFULLY adjudged byanyman or woman. Yes, He was a criminal who had (and who still has) no GED, no college education, nor any skills ofanykind

.... Our Last Prophet truly was a criminal in fact and yet has "no criminal conviction" of anykind

-- as a matter oflaw

... that has been rendered against Him For some that will be hard to accept; it is maybe trulyunacceptable. But for all legal purposes, He is no "offender" as a matter ofman's law

... ofthe land. 103. 

### And the same is true ofMoses. While He had "unlawfully'' murdered a man, He was never sued for or charged with His crime

-- even though we all know He was in fact so "guilty." Unlike theirbrother Moses, Prophets Jesus and Ronald were both arrested and made to stand trial and imprisoned and in each situation, the government had done them both wrong. But in Moses situation,. He was not caught, "arrested," "convicted," "punished," "sentenced and imprisoned."Last Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield: Official Presidential, Congressional and Judici... Page 42 of42

Contact (mailto:cpntact@casetext.coml Features (/features) lerms (Iter (h //t 'tt I t t) nronnets not. His chilrlren

. . ttps: w1 er.com case ex 104. So, REAL God is the better and bestjudge for**w~shall** become and be His Privacy**(lpr~Vac:rJ** Ao6'urvaoout) :iooS\/jol5s) Press (/press) Students ( ents) 105. And one maywell ask: "How could and can this nd whyhas He otherwise no qualifications[sic]?" In answer, again,see**Joh~6'lrr,~;f1§~'1'6~casetext** © 2015**Ca(~ynBible).** Casetext Inc. and Casetext are not attorne sora law firm and do not DATED: Monday, 24March 2015, A.D. 

### fsf Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield Edited: Monday, 12 October 2015, A.D. CC: U.S Atty. Gen. Holder CC:Texas government Officials File: Prophet Ronald

COMMUNITIES FOLLOWED BY LAST PROPHET RONALD DWAYNE WHITFIELD: (9)
Constitutional Law (/communities/constitutional-law) Civil Rights (/communities/civil-rights)
Consumer Protection (/communities/consumer-protection) Business Law (/communities/business-law) Employment & Labor Law (/communities/employment-law) Legal Research (/communities/legal-research) Appellate Practice (/communities/appellate-practice)

### ~2===============~--~ Legal Ethics (/communities/legal-ethics) Civil Procedure (/communities/civil-procedure)

There are no entries in this feed! j I I

.......JSunday, 11 October 2015, A.D. 7522 La Sa1ette Street Houston, Texas 77021 Cell phone: 832.882.5696

IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, CONGRESS, SUPREME COURT, COURT OFAPPEALS FORTHE

FIFTH CICUIT, DISTRICT COURT FORTHE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, HOUSTON DIVISON CASE NOS.15-20558,15-20547,97-00454,03-20424----------------------------------------



### ----------·---·------------------------ ·------------

IN RE: ProphetRonald Dwayne Whitfield, Petitioner ' "DEMAND FOR DETERMINATION OF VOID JUDGMENTS" AND "SANCTION" ORDERS, TOGETHER WITH 28 U.S.C. SECTION l91S(a) MOTION TO SUEINFORMA PAUPERIS, AND COMPLAINT AGAINST U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE, HON. MEUNDA HARMON, FORJUDICIAL MISCONDUCT, Wim28 U.S.C. SECTION 1746 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF ALL "MATERIALFACTUALALLEGATIONS"

TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES: TO THE ABOVE STATED PUBLIC SERVANTS: NOW COMES Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield (not as "prose, "but) "inpropria persona, " 1 and He would RESPECTFULLY show as follows:

I. JURISDICTION AND INCORPORATION

The power orjurisdiction ofthe Congress to hold he<lrings, ofthe office ofthe President to exercise executive power, and ofthese courts overthe subject matter and overthe parties, and the authority of theirjudges to hear and adjudicate to a lawful decision orjudgmentthe claims presented herein are provided by the federal constitution and all relevant Acts ofthe Congress, the latter ofwhich may be found in our U.S. Code, Title 28.

Finally, I adopt and incorporate byreference all the void, affected orders, judgments and pleadings having been filed in these cases, being the subject hereof, and the attached documents , as relating to void orders andjudgments for all legal and evidentiary purposes.

1 This Court's decisions addressing the subject matter are adopted and incorporated byreference herein fully.II.·sUPREME LAW AS APPLIED TO THE FACTS HEREFOR

A. My Honorable Mr. and Ms./ Mrs. Justices, there being no real need to argue to you-all in dept the wellestablished Supreme Law of REAL God's Land, with respect to the VOID sanction order that was rendered in this matter, as opposed to a "case" (for My application to sue inthis Court in formapauperis was not granted but was denied and therefore there was no case nor controversy existing ), I now respectfully demand that the said be set aside for wont of jurisdiction ofthe Court·itselt: and the authority of her Justices to render the said order. Specifically, the void order expressly stated not only was My application to sue informapauperis "denied"(i.e., having no justice acting on behalf ofthe Court to grant permission, such that the attached petition be filed without having to pay the Government, in advance, the filing fee and thus to proceed or sue Texas in forma**pauperi~).** but also the order went on to declare that the merits ofMy petition were ":frivolous," as well as to unlawfully impose, as a sanction, a bar that I be not allowed to sue inthis Court in civil matters in formapauperis. Accordingly, but, and needless to say, as soon as the order declared that My request that the clerk "file" My petition informapauperis was denied, no case nor controversy was brought to nor before this Court. See 28 U.S.C. section 1915 (a). No Justice of this Court has ever "authorize[d] the commencement, prosecution [n]or defense of [My] suit, action [n]or proceeding, civil [n]or criminal,

... without prepayment of fees or securitY therefor

...." See also this Court's Rules relating to this subject, informa pauperis. Rules 39.1-2 and 39.4-5. Before a petition may be placed on the "docket" it first must be "filed"-- that is, commenced. And unless the statutory fees required by our Congress be paid, see 28 U.S.C. section 1914, in order for the Justices ofthis Court to hear and adjudicate to a lawful decision the averments contained within a

My petition, ajustice ofthis Court MUST first "authorize" such a petitionbe commenced-- filed. In Steel Co. v. Citizensfor a Better Environment, 118 S. Ct.

__ (1998), the opinion, at great length ,explains mostly all there is to know aboutjurisdiction ofthefederal courts, thejudicial power. This Court there explained that if the averments of Afy claims are given one construction under ourfederal Constitution andI should prevailandgiven another construction and wouldbe defeated, afederal court hasjurisdiction. However, the opinion there declared that afederal court will lackjurisdiction to adjudicate claims that are both "immaterial and frivolous. " The opinion expressly stated that frivolous claims are themselves are a "jurisdictional defect. " And needless to say, the opinion teaches that once it be determined that afederal court lackpower orjurisdiction, such a court cannotproceed on to impose sanction, since the opinion also stated that afederal court can take no other action or step after announcing thisfact than that of dismissing the case. Andstill, as here, there was never ever a case that

2 Itmust here be noted that a decisionto either grant or deny any request to sue as a pauper is to be decided solely on the financial status ofthe petitioner and not onthe merits ofthe petition itself- to sue out for the writ, sounding in certiorari or the like. In otherwords,just because it is necessary that a justice of the Court grant leave to a litigant claiming to be unable topay the costs of filing the lawsuit andthus to proceed in formapauperis, that in no wise willmean that theJustices of this Court must also grant relief under thatpetition: it only means that in order for this Court -through her justices- to exercise either her original or appellatepowers or jurisdiction, there really MUSTbe an actual case or a controversy and ongoing. See 28 US.C. section 1915(g) withArticleIll section 2US. Const.

2was authorizedto be filed- or call it, "commence[ d). " Finally, and notwithstanding, both the information set out on the forms themselves for filing a petition sounding in certiorari and in thejudicial opinions ofthis Court relating thereto, this Court explained to the American people that a denial ofa petition for a writ ofcertiorari imports no expression ofdecision on the merits ofsuch a petition whatsoever: ( There are only nine(9) members on the Court; it can grant but a few petitions each term ofthe Court.) Thus, and for these reasons, the said void order entered is TRULY void and, as a Constitution matter, said void orderrendered here must be vacated. Ofcourse we . (the American people) will have to wait to see on whether or notjustice inthis case will be done. B.

Hon. Chief Judge Stewart and all such associate circuit judges of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals assigned to My present appeals filed in the lower court, it is but unnecessary to state everything that can be that is in violation ofourJudicial Code, as committed by our Hon. Judge Hannon against Me. Rather, My petition seeking a writ ofhabeas corpus and our Judge's order thereto both establish the misconduct and provide the supporting evidence for the alleged violations under the Code. See also the attached article relating to a Judicial Misconduct Complaint filed by another against Circuit Judge Jones of this Court, as well as the attached article wherein Judge Jones hath indicted thejudiciary as being "corrupt beyond recognition." Therefore, there is also even further, but judicial support from a sitting appellate judge ofthis very Court, as to substantiate the very same thing that I, too, have claimed and argued for many, many years before she ever came out, finally agreeing.

As in response to the letters to Me from the clerk ofthis Court, first, I move to sue out the appeals and complaint for Judicial Misconduct informapauperis, but for My poverty do I move for such leave to so sue them out and in good faith beliefdo I declare that I am entitled to the relief sought. " We think an affidavit is sufficient which states that one cannot because of

... poverty ' pay or give security for costs
... and still be able to provide' [one]selfand dependents 'withthe necessities oflife."' I amwholly unable to pay any amount ofthe costs whatsoever. Adkins v. E.l DuPont de Nemours& Co., 335U.S. 331, 339- 40,69 S,Ct. 85, 93 L.Ed 43(19488.

Second, I demand a determination on the void orders andjudgments as such- truly being void. Third, and finally, please be advised that our own Judge Jolly rendered an order on a motion (which I had then forwarded to everyjudge appointed to this court ),which order stated that a prior sanction order then in place was "superseded and replaced by 28 U.S.C. section 1915(g)," which is how and why I thereafterhad been able to resume bringing more appeals to this Court

- witil sometime there after our own Judge Jones, withoutjurisdiction, rendered an order, thusjudicially declaring my lawsuit before her had beenfrivolous and then ordering I be sanctioned in cash and also barring Me from bringing any further matters to this Court until the sanctionbe paid. Thus I now challenge the order also as being void for wont of jurisdiction. Attached hereto and in support ofboth My claim ofvoid orders andjudgments and My Complaint for Judicial Misconduct is yet another article from the Internet, posted after I hadbeen already experiencing and complaining about the same thing. The article is called" Defrauding America."

Judge Stewart, it has gotto be adjudicated and sustained, in either one way orthe other

- orboth : either Judge Hannon is acting "willfully" (e.g., as set forth in Title 18 U.S.C section 242, which applies to ionby state officials acting under color ofstate laws, ect.), or she really isjustno longer competent to hold her office anymore. My claims (which must bepresumed to be true) which I have verified and stated were presented under perjury, ect., and which clearly averthat, under Texas laws, not only have I not been sued by Texas in criminal law matters, and not only have I not been ofcommitting crimes "convicted," which legal term definition O.!lf Texas Court ofCriminal Appeals has construed to include a "judgment on

### -.

a conviction, " ( which rendition is necessary before "the disqualifications" may attach), but

also had I claimedthat ajudgment, as defined under Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 42.01, had been neither "rendered" nor "entered ofrecord in the minutes" ofthe state court from which the ''purported judgmenf' purported to have come. I clearly movedthat an orderbe rendered and entered, halting all further death penalty executions from Harris County, Texas, until and after suchtime as thejudge could determine on whether or not such claimsbetrue, and yet, in two orthree words, andwithout any discussion nor evidence in support ofher opinion, Judge Harmon will have given TeXas the okay to continue to unlawfully deprive persons ofthe REAL God-given, inalienable right to life and freedom from imprisonment, but to go ahead to continue to carry out such further, unlawful sentences ofdeath and to continue to unlawfully deprive persons ofsaid freedom without the process owed or due to them, thus stating thatthis was no "discemable claim." Finally, attached hereto is the state court docket sheet and the minutes ofthe court relating to a womanwhom Texas had unlawfully put to death. Here, the record proves not only had Karla Faye Tucker not been properly sued in order for Texas to lawfully "deprive" her of the REAL God-given rigbt to life, which the federal Constitution recognizes and thus stands to protect unless due process oflaw is afforded, and not only was no verdict ofthejury fmding herto be guilty ofcapital murder "setout in the minutes ofthe court," and not only was the same verdict not "accepted" bythe presidingjudge ofhertrial nor accepted by any otherjudge for this matter, and not only does the docket sheet show thatnojudgment, neither for nor against her, had been ''rendered"; i.e., "filed" withthe clerk ofthe state trial court, but also does the same record reflect and thus prove that nojudgmenthad everbeen "entered ofrecord in the minutes" ofthe state trial court. And for a more, thorough discussion onthe law ofTexas onthe subject, see attachment. Our Judicial Code provides that Judge Harmon shall faithfully comply with the laws and the rules ofthe Court, which she herself--over and over -- showed she is notwillingto do.

III. CONCLUSION

WEREFORE, PREMISES ARE CONSIDERED, AND THAT I SUFFERNO RETALIATION IN ANY FORM WHATSOEVER, MERELY EXEERCISING THE SAME RIGHTS THE FEDERAL COURTS DECLARE THAT ALL CITIZENS OF OUR COUNTRY HAVE, I RESPECTULLY MOVE TAT I BE HERE GIVEN THE EQUAL PROTECTION OF THELAW AND ALL THE RELIEF I SHOW MYSELF ENTITLED AS A MATfEROF EXISTING LAW AND FOR SUH BFUTHERRELIEF AS THE LAWS APPLIED TO THEFACTS OF THESE CASES JUSTIFY.

IV. AFFIDAVIT

,I, the undersigned, declare underthe pains and penalty ofperjury that ALL the material factual allegations are both true and correct and notmisleading ; that I have read the foregoing and that same was made by Me; that I am overthe legal age ofeighteen{l8) and that I am legally competent to testify to the material facts stated herein, including those as to My poverty and that Myjudicial was and is the blast resort, so as to PROTECT and FREE Myselffrom official oppression and overtwenty (20) years of repeated injustice committed against Me byboth state and federaljudicial officers having taken ajudicial oath ofoffice to be fair and impartial towards Me.•

• time as thejudge could determine on whether such claims be true, and yet, intwo orthree words, and without any discussion nor evidence in support ofher opinion, Judge Harmon will have given Texas the okay to contiri.ue to unlawfully deprive persons ofthe REAL God-given inalienable right to life and freedom from imprisonment, but to go ahead to continue to carry out such further unlawful sentences of death and continue to unlawfully deprive persons ofsaid freedom withoutthe process owed or due to them, thus stating that this was no "discernable claim." Finally, attached hereto is the state court docket sheet and the minutes ofthe court relating to a White woman whom Texas had unlawfully put to death. Here, the record proves not only had Karla Faye Tucker not been properly sued in order for Texas to lawfully "deprive ''her ofthe REAL God-givenright to life, which the federal Constitution recognizes and stands to protect unless due process oflaw is afforded, and not only was no verdict of jury finding her to be guilty ofcapital murder set out in the minutes ofthe court, and not only was the same verdict not "accepted" by the presidingjudge ofhertrial nor any otherjudge for this matter, and not only does the docket sheet show that nojudgment neither for nor against her had been "rendered"; i.e. "filed" with the clerk ofthe state trial court, but also does the same record reflect and thus prove thatnojudgment had ever been "entered ofrecord inthe minutes" ofthe state trial court. For a more, thorough discussion on the law ofTexas onthe subject, see attachment. OurJudicial Code provides that Judge Harmon faithfully comply with the law and the rules ofthe Court, which she herselfoverand over showed she is not willing to do. '

IlL CONCLUSION

WEREFORE, PREMISES ARE CONSIDERED, AND THAT I SUFFERNO RETALIATION IN ANY FORM WHATSOEVER, MERELY EXEERCISING THE SAME RIGHTS THE FEDERAL COURTS DECLARE THAT ALL CITIZENS OF OURCOUNTRY HAVE, I RESPECTULLY MOVE TAT I BE HERE GIVEN THEEQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW AND ALL THE RELIEF I SHOW MYSELF ENTITLED AS A MATTER OF EXISTING LAW AND FOR SUH BFUTHERRELIEF AS THE LAWS APPLIED TO THEFACTS OF THESE CASES WSTIFY.

IV. AFFIDAVIT

,I, the undersigned, declare under the pains and penalty ofperjury that ALL the material factual allegations are both true and correct and notmisleading; that I have read the foregoing and that·same was made by Me; that I am overthe legal age ofeighteen(IS) and that I am legally competentto testifY to the material facts stated herein, including those as to Mypoverty and that Myjudicial was and is the biast resort , so as to PROTECT and FREE Myselffrom official oppression and over twenty (20) years of repeated injustice committed against Me byboth state and federaljudicial officers having taken ajudicial oath ofoffice to be fair and impartial towards Me.

DATED: Monday,ll October2015, A.D.

lsi Prophet Ronald Dwayne Whitfield CC; Out -of-State Attorneys , News Media -thewhole world Over•10/11/2015 Void Judgment Details
- 'Mlat malES ajudg

### rrent I.Oid 

### (7) where nojusticiable issue is presented to the court through proper pleadings, 

### Ligon v Williams, 264 IlLApp.3d 701, 637 N.E.2d 633 (1st Dist. 1994), (8) where a complaint states no cognizable cause ofaction against that party, 

### Charles v Gore, 248 Ill.App.3d 441, 618 N.E. 2d 554 (1st Dist 1993), (9) where any litigant was represented before a court by a person/law 

### frrm that is prohibited by law to practice law 

### in thatjurisdiction, (10) when thejudge is involved in a scheine ofbnbery (the Alemann cases, 

### Bracey v Warden, U.S. Supreme Court No. 96-6133 (June 9, 1997), (11) where a summons was not properly issued, (12) where service ofprocess was not made pursuant to statute and Supreme Court Rules, 

### Janove v Bacon, 6 111.2d 245, 249, 218 N.E.2d 706, 708 (1955),

. (13) where the statute is vague, 

### People v Williams, 638 N.E.2d 207

(1st Dist. 1994), (14) when proper notice is not given to all parties bythe movant, 

### Wilsonv. Moore, 13 Ill.App.3d 632, 301 N.E.2d 39 (1st Dist. 1973), (15) where an order/judgment is based on a void order/judgment, 

### Austin v. Smith, 312 F.2d 337, 343 

### (1962);English v English, 72 Ill.App.3d 736, 393 N.E.2d 18 (1st Dist. 1979), or (16) where public policy is violated, 

### Martin-Tregona v Roderick, 29 Ill.App.3d 553, 331 N.E.2d 100 (1st Dist. 1975). 

### SUMMARY OF THE LAW OF VOIDS Before a court (judge) can proceedjudicially,jurisdiction must be complete consisting oftwo opposing parties (not their attorneys

- although attorneys can enter an appearance on behalfofa party, only the parties can testify and until the plaintifftestifies the court has no basis upon which to rule judicially), and the two halves ofsubject matterjurisdiction= the statutory or common law authority the action is brought under (the theory of indemnity) and the testimony ofa competent fact witness regarding the injury (the cause ofaction). Ifthere is ajurisdictional failing appearing on the face ofthe record, the matter is void, subject to vacation with damages, and