COMPLAINT FOR MISCONDUCT

PATTON STATE HOSPITAL
and
RIVERSIDE COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER

RE:

Patton State Hospital;
Riverside County Public Defender;
Riverside County District Attorney;
Riverside County Superior Court; Indio, CA

Sharon Stephens
PAT 1590355
Case: INF054715

TO: Paula McCord, Patient Rights Advocate; Carlos Luna, Executive Director; Gary Windom, Chief, Public Defender; Rod Pacheco, District Attorney

FROM: Sharon Stephens; 3022 Lime Street, Riverside, CA 92501 (Cell) 1.760.835.8210

I was referred to the Patton State Hospital, Office of Patient Rights, Paula McCord by the State of California, Ombudsman For Mental Health:

California is presently cash and income strapped by at least $14.5 billion dollars with proposed cuts to be made in every State Department. Keeping that in mind, nothing is laudable or applaudable about the Public Defender's Office, with support from the District Attorney, and the courts to committ, and then warehouse defendants in criminal court cases in Patton State Hospital because there is no time to work on their case. This has resulted in a battle-scarred group of people who will be detrimentally affected and stigmatized for life as mentally ill.

It seems, neither the public, or the media, nor even the government is aware of these cruel and immoral shenanigans.

I recently went to the Department of Mental Health to be evaluated on my mental health. I have a letter that states I do not meet any criteria for services, i.e., I am NOT mentally ill. [SEE: Attachment #1]

When I arrived at Patton the intake people I spoke with had no idea why I had been sent there; I did not meet any criteria for mental illness at Patton either.

Now, I want this complaint recorded, as an Addendum to my Patton records, to offset the lies and fabrications that are in my Discharge Papers. The truth needs to be told. I have copies of all of the complaints I made while in Patton, that were ignored and never answered by staff.

June 9, 2006: I was falsely arrested by Riverside County District Attorney Investigator, Twiss while on my way into court to have a provable void on the face restraining order dismissed, INC 057008 Trylison v Stephens, Riverside County Superior Court, Indio, CA. This invalid order was obtained by the perjury of a Gold Coast Management employee, Darlene Trylison, and a Shadowcrest HOA board member, Kent Robins. HOA attorney, Jan "Gen" Wangler also sat in court, I presume to defend the two against the Charging Affidavit for Perjury I had filed. The judge had already agreed to dismiss the case; it was just a matter of appearing in court. The order was void because Judge Olfield had not let me present my side of the case in court, and, Trylison had not met the statutory criteria for a civil restraining order. The order was void!

Twiss refused to let me go before the judge; instead he had me incarcerated in the county jail, with a $500,000 Bail, where -- documented in written complaints -- I was not allowed a phone call for several days, was strapped into a prostraint chair when what I needed instead was medical help for angina, and I suffered terrible physically and emotionally abuse, denial of medical treatment for a heart condition, and later, a deadly staph infection.

With no advocacy and no one to protect me I fell into the hands of the Riverside County Public Defender's Office, Indio, CA and sent through the kangaroo-court process of a Preliminary Hearing where I was not allowed to speak, and neophyte attorney, Neil A. Harrison had no idea of how to defend me.

Much of the case could have been resolved at this hearing based on challenges to the void on the face nature of the cases against me. Every person who testified against me committed provable perjury, and another neophyte, Deputy District Attorney, Kristi Belcher knew it, and still knows it, and is working hard to put me back in jail, rather than look at the facts, or admit to her mistakes.

I am filing a complaint of prosecutorial misconduct, in which I shall show that I ought NOT to have been held criminally liable for any actions involving void on the face judgments, and that Ms. Belcher acted in an inappropriate and/or unfair manner, by knowingly witholding evidence and permitting false testimony, among other charges.

There needed to be experienced counsel from both sides, given the opportunity to discuss with a judicial officer the just resolution of my case. These void orders then would have been brought to light. No one can be punished for disobedience of avoid order.Mitchell v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal. App. 3d 759, 764, citing Fortenbury v. Superior Court (1940) 16 Cal. 2d 405, 408-09; seeIn re Berry (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 137, 147 (order in excess of jurisdiction).

My case was then turned over to Public Defender, Melanie Roe.

I would have done better to defend myself, but that was impossible in jail.

When Deputy Public Defender, Melanie Roe did not have time to review my case -- she never met with me, not once, nor did she even speak with me by phone even though I left her a message I had laid on the floor of my cell for hours, deathly ill with numerous boils from a staph infection, and was refused medical treatment. Roe was working on a murder case, and in the process of building and protecting her image in order to advance her career, so, she simply had me committed to Patton State Hospital, stating I was incompetent to go to trial -- even though I had won a four-day criminal jury trial in 1999, INM 089407, People v Stephens, Riverside CountySuperior Court, Indio, California, as a pro per, and, as a lay-person, and was well versed in court procedures.

I was hardly court incompetent!

Attorney, Melanie Roe called upon court-appointed psychologist, Michael E. Kania, Ph.D., [he is paid to find FOR the court]. He spent just twenty [20] minutes on a Sunday, (double-time pay for him!) talking with me in jail. He did no testing of my mental state, did not record any of my conversation in his report, nor did he look into any of my documented records for evidence of what I told him. He simply supported attorney Roe's request, called me paranoid and recommended to the court for my commitment. [SEE: Attachment #2 Complaint, Kania]

Patton State Hospital lists itself as: A prison hospital for the criminally insane and people charged in criminal cases who are so disconnected from reality that they are
unable to participate in their own defense at trial.

But is this statement true?

Once at Patton State Hospital I discovered that ALL fifty [50] of the "patients" in Unit 72 had been placed there under this blatant miscarriage of justice, commitment by the court, based on a recommendation by their Public Defenders. We all knew the reason - no time to work on their case.

I do not recall meeting one person who was disconnected from reality.

An attorney's professional responsibilities, whether prosecuter, or defender are set forth in Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 2668; People v. Pope(1979) 23 Cal.3d 412; and In re Alvernaz (1992) 2 Cal 4th 924.

State Bar of California Guidelines on Indigent Defense Services Delivery Systems (2005 – 2006) ...An attorney representing an indigent criminal defendant owes allegiance, first and foremost to his or her client. If the attorney cannot represent the client's interests, due to a conflict or otherwise, he or she must refuse the appointment, or immediately withdraw from the case.

Attorney, Melanie Roe had a responsibility to withdraw.

The patients of Unit 72 spent the majority of the day going to multiple, useless, and often laughable, repetitious hour-long "classes" on How to Recognize -- who is the judge, the jury, the Public Defender, the District Attorney, etc., in a court setting -- something that can be learned in about a forty-five minute lecture!

THE DISCHARAGE PAPERS I RECEIVED FROM PATTON ARE FILLED WITH DOWN-RIGHT LIES AND FABRICATIONS:

There is no work, no "group therapy", no "private therapy" and no "assessment" of a person's mental condition, yet we were all labeled as court incompetent and often terribly abused by seclusion, super-powerful psychiatric drugs --against our will, and/or restrained by shackles to beds, with denial of patients'rights, all at the cost to tax payers of about $1,500 a day. Along with this there is a prevalence of illicit drugs, and open, and unwanted sexual advances from other patients.

While there I was physically attacked by another patient [ I am still in touch with a person who witnessed this attack on me] and even though there is to be a zero tolerance position against violence the person was never arrested and she went on to attack three more women. Patton fails to provide a reasonably safe environment for its patients; patient-on-patient violence is commonplace, and I witnessed it several times. I did not receive any medical treatment for my injurys from this woman, and my complaints to Executive Director, Octavio C. Luna, and other staff, including Patients' Rights went ignored, and unanswered.

The major statutory duties of the Office of Patients' Rights are contained in Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code 5510, 5512, 5513, Title 9 C.C.R. 864, and Title 9 C.C.R. 868:

May 2, 2006: The U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division; Special Litigation Section completed a investigation of Patton State Hospital, and notified Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor of California:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/split/documents/patton_hosp_findlet_5-2-06.pdf

We found significant and wide-ranging deficiencies in patient care... Patton fails to provide a reasonably safe environment for its patients. Patient-on-patient violence is commonplace at Patton... Patients also are subject to adverse environmental conditions such as potential suicide hazards and the prevalence of illicit drugs. These problems are long-standing and serious... fails to adequately address inappropriate sexual contact among individuals served at the facility, including sexual contact between staff and patients. This issue, too, is long-standing. The harm that Patton patients experience as a result of these deficiencies is multifaceted, including physical and psychological abuse; physical injury; excessive and inappropriate use of physical and chemical restraints; inadequate, ineffective and counterproductive treatment; and excessively long hospitalizations. our investigation uncovered problems in three main areas of psychiatry: assessments and diagnoses, medication management. Psychiatric assessments and diagnoses at Patton substantially depart from generally accepted professional standards of care. Psychiatrists routinely diagnose their patients as having psychiatric disorders without conducting an adequate psychiatric assessment... we found the overall approach to ongoing psychiatric assessment reflects a lack of critical thinking and clinical inquiry. In many cases we reviewed, the psychiatrist failed to evaluate important developments in a patients condition that woulds suggest that the diagnosis assigned to the patient is not accurate... Patients are routinely prescribed inappropriate or unsafe medications without clinical justification... Shanetta Y. Cutlar, Chief of the Civil Rights Division's Special Litigation Section, at (202) 514-0195.

Still, men and women are being warehoused in Patton State Hospital by their Public Defenders, with the help of the District Attorneys Office, and the courts.

It seems that in this time of economic-downfall in California, someone ought to be looking very closely -- investigating, and analyzing for further review these bogus commitments -- and considering a solution to this stunning waste of money, and perpetuation of social evils at Patton State Hospital.

Also, the following people need to be investigated: Octavio C. Luna, Executive Director; Gary Hahn, Hospital Administrator; Joseph Malancharuvil, Ph.D., Clinical Administrator, and, other staff members who continue to manipulate, and file false reports, filled with lies and fabrications in order to continue and hold people for three to six months, some even longer -- in order to collect these huge sums of money from the State of California.

And, what about the people who fall victim to these remarkable unconstitutional violations of human and civil rights?

Sharon Stephens
cc: Shanetta Y. Cutlar, Department of Justice; Chief of the Civil Rights Division's Special Litigation Section; 950 Penn. Ave.; N.W.; Washington D.C. 20530
.

PROSICUTORIAL MISCONDUCT, Riverside District Attorney

PROSECUTIORIAL MISCONDUCT
A FORMAL COMPLAINT
TO BE MAILED, WEDNESDAY April 16, 2008
Riverside District Attorney, Indio CA
82-675 Highway 111,4th Floor
Indio, CA 92201

RE:
Assistant District Attorney, Sue Stetting
Deputy, District Attorney, Kristi Elise Belcher
Deputy District Attorney, James Michael Graff-Radford
District Attorney Investigator, Rich Twiss

RE: People v. Sharon Dale Stephens
Case: INF054715

FROM: Sharon Stephens:
TO: Whom It May Concern:

cc: Shanetta Y. Cutlar, Department of Justice;
Chief of the Civil Rights Division's; Special Litigation Section;
950 Penn. Ave.; N.W.; Washington D.C. 20530

Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.'
FIRST AMMENDMENT OF THE UNITED STATES

INTRODUCTION

I am 67 years old, a mother and grandmother, and have always been an asset in any neighborhood where I have lived. I have no criminal record. I have worked hard all of my life in jobs in social services where I have tried to be a help those less fortunate in society. I have worked as a case manager in battered women's shelters, shelters for the homeless, and as a child advocate.

When I bought my first home in 1996, along with my daughter Jeanine, my grandson Chris, and an elderly aunt, Beauchamp Everitt, it was in Shadowcrest Homeowners Association, 27135 Shadowcrest, Cathedral City, CA. 92234.

None of us knew anything about homeowners associations [HOAs]. It would be months later that we would come to truly understand that we did not even own this property, but was only a shareholder in a non-profit corporation. In our ignorance, the first few months were wonderful, and peaceful, and we loved loved this home.

Directly across the street lived the elderly 82-year-old widow, Marie Bockman. Marie had several renters, but in mid 1996 she allowed the Edward and Lolitta Riddle family to move in, along with their two sons, Nathan and Eddie. From the first night the Riddles moved in there were strange goings on: cars coming and going about every 15 minutes, with drivers openly picking up small packages, and exchanging money; it looked very much like drug dealing was going on.

I approached the board: they didn't want to be involved; I approached neighbors -- they didn't want to be involved, totally ignoring their legal responsibilty: There is a legal duty, which every person owes to others - that is, a duty to refrain from conduct that imposes an unreasonable risk of injury on third parties. Lamden v La Jolla Shores Clubdoninium HOA (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249.

In her ignorance, Marie put the Riddles on her Deed. Almost immediately they stopped paying any share of the mortage, and eventually Marie would lose her home, be forced to move out, but the Riddles would continue to live there for over year -- not paying any mortage, or the association fees.

Finally, frustrated! I called The Cathedral City Police: I didn't realize that it would be difficult to get the police to offer the same services to me in a private corporation, a homeowners association, as they do to those which are not HOAs. Officer Glenn Haas, working with Neighborhood Watch, asked if I would begin to take down license plate numbers and give him the list. Naively I agreed, considering it the responsible thing to do, but not considering the consequences. I thought the police would protect me. I was wrong!

The police told us that just prior to moving into Shadow Crest Lolita Riddle was allegedly suspected of arson, Case: CIV089430 - RIDDLE VS. STATE FARM INSURANCE 05/24/1996 and her son “Eddie” had already been arrested, and spent time in jail for drugs, and attempted murder, Case: ICR20863 Indio, Superior Court, Defendant 14650 RIDDLE, EDWARD, 10/07/1994; Case: ICR22594 Indio Superior Court, Defendant 14650 RIDDLE, EDWARD, 06/15/1995, and was out on probation.

I continued to write down and turn in license plate numbers to the police. One night I was caught and my life, along with my daughter's, and the hardest of all, my ten-year old grandson's life was threatened; our lives became miserable, and still, after all of these years my grandson suffers emotinally from this horrible esperience.

On Thanksgiving Day, the John Weiser family, relatives to the Riddle family moved in next door, and began that very day to join them in the persecution of my family, gathering out front with open name calling. Later they also set out to join forces with the board of directors, against me, with John soon being placed onto the board as Treasurer. (John Weiser would later hit me with his car, while I was on foot; I received no help from the Cathedral City Police, the District Attorney, or the court on this incident.)

The board still refused to act, and so did the neighbors, who refused to even look out their window when drug dealing was going on right in the middle of the street, or at the community pool. The police were not helpful, and I complained about Officer Glenn Haas in particular, he had foolishly informed the Riddles that it was me who was helping him, and their threats became even more prevelant. He then sold out all of the homeowners in Shadowcrest with regard to down-playing the need for Neighborhood Watch, in order to enhance his own image with them.

My complaints against Haas, a popular officer, would prove to cause me great harm -- from him, and his fellow officers -- in the future. He slandered, and lied about me, in order to protect himself, and set me up to being thought of as crazy.

A private defense attorney told me, You complained against the 'Boy's Club' and they will get you! They certainly have!

I started a one-page newsletter, speaking out about what was happening in the neighborhood, and the lack of help from the board. The board then authorized the association Attorney, Wayne Guralnick and his associate, Attorney, Kendel Berke, (who would later become the Cathedral City Assistant City Attorney) to send several letters to me threatening a lawsuit if I continued to write and distribute the newsletter. However, I did know that the ACLU had taken a stand on this issue: It is probably no accident that freedom of speech is the first freedom mentioned in the First Amendment: Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. And, there is case law on freedom of speech at well. Smith v. Silbey (1983) 149 Cal. App. 3d 400, 406-407

Eddie was finally arrested for drugs and weapons a few weeks later, Case: INF027519, Indio Superior Court, Defendant 14650 RIDDLE, EDWARD 07/22/1997. But he only received a slap on the hand from a Deputy District Attorney, Archie Wong, and was soon back home. His drug dealing became more covert, his threats more frequesnt, and my ten-year old grandson was afraid to go anywhere in the community alone as the Riddles had openly said to him, We are going to hire a hit man to kill you! Although I made a police report, nothing was done.

Finally, months later, Eddie Riddle was again arrested, this time for burglary on a neighborhood home, and this time he was sent to prison. Case: INF029011 Indio Superior Court, Defendant 14650 RIDDLE, EDWARD NMN, 02/10/1998 The day he was arrested, his mother, Lollita Riddle raised her fist and shouted at me from across the street, I will get you!

Things were quiet for about a year, and then on a Saturday morning, as I returned from the store I noticed my grandson's BB gun in the trunk of the car. I also saw Lollitta Riddle watching me from across the street. I put the BB gun under my arm, and the plastic bags over my arms, and ignoring Lollita as I walked into my home to prepare breakfast for my family, and company that was soon to arrive.

Fifteen minutes later the phone rang and it was the police telling me come out with your hands visible. Lollita had lied, saying I had pointed the gun at her. Lollita Riddle then made a citizens arrest, I went to jail for the afternoon to be booked, and, a few months later I went into the Indio, California, Criminal Court, as a pro per, and conducted a four-day jury trial to defend myself. Every juror found me not guilty, and it was not because I did such a good job as a pro per in my defense, rather, it was because the evidence was so obviously in my favor, in spite of the blatant lies on the stand of Lollita, and her relatives, the Weiser family, and the presentation in court of doctored papers by the Deputy District Attorney, Archie Wong. Several jury members commented to me afterwards that they didn't understand why the case had even been brought against me. CASE: INM 089407, Indio Superior Court, California, 06/10/1999

Archie Wong, who knew the history of the Riddle family, having prosecuted Eddie Riddle more than once. After losing this case to me, he gave up his job with the Riverside County District Attorney, and moved to the San Francisco Bay Area. Today he is working for the San Francisco District Attorney.

TAKE NOTE: From the time I won this case, I have never received any help from the Riverside County Assistant District Attorney, Sue Steding, and there is proof that that Deputy District Attorney, Charles John Gianguzi Jr did conspire with C.C.P.D. Sergeant, Charles Robinson, -- who filed a provable false police report against me, and used it to falsely arrest me --and, my HOA board members to try and have me arrested on bogus charges. The judge threw their charges out of court.

The truth is, I picked up the gauntlet against the crooked Shadowcrest HOA association board, an irresponsible and corrupt Cathedral City Police Department including Chief Stan Henry, (who was sued by his own officers for civil rights violations!), Cathedral City Counsel, an unprofessional HOA management company, HOA attorneys, and even a dishonest assemblywoman, Bonnie Garcia all of whom figuratively and literally beat-me-up rather than take a stand against all the evil in my HOA.

I lost my home, my car and over $100,000, as well as over a year of my freedom in jail, and a state hospital where I suffered much abuse, all the result of the prosecutorial misconduct of the District Attorney's Office -- which includes: false arrest, prosecution on void on the face restraining orders, help in a bogus commitment to Patton State Hospital, unreasonable Bail, supression of evidence, and even prosecution on charges where I was provable the victim.

FACTS

In 1998, the most recent year for which figures are available, almost 928,000 adults were convicted of felonies in state courts. Statisitcally it is estmated at least 9,280 and as many as 92,800 innocent people were convicted of crimes they did not commit. Bureau of Justice; Statistics Report, May 17, 1999:

NEW YORK (AP) - Feb 28, 2008, Report by the Pew Center on the States: For the first time in U.S. history, more than one of every 100 adults is in jail or prison, according to a new report documenting America's rank as the world's No. 1 incarcerator... that is 2,319,258 Americans were in jail or prison at the start of 2008 - one out of every 99.1 adults. Whether per capita or in raw numbers, it's morethan any other nation. It urges states to curtail corrections spending by placing fewer low-risk offenders behind bars... California - which faces a $16 billion budget shortfall - spent $8.8 billion on corrections last year...

JANUARY 27, 2006: I was at my home in Shadowcrest to attend a Board Meeting the next day to discuss the illegal use of Reserve Funds while they were suspended as a corporation. The board members had already taken out Restraining Orders in an attempt to keep me out of meetings. But Restraining Orders can not be used to keep homeowners out of open meetings. So, they resorted to a more evil tactic to keep me out of the meeting. Board members, Kent Robbins, and Jim Hooten filed a false police report against me, stating I tried to run them over with my car, and I was arrested and taken to Riverside County Jail, Indio, CA.

I needed, but was denied medical treatment for angina by Corp. Maggie Beviens. When I scratched my wrist with my fingernail in hopes of obtaining medical treatment, I was stripped of all my clothing, strapped down in a Restraint Chair for more than an hour and then locked in a filthy dirty, rubberized dry cell for twelve more hours, with no cloths, no bedding, no toilet paper, no water, and still no medical treatment. Then I was transferred into a total lock-down cell, in twenty-four hour isolation, for four days. This is illegal All inmates are to be allowed at least 2 1/2 hours of recreation outside, every week. (Inmates of Riv.Co. Jail Indio v Ben Clark, as Sheriff and Appeal. 144 CAl App. 3d 850; 192 Calk Rptr. 823; 1983 Cal App - Lexis 1877 No27464)

And, Solitary confinement of inmate in dry cell to punish for self-inflicted wounds is unconstitutional. Hancock v. Avery (M.D. Tenn 1969) 301 F. Supp 786, 791)

Also, ...solitary confinement - that is, confinement of a prisoner alone in a cell for all or nearly all of the day, with minimal environmental stimulation and minimal opportunity for social interaction - can cause severe psychiatric harm. Stuart Grassian M.D.; September 1993 in Madrid v. Gomez, 889F.Supp.1146

I was released when it was decided the case needed more investigation. I filed a complaint with the Sheriff's Office, and, with the District Attorney in Indio. I received no response from either.

When I was released I went to the District Attorney's Officer and spoke with Investigator, Rick Nelson, who had worked on the Riddle case, and knew I was innocent. (He has since left the DA's Office). He called Cathedral City Police and told them to take my side of the story.

I then wrote a 30 page report that went to CCPD Detective C. DeVeas on January 1, 2006, and then it was sent to the District Attorney -- the case against me was closed. Deputy, District Attorney, Kristi Elise Belcher has a copy of the the Supplemental Report from CCPD in her case file, and she still with-held this crucial piece of evidence from the court -- she knew the case was closed, and, that I was innocent of these bogus charges by Robbins and Hooten, but she continued to prosecute me on the charges anyway in order to make her case look good in the Preliminary Hearing.

MAY 15, 2006: I was challenging a void on the void on the face restraining order of Assemblywoman BonnieGarcia, ( INC 043179, Riverside County Superior Court; Indio, CA ). The commissioner in this case said, the last time I was in court on this case, that he would dismiss the orders if I would have Mary Brhel, Garcia's aide personally served. It should be noted: Mary is married to ex-Deputy District Attorney, Martin Brhel, and he sat behind her in court adn gave her questions to ask.). Garcia, in order to protect herself, got rid of Brhel and I was unable to have her served. (This is documented in the transcripts of the case.)

So, I was arrested and booked and was supposed to be released. Instead I was locked in a 3X3 steel cage by Corp Erdralin where he deliberately provoked me, calling me names such as cunt, laughing at me, reminding me of my complaint against Maggie Beviens, and denying me my heart medication. Finally I was transferred to JFK hospital, and was battered by transporting deputies; there is a doctors report on my injuries when I was dragged across the parking lot, and then dropped on my knees in the parking lot. I filed another complaint with the Sheriff's Office. It was ignored! All of these deputies had a deliberate indifferance to my serious medical condition. Esterrle v Gamble (1976) 429 US 97 50 L Ed251, 97 S.Ct 285

My complaints to the Sheriff and District Attorney on this incident went ignored.

Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the American Friends Service Committee, the National Lawyers Guild, California Prison Focus, and many other groups and individuals have joined with the World Organization Against Torture to express their concern, and is currently writing a report on United States' Compliance With theUnited Nations Covenants this country has signed. For instance, the U.S. ratified the International Convention Against Torture in 1994, but still does not comply, continuing to use punitive violence and brutality in control unit facilities, cell extractions, mistreatment of the mentally ill, chemical sprays and dangerous methods of restraint. The existence and scope of these conditions are also in opposition to guidelines for treatment set in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatmentof Prisoners.

JUNE 8, 2006: I was falsely arrested by District Attorney Investigator, Rich Twiss on my way into court to dismiss a void on the face restraining order by Gold Coast Management ( Trylson v Stephens INC057008 Riverside County Superior Court, Indio CA ) The comissioner had already agreed to dismiss the case; it was void! Judge Olfield had not heard my side of the case, which automatically makes a case void, but, Trylson had not met the statutory criteria for a restraining order. There was also a Charging Affidavit in this case against Kent Robbins and Darlene Trylson for provable perjury. Twiss could have easily have discerned this by reading my paper work, or, by letting me go before the judge.

Twiss refused to let me go before the judge; instead he had me incarcerated in the county jail, with a $500,000 Bail. The District Attorney would never allow me reasonable Bail, and in effect was denying me release.

Resonable Bail permits the unhampered preparation of a defense and serves to prevent the infliction of punishment prior to conviction. Unless this right to bail before trial is preserved, the presumption of innocence -- which every defendant ought to be able to retain -- until proven guilty -- would lose its meaning.

The Eighth Amendment itself does not speak of any right to bail; rather, it prohibits the imposition of excessive bail. Nevertheless, simple logic would indicate that a prohibition against excessive bail assumes the availability of reasonable bail.

The fairness of such a rule was questioned in the 1960 case of Brady v. U.S. The petitioner applied to U. S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas. Justice Douglas conceded that he was troubled by the application. While noting that the setting of excessive bail to prevent a defendant from gaining release would be a clear violation of the Eighth Amendment, and he said, ...in the case of an indigent defendant, the fixing of bail in even a modest amount may have the practical effect of denying him release. Further reflection has led me to conclude that no man should be denied release because of indigence...It would be unconstitutional to fix bail to assure a defendant will not gain his freedom.

The orders against me were easily proven void, and I could have easily helped to prepare a defense to prove that if I had been allowed Bail. Instead, I was denied that ability, and I suffered infliction of punishment prior to conviction.

After this false arrest I was supposed to be booked and released so that I could return to court to have my case heard. Instead I again fell into the hands of Corp. Maggie Beviens who refused to allow me to be booked and releashed, and would not allow me any phone calls [ I was not allowed a phone call until June 22 ] I reminded Corp. Beviens that I would file another complaint against her. She just laughed stating she had read my complaint, and locked me in a cell with no phone, and then into a restraint chair for two hours because I broke out in nervous hives, and when I scratched them she said I was self-inflicting the hives. Two hours with no medical care, no water, no toilet use where I had to urinate in my cloths, and then, much taunting from deputies who were outside the cell door. No one can imagine the fear I felt with these ongoing angina attacks -- truly, I thought I was going to have a heart attack and die; I needed nitroglycerin to stop the attacks. (I have a very bad heart; suffered a heart attack in 2002, and had open heart surgery, and still have difficulty in breathing, and with severe angina attacks. I was in the hospital just three weeks ago with my heart.)
When I was pulled out of the cell, still in the chair, and still strapped down, [There are photos of this event] and Corp Erdralin began to taunt me, and to point and laugh at me like I was an animal -- provoking me; I simply had a psychotic break with reality and just could not stand any more of this malicious and abusive torture -- I spit on him -- He came by the cell later, looked through the glass, where I still had no water, was still siting in my urine soaked cloths, with no use of the toilet, and no medical treatment; he smiled, and mouthed the words at me -- cunt.

When I was finally taken to the hospital the deputies continued to provoke me, not allowing me any water, and lauging at me when I tried to reach for water. There was no kindness in any of these deputies, and no concern for my well being.

The Court of Appeal has held that offensive conduct means behavior which has a tendency to provoke others to acts of violence...People v Cohen 1 Cal. App. 3d, at 99-100, 81 Cal. Rptr., at 506.... provocation maliciously to bring about harm if resisted, which is likely to lead to retaliation. Foutch v State 95 Tenn 711, 34 SW 423

With no phone calls allowed to me, no visitors, and no ability to tell my story, charges were filed against me with no one hearing my side of the story. CASE: INF054715 Riverside County Superior Court, Indio, CA.

With no advocacy and no one to protect me I fell into the hands of the Riverside County Public Defender's Office, Indio, CA and was sent through the witch-hunt, kangaroo-court process of a Preliminary Hearing where I have never witnessed so much injustice: I was subjected to witness after witness telling blatant lies, destroying my character, contradicting their own police reports, and I was not allowed to speak, ...the court has held that it violates due process to use a defendant's silence against him, yet that is exactly what happens in this unjust process.Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976)

Neophyte Public Defender, Neil A. Harrison had no idea of how to defend me in this hearing. Much of the case could have been resolved at this hearing based on challenges to the void on the face nature of the cases against me, but he refused to hear me that every restraining order being used to prosecute me, was void!

Void on the face judgments lack jurisdiction and can legally be ignored as they neither bind, nor bar anyone. Obviously a judgment, though final and on the merits, has no binding force and is subject to collateral attack if it is wholly void for lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter or person, and perhaps for excess of jurisdiction, or where it is obtained by extrinsic fraud. 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, supra, Judgment, 286, p. 828.) CCP Section 473 permits a trial court, on noticed motion, to set aside void judgments and orders. Courts also possess inherent power to grant such relief. Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194.

Every person who testified against me in this Preliminary Hearing committed provable perjury, and another neophyte, Deputy District Attorney, Kristi Belcher knew it, allowed it, still knows it, and is working hard now to put me back in jail, rather than look at the facts, or admit to her mistakes.

I ought NEVER to have been held criminally liable for any actions involving void on the face judgments.

The judge slept through most of the hearing, and when I began to experience angina, he refused to let me take my nitroglycerin. The Public Defender never protested this. When I was taken back to a cell, the angina was so bad I could not breath, and an ambulence had to be called, and I was transported to JFK Hospital.

But, before there was ever a Preliminary Hearing, there needed to first be experienced counsel from both sides, given the opportunity to discuss with a judicial officer the just resolution of my case. These void orders then would have been brought to light. No one can be punished for disobedience of avoid order. Mitchell v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal. App. 3d 759, 764, citing Fortenbury v. Superior Court (1940) 16 Cal. 2d 405, 408-09; see In re Berry (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 137, 147 (order in excess of jurisdiction).

It is stunning how many judges and commissioners in The Larson Justice Center, Riverside County, CA., Indio issue Civil Restraining Orders, CCP 527.6 and CCP 527.8, disregarding the required legislativestatutory criteria that is well supported by case law, and they do so with no regard as to how these orders can be used to abuse and harass others.

TAKE NOTE: When a judge does not follow the law, i.e., they are atrespasser of the law, the judge loses subject-matter jurisdiction and the judges orders are void, of no legal force or effect.The U.S. Supreme Court, in Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974) stated that when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he "comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States. [Emphasis supplied in original]. Whenever a judge acts where he/she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. U.S. v. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980 ); Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5 L.Ed 257 (1821)

Any judge or attorney who does not report a judge for treason as required by law may themselves be guilty of misprision of treason,18 U.S.C. Section 2382.

The Public Defender's Office was well aware of these abuses and did nothing to help.The public defender is all too often synonomous with ineffective assistance of counsel. (SEE: Model Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.1 (1983)(amended 1998); A lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation.

Deputy Public Defender, Melanie Roe never came to see me, never even talked with me on the phone even when I left her a message that I had laid on the floor for hours, with boils, the dry heaves, and a deadly staph infection. Rather, she had me put into Patton State Hospital on a bogus commitment because she had no time for my case, and, when I went into court she would not let me speak to have her dismissed so I could defend myself. [SEE: Attached Complaint re: Patton State Hospital]

Melanie Roe had a blatant failure to communicate with me, her client, her communication was dismissive when I finally saw her in court, she was callous and hurried in her manner; there was no attempt at discovery; no investigation into the facts; she did not test physical evidence; did not even give minimal preparation, and, gave no advocacy for me. (SEE: Model Rule of Professional Conduct Rule 1.1, cmt. 5 (1983) (amended 1998) competent handling of a particular matter involves inquiry into analysis of the factual and legal elements of the problem and use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners.

The court allows for this incompetent BAD LAWYERING!

THE LAW

Crime is contagious.

If the government becomes a law-breaker,

it breeds contempt for the law;

it invites everyman to become a law unto himself;

it breeds anarchy.

Olmstead v. United States (1928) 277 U.S. 438, 485; Brandeis DISSENTING OP

In 1998, the most recent year for which figures are available, almost 928,000 adults were convicted of felonies in state courts. Statisitcally it is estmated at least 9,280 and as many as 92,800 innocent people were convicted of crimes they did not commit. Bureau of Justice Statistics Report, May 17, 1999

NEW YORK (AP) - Feb 28, 2008, Report by the Pew Center on the States: For the first time in U.S. history, more than one of every 100 adults is in jail or prison, according to a new report documenting America's rank as the world's No. 1 incarcerator... that is 2,319,258 Americans were in jail or prison at the start of 2008 - one out of every 99.1 adults. Whether per capita or in raw numbers, it's more than any other nation. It urges states to curtail corrections spending by placing fewer low-risk offenders behind bars... California - which faces a $16 billion budget shortfall - spent $8.8 billion on corrections last year...

A person accused, most often without any true investigation, is stigmatized simply by being charged. Then, not being able to testify or defend themselves in the kangeroo-court Preliminary Hearing only adds to the the impression that his or her silence is an indicator of guilt. Presumption of innocence, and reasonable doubt are totally ignored in these court settings. Interestingly, the court has held that it violates due process to use a defendant's silence against him, yet that is exactly what happens in this unjust process. Supra: Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976)

It has been noted: An unethical, overzealous District Attorney is the most powerful and dangerous person in the court room. He can make, break or ruin a person's life.

At the Preliminary Hearing, Deputy District Attorney Kristi Elise Belcher allowed her witnesses to probably perjure themselves; she absolutely heard them over and over contradict their own police reports, and she NEVER allowed for the facts of void orders, and false arrests to come out.

This is Fraud: Deputy District Attorney, Kristi Elise Belcher used Fraudulent use of process -- using legal process for fraudulent purposes such as attempting to enforce a judgment on a fictitious claim. 1 AM J2d Abuse PSS 9-12.

No one in the District Attorney's Office did their job to find the truth, or, to make sure I had a fair trial. They knew, I was falsely arrested, and that I was in court to dismiss a void order -- yet they just ignored this and prosecuted me on this case anyway.

The role of the prosecutor differs significantly from that of others who practice law, including criminal defense lawyers: A Prosecutor is held to a standard higher than that imposed on other attorneys because of the unique function he or she perfoms in representing the interests and in exercising the sovereign power, of the state ... the prosecutor represents 'sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartilly is as compelling as its obligatin to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done' Berger v. United States (1935) 295 U.S. 78,88 (People v. Hill (1998) 17 Cal 4th 800, 8.

Prosecutors have a special obligation to promote justice and the ascertainment of truth. ... The duty of the district attorney is not merely that of an advocate. His duty is not to obtain convictions, but to fully and fairly present... the evidence..."People v. Kasim (1997) 56 Cal.App.4th 1360, 1378

The truth and evidence was there for the District Attorney to ascertain, but the District Attorney's Office was so anxious to win, that they ignored my right to a fair trial, and never did the required investiagation of the cases they were prosecuting me for. (SEE: Model Rule of Professional Conduct Rule 1.1, cmt. 5 (1983) (amended 1998) competent handling of a particular matter involves inquiry into analysis of the factual and legal elements of the problem and use of methods and procedures meeting the standards of competent practitioners.

There was never anything fair about the case the District Attorney was building against me. As an officer of the court, the prosecutor has a heavy responsibility to the court and to the defendant to conduct a fair trial. (United States v. Escalante (9th Cir. 1980) 637 F.2d 1197, 1203.)The prosecutor's job isn't just to win, but to win fairly, staying well within the rules. (United States v. Kojayan (9th Cir. 1993) 8 F.3d 1315, 1323).

An attorney's professional responsibilities, whether prosecutor, or defense are set forth in, Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 2668; People v. Pope(1979) 23 Cal.3d 412; as In re Alvernaz (1992) 2 Cal 4th 924.

Quod initio vitiosum est non potest tractu temporis convaescere -- That which is void from the beginning cannot become valid by lapse of time. Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., page 1253'

Every restraining order that the District Attorney prosecuted me for, was void on the face! Not one of them met the statutory criteria. And, the District Attorney had a responsibilty to ascertain the truth, and to conduct a fair trial based on the facts. No one can be punished for disobedience of a void order.Mitchell v. Superior Court (1972) 28 Cal. App. 3d 759, 764, citing Fortenbury v. Superior Court (1940) 16 Cal. 2d 405, 408-09; seeIn re Berry (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 137, 147

TAKE NOTE: Constitutionally protected activity, such as making police reports, or complaints of any type are excluded from the meaning of "course of conduct" with regards to a restraining order. Schraer v. Berkley Property Owners Ass'n, supra, 207 Cal. App. 3d 719.

I have the right to make complaints to the police, the state, or anyone else regarding bogus restraining orders!

Motions to vacate void judgments may be made at any time after judgment. County of Ventura v. Tillett, supra, 133 Cal. App. 3d 105, 110.

NOT ONE OF THE RESTRAINING ORDERS I WAS PROSECUTED ON,
MET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA: - therefore they are void, and the judge, who must follow the law, had no juridiction to issue them.

1. Civil Code of Procedure 537.6 was enacted to, supplement the existing law of Torts of 'invasion of privacy' and 'intentional infliction of emotional distress,' therefore a person must prove these two elements. Grant v. Clampett (1997 2nd Dist) 56 Cal App 4th 586, 65 Cal Rptr 2d 727

2. There must be clear and convincing evidence of suffering great medical or psychological distress. Sheild vRubin (1991, 2nd Dist) 232 Cal App 3d 755, 283 Cal Rptr 533

3. Great or irreparable harm must be proven. Nebel v Sulach (1999 4th Dist) 73 Cal App 4th 1363, 1369, 87 Cal Rptr 2d 3851 We can seek guidance from the phrase "severe emotional distress" -- in the context of the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress -- which has been interpreted to mean distress so severe that no reasonable [person] in a civilized society should be expected to endure it. (Fletcher v. Western National Life Ins. Co. (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 376, 397, relying on comment to section 46 of the Restatement Second, of Torts.)

4. Such void on the face judgments lack jurisdiction and can legally be ignored as they neither bind, nor bar anyone. Obviously a judgment, though final and on the merits, has no binding force and is subject to collateral attack if it is wholly void for lack of jurisdiction of the subject matter or person, and perhaps for excess of jurisdiction, or where it is obtained by extrinsic fraud. [Citations.]" 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure, supra, Judgment, § 286, p. 828.).

5. Void on the face judgments "never die" in the State of California, and CCP 473 and 473a has no direct reference to void judgments: Because the order of dismissal was void on its face, it can be set aside at any time after its entry, and the six-month time limitation in section CCP 473 for relief from improper orders, which is relied on by defendant in this appeal, is not applicable here. Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194

6. Although it has been held, by analogy to CCP section 473a, that such motions should be made within one year from the date the judgment sought to be set aside was rendered this time limitation does not apply where the judgment is based on a fraudulent return. Washko v. Stewart, 44 Cal. App. 2d 311, 317,318 [112 Pd 306]; Richert v. Benson Lbr. Co., 139 Cal. App. 671, 674-676 [34 P.2d 840]

7. CCP Section 473 permits a trial court, on noticed motion, to set aside void judgments and orders. Courts also possess inherent power to grant such relief. Reid v. Balter (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 1186, 1194.

8. It is well settled that a judgment or order which is void on its face, and which requires only an inspection of the judgment-roll or record to show its invalidity, may be set aside on motion, at any time after its entry, by the court which rendered the judgment or made the order. Plotitsa v. Superior Court (1983) 140 Cal.App.3d 755, 761

9. An APPEAL will NOT prevent the court from at any time lopping off what has been termed a dead limb on the judicial tree -- a void order.MacMillan Petroleum Corp. v. Griffin (1950) 99 Cal. App. 2d 523, 533 [222 P.2d 69]; accord: People v. West Coast Shows, Inc. (1970) 10 Cal. App. 3d 462, 467 [89 Cal. Rptr. 290]; Svistunoff v. Svistunoff (1952) 108 Cal. App. 2d 638, 641-642 [239 P.2d 650]; and see: 6 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Appeal, § 7, pp. 4024-4025.)

THE RESTRAINING ORDERS:

Trylson v Stephens INC057008 The comissioner had already agreed to dismiss the case; it was void! Judge Olfield had not heard my side of the case, which automatically makes a case void, and, Trylson had not met the statutory criteria for a restraining order. There was also a Charging Affidavit in this case against Kent Robbins and Darlene Trylson for provable perjury. Twiss could have easily have discerned this by reading my paper work, or, by letting me go before the judge.
And, The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order, and it is void!

Kent Robbins INC 040482 had already been found to have battered me, and perjured himself in this restraining order against me, and, that is part of the transcripts of our last court appearance in this case, and could have been easily discovered by the District Attorney. Robbins' restraining order is also void; The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order.

James Hooten INC044733 Who has police reports against him for harassment of women and children, and also pulled what looked like a gun on several children in Shadowcrest HOA. The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order.

Jill Reed INC039738 Had me falsely arrested twice on a TRO, in a HOA board meeting, in a public place; public places had been crossed out by the judge on her order. The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order.

Jose Liceaga INC040572 probvaly battered me on two ocassions, in front of witnesses, attemptd a battery on me on on another ocassion. Deputy District Attorney Kristi Elise Belcher had a police report on one of these events where Liceaga's own witness reported I was the victim. Belcher went ahead and prosecuted me on this event, and ignored the facts -- never presenting the truth to the court --that I was the victim. There are multiple police reports and requests for Restraining Orders against Liceaga for his harassment of women and children. And, The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order.

Bonnie Garcia [or any of her aides] INC043179 Knowing I was talking with the Garcia people, two officers from CCPD visited her office and slandered me, telling them to have nothing to do with me. Four months after visiting the Garcia Office for help, she began a provable conspiracy with the Cathedral City Police Department, and filed for 8 restraining order against me. The proof of this conspiracy is very well documented in the 65 page Memo of Cost in Case INC043437 ROBINSON v. STEPHENS. The last time I was in court with Garcia's aide, "Candy" the commissioner agreed to dismiss the orders -- if I had Mary Brhel served; Garcia moved Brhel so I could not serve her. This is all documented in the court transcripts, and could have easily been asertained by Kristi Elise Belcher if she had done her duty is to ascertain and fully and fairly present... the evidence... supra: People v. Kasim (1997) Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, and her aide has engaged in conduct that is prejudicial to the adminsitration of justice in her conspiracy, and in allowing me to be prosecuted knowing her orders are void! The OrderNever met the statutory criteria for a restraining order.

ROBINSON v. STEPHENS [Judy Williams] INC043437 When I discovered that two police offiers had gone to the Garcia Office and slandered me I called CCPD and spoke with Judy Williams and wanted an investigation; she hung up on me! On this very day, February 3, 2004, as is well documented in their 65 page Memo of Costs, Attorney, Kendall Berkey, and CCPD began a conspiracy against me, behind my back, which resulted in false police reports, false arrests, bogus restraining orders being served on me that never went through the court, and refusal to do an investigation into the two officers believed to be Sergeant, Charles Robinson, and Captain Kevin Connor. I had no idea of this Memo of Costs until October 2004, after losing to them in a bogus restraining order because I didn't have enough legal knowledge to fight them. I was then served with a bill for over $65,000 that had been chalked up by Berkey in an ivestigation against me; an investigatoin that proved nothing againt me. (Now, interestingly, Berkey had obtained a restraining order against another person for CCPD, and never charged any money for that.) All of this to protect two crooked cops! I then learned that The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order, and began a fight to have it dismissed. When I was falsely arrested I was in the process of going through Appeal Court, but lost as I was incarcerated and could not fight it in jail. I lost my home, and over $100,000. Since then, I have learned An APPEAL will NOT prevent the court from at any time lopping off what has been termed a dead limb on the judicial tree -- a void order.MacMillan Petroleum Corp. v. Griffin (1950) 99 Cal. App. 2d 523, 533 [222 P.2d 69]; accord: People v. West Coast Shows, Inc. (1970) 10 Cal. App. 3d 462, 467 [89 Cal. Rptr. 290]; Svistunoff v. Svistunoff (1952) 108 Cal. App. 2d 638, 641-642 [239 P.2d 650]; and see: 6 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Appeal, § 7, pp. 4024-4025.) The Order Never met the statutory criteria for a restraining order, and it is void!

Going into trial, I was still in 24 hour a day solitary confinement, which is illegal (supra; Inmates of Riv.Co. Jail Indio v Ben Clark, as Sheriff and Appeal; ...solitary confinement - that is confinement of a prisoner alone in a cell for all or nearly all of the day, with minimal environmental stimulation and minimal opportunity for social interaction - can cause severe psychiatric harm. (Stuart Grassian M.D.;September 1993 in Madrid v. Gomez, 889F.Supp.1146), and, greatly in need of medical treatment for heart problems -- I was not receiving any medical care in jail for my heart -- and, needing to see a doctor. Finding myself represented by defense counsel that was blatantly unprepared, unmotivated and whose incompetence was stunningly conspicuous, forced me, an indigent 67 year old woman to take whatever the District Attorney offered. Even though I was innocent. I could not chance going to prison, where I would have died for sure. I agreed to plead guilty; my Public Defender would not let me plead nolo contendere. I had to get out of jail due to my health; I was going to die.

CONCLUSION

I ought never to have been prosecuted on void orders.

I have already filed a report against Patton State Hospital, for the bogus commitment that the Public Defender initiated against me, with the support of the District Attorney; it is going to The Department of Justice, Civil Rights Divsion. I am also considering a Grand Jury as well, and Bar Complaints against all attorneys in this case.

.