Motion For Continued Stay Of Execution From Imposed Sentence

Case No. 03SC114

MOTION FOR CONTINUED STAY OF EXECUTION FROM IMPOSED SENTENCE


Aggrieved Petitioner, Richard Stanley, hereinafter known
as Rick Stanley, without assistance of counsel, submits this Motion For
Continued Stay of Execution From Imposed Sentence to the pleading
standard described in Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519-421 (See Hall v
Bellmon 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 06/03/1991) and relies on the Court to
explain any deficiency concerning Petitioner's pleadings as outlined in
Platsky v. C.I.A. 953 F.2d. 25. Additionally, pro se litigants are to
be given reasonable opportunity to remedy the defects in their
pleadings. Reynoldson v Shillinger 907F .2d 124, 126 (10th Cir. 1990);
See also Jaxon v Circle K. Corp. 773 F.2d 1138, 1140 (10th Cir. 1985)
(1)
1. Petitioner, Rick Stanley, was summoned to County Court, City and
County of Denver, Colorado, Courtroom 151P, Judge Robert L. Patterson on
March 7, 2003 at 8:30 AM, upon potential issuance of bench warrant
should Petitioner not present himself, for a NOTICE OF HEARING ON
REMAND.
2. Purpose of the hearing was for further proceedings, vacating
stay of execution and imposing sentence as ordered by the court. Judge
Patterson reiterated his position regarding this matter, including his
contention that Petitioner must ask permission of his court or the
Colorado State Supreme Court, for the stay of execution to be continued
during the appeals process.
3. Petitioner explained to Judge Patterson, that Petitioner paid
the $2,500.00 appeal bond, that Petitioner had asked the trial court for
a stay of sentence pending the outcome of ALL APPEALS. Judge Patterson
granted that request at the sentencing hearing. According to C.R. Crim.
P. 37(f), Judge Patterson must grant the stay, but he could require that
the Petitioner post an appeal as a condition of stay. As previously
stated, the $2,500.00 appeal bond was paid in full, and remains in
effect to date. All of Petitioner's appeal rights are found in Colorado
Municipal Court Rule 237, which tells Plaintiff to follow Colorado Rule
of Criminal Procedure 37, et seg, the rules for appealing from county
courts. All rules were followed.
4. Petitioner docketed the appeal in district court, paid the
docket fee, and submitted the Designation of the Record of Appeal, and
properly filed and served that designation.
5. Petitioner filed a Petition to Show Cause Why Judgment is Not
Void, with the district court. District and city attorneys were
properly mailed this document, but then filed a Motion to Strike Notice
of Appeal and to Dismiss Case for Failure to Prosecute. Petitioner
filed a Response to the Motion to Strike NOA and to Dismiss Case for
Failure to Prosecute. Petitioner, at the same time filed his own Motion
for Default Judgment and Affidavit in Support of Default Judgment.
Judge Hyatt issued an Order to Show Cause and Petitioner came back to
the court with DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Judge Hyatt
of the Denver District Court dismissed the case for failure to proceed,
without ever addressing any of Defendant's Petitions or Motions to the
court.
6. Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the
Colorado State Supreme court on February 12, 2003, mailed to Judge
Patterson the court's copies, not once but twice, because the clerks in
his office did not have copies. Upon arriving in court on March 7,
2003, Judge Patterson said he did not have the Writ of Certiorari.
Petitioner explained that his clerks had been personally served the Writ
of Certiorari on March 5, 2003, and that Petitioner had a time stamped
copy from Judge Patterson's clerks, Judge Patterson relented, and found
the contested Writ of Certiorari.
7. Petitioner requested that Judge Patterson grant Defendant's
REQUEST FOR CONTINUED STAY OF EXECUTION FROM IMPOSING SENTENCE, and
Judge Patterson, granted until April 11, 2003, at an 8:30AM hearing in
his courtroom, 151P, in the City and County of Denver, the CONTINUED
STAY OF EXECUTION FROM IMPOSING SENTENCE. Judge Patterson cautioned
Stanley that he must keep jurisdiction in the matter, and that Stanley
must respond to the Colorado State Supreme Court with a Motion for
Defendant's REQUEST FOR CONTINUED STAY OF EXECUTION FROM IMPOSED
SENTENCE, and it be granted, or he would be inclined to vacate the stay
of execution and impose the sentence of six months in jail upon Stanley
on April 11, 2003, at the next hearing.
8. Petitioner asks the court to consider this request because
Petitioner has complied with all the rules regarding the stay of
execution phase of this court matter, and the lower court wants to keep
jurisdiction in this matter, even though Petitioner has filed the Writ
of Certiorari with the higher court. Judge Patterson reminded
Petitioner that his ruling still stands, and he regards that the
sentence will be imposed. Rule 49 Consideration Governing Review on
Certiorari, of Colorado Appellate Rules states:
(a) Addressed to judicial discretion. A review in the Supreme
court on Writ of Certiorari as provided in Section 13-4-108, C.R.S., and
Section 13-6-310, C.R.S., is a matter of sound judicial discretion and
will be granted only when there are special and important reasons
therefore. The following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring
the Supreme Court's discretion, indicate the character of reasons which
will be considered:
(1.) Where the district or superior court on appeal from the county
court has decided a question of substance not heretofore determined by
this court.
(4.) Where the Court of Appeals has so far departed from the
accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings or so far sanctioned
such procedure by a lower court as to call for the exercise of the
Supreme Court's power of supervision.
The actions outlined in this Motion show a judicial branch
of government in Denver, that is out of control, drunk with power, and
has an arrogance towards a citizen of Denver who wishes to secure his
God given rights of self defense to keep and bear arms in defense of his
person, which is a protected and guaranteed right of all Colorado
citizens based upon the Colorado Constitution at Article II, sec. 13,
which if not prevented by this higher court, will cause irreparable harm
to Mr. Stanley, and the honor and integrity of the judicial system
itself, which is really on trial here in the City and County of Denver
courts. A municipal or county judge, who wishes to illegally seize
power back from the Colorado State Supreme Court, because he wants to
impose sentence now, violates the jurisdiction of the Colorado State
Supreme Court in the appeals process. Colorado citizens such as Mr.
Stanley, have a right to judicial protection from the higher court, who
have the courage to rule on the denial of a citizen's constitutional
state rights, by a corrupt city's judicial power grab under the "color
of law." The Colorado State Supreme Court has their own timetable of
events, to decide a Writ of Certiorari, without undue pressure from a
lower court, who wants to jail a Colorado citizen in violation of the
very laws he has sworn to defend.

FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the
Court grant the MOTION FOR CONTINUED STAY OF EXECTUION FROM IMPOSED
SENTENCE.




_____________________________________

Richard (Rick) Stanley





CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the following MOTION FOR CONTINUED STAY OF
EXECUTON FROM IMPOSED SENTENCE was delivered this _____day of March,
2003, by placing the same in the U.S. mail, postage prepaid, addressed
to:




______________________________________

Rick Stanley



J. Wallace Wortham, Jr. No. 5969
City Attorney
James C. Thomas, No. 13583
Paul W. Pockett, No. 5885
Assistant City Attorneys
City and County of Denver
201 W. Colfax Ave. Dept. 1207
Denver, Colorado 80202

City and County of Denver Court
Clerk of the County Court
1437 Bannock Street
Denver, Colorado 80202

Judge Robert S. Hyatt
Denver County District Court
1437 Bannock Street
Denver, Colorado 80202