Orlando Salazar v. State

Opinion

NO-01-15-00365-CR //( '^^p3 30 IN THE %U 2015 , ) Pft'»e COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIRST SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Orlando Salazar,

Appellant.

VS.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

From the 340th Judicial District Court Of Tom Green County, Texas Honorable Jay Weatherby, Judge Presiding

ANDERS RESPONSE & APPELLANTS BRIEF

ORAL Argument Requested

Orlando Salazar 3406 Juanita Ave. San Angelo.TX 76901 325-227-1620 Bandaandrea53@,yahoo.com In Propria Persona ProSe IDENTITIES OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

Orlando Salazar, Appellant c/o Tom Green County Jail 122 W. Harris San Angelo, Texas 76903

Frank D. Brown, Counsel of Appellant P.O Box 3275 San Angelo, TX. 76902 325-227-8794 TSB#03122500 FAX: 325-227-8817 Ihonestlawvertgtsbcglobal.net

Danny Hardesty, Trial Counsel 17 S. Chadbourne St#205 San Angelo, TX. 76903 325-658-6040 FAX: 325-658-6040 dHarde@iustice.com

State of Texas Appellee

Ashley Knight, Attorney for Appellee Asst. District Attorney 124 W. Beauregard San Angelo, TX. 76903 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

Identity of Parties and Counsel 2 Table of Contents 3-4

Index of Authorities 5-8

Request for Oral Argument 9 Statement of the Case 10

Statement of the Facts 11

Response to Anders Brief 12-13 Statement of the Issues 14

Issues Presented - Issue A 15

Issue B 15"18

Issue C lg

Issue D I8

Issue E I8"!9

Issue F I9

Issue G I9-20

Issue H 20-21

Issue I 21

Issue J 21-22

Issue K 22

Issue L 22-23

Issue M 23 Issue N 23-24

Issue O 24

Issue P 24

Issue Q 24

Issue R 24-25

Issue S 25-26

Issue T 26-27

Issue U 27

Issue V 27-28

Issue W 28

Issue X 28

Summary of the Argument 29 Argument 30-31 Prayer 32 Certificate of Service 33

Certificate of Compliance 34-35 INDEX TO AUTHORITIES

Cases Issues

Allen v. Wright, 1984 468 U.S. 737, 752 A Allgeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U.S 578, 175.Ct. 427, 412.Ed. 832...... R Aptefv. Ross, 781 N.E. 2d 744 .....V Argersinge v. Hamlin, 407 US 25 .B

ASIS v. US, 568 F2d 284 B

Atkins v. lanning , D.C OKL., 415 F.Supp. 186.188 U

Bassov. Utah power & light co. 495 F2d 906.910 S

Brady v. Maryland- 1963, US Supreme Court............ K Brown vs. Texas, 443 US 47 G

City of Dallas v. Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 J Clifford s v. Superior Court. 45 cal. RPtr. 2d 333,335 A Cohen vs. Virginia, 19 U.S.(bwheat) 264, 404 5L.Ed.257 B Crawford v. Washington (02-946) 541 U.S. 36 (2004) C

Co.Litt. 127 Q

Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P.27 S

Eggleston v. State, 917 S.W. 2d 100(Tex.App-San Antonio 1996, no pet) D Elliot vs. Piersoi, 1 Pet. 328, 340,26 U.S. 328 B

Erwin v. U.S., D.C. Ga., 37F.488, 2L.R.A. 229 B

Ex Parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212 B

Ex Parte thistleton, 52 Cal 225 B

Ex Parte Vasquez, 558 S.w. 2d 477 (Tex.Cr.App. 1977) D 5 Cases Issues

Frasherv. Radar, 124 cal. 133.56P . A FRCvs. GE 281 U.S. 428, 1 P

Halev. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 at 47 T Hazel - atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford - Empire Co. 322 U.S. 328 B Heinigerv. Davis. 96 ohio st. 205.117 N.E. 229, 231 B Hilltop Developers v. Holiday Pines Services Corp. 478 So, 2d.368 (Fla2ndDCA1985)..S Joyce v. U.S. 474 2d 215 S Kawananakou v. Polyblank, 205 U.S. 349, 353,275,ct.526,527,51,LE.P.834 T Keller vsPE 261 U.S 428, 1 stat. 138-178 P Kolenderv. Lawson461 U.S.352 G Louisville v.Motley 211 U.S. 149,295. Ct.42 • S Maine v. Thiboutot 100 S.Ct.250 •S Manning v. Ketcham, 58 F. 2d 948 •••S Norwood v. Renfield, 34c 329; Exparte Giambonini. 49 P. 732 S Old wayne Mut.L.Assoc. v. McDonough . 204 U.S. 8. 27 S.ct.236 S Owens v. city. 445 US 662 B People v. Alvarez,(2002)27cal 4th 1161,1168,1169,119 cal,RPtr.2d 903.46P.3d372 A People v. Bird, 300 P22, 26-27 A People v. Dick 37 Cal. 251 A People v. Lopez. 62 ca.Rptr. 47,254 C.A. 2d 185 A People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d, 433,467 (cal2003) A Pointerv. Texas. 380 U.S. 400,406(1965) C 6 Cases Issues

Sherer v. Cullen 481 F. 945 A

Smith v. Andrews. 6 Cal. 652 B

Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan.APP.2d 573,576-77,840 P.2d553 S

State v. Brown, 103 sc 437, 88 SE21 A

State ex rel. Herbert v. Whims, 68ohio app.39, 38, N.E.2d 596,599,220.0.110... U

Strickland v. Washington (1984) U.S. Supreme Court L

The Thomas Fletcher, C.C. G.a., 24 F. 481 B

Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 583 B

U.S. v Johnson, 76 F.Supp. 538(1947) L

U.S. vs. Will, 449 U.S.200, 216.101 S.ct.471.66L.Ed.2d 392,406 B

Wheelingsteel corp v. Fox, 298 U.S.193.80L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.ct 773 T

White v. state. 49 ala. 347 .A

William Dixon v. The United States. 1marsh 117,181 B

Windle v. Flinn, 196 or. 654, 251, P.2d 136,146 U

Yick wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, atpg.370 T

10 coke 68; Bradley v. Fisher, 13 wall 335,351 S

In Re Application of wyatt, 300 P.132; ReCavitt, 118P2d 846 S

2wils. 409; 3 I'd, comm.298 B

3witlen.Cal.Procedure (3rd ed 1985) actions § 44.PP.70-72 A 3steph.Comm.383 B

3B.I.Comm.24 B Statutes

Art.42.12;Sec5, (B) E

Art. 42.12; Sec 14 F

Black's law Dictionary, 6th ed pg. 624 Q Black's law Dictionary, 6thed, 13th reprint (1998) ...S Black's law Dictionary, 5thedition, pg. 240 U

Public law 93-12 B

FSIA Statutes Pursuant to 28 U.S.C 1330 , H

Title 8 U.S.C 1481 H

Title 22 U.S.C, chapter 11 .....H 22C.F.R., 92.-12-92, 31 F.R H REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT

The appellant, Orlando Salazar, respectfully request oral argument. This Appeal in no form or way is Frivolous stated by Danny Hardesty and Frank Brown. I believe every lawyer in Tom Green Count is corrupt and never helps their clients. It's my obligation to present myself in person and state the facts.

The appellant, Orlando Salazar, believes Oral discussion of the facts and the applicable would benefit the Court. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS:

COMES NOW, The appellant Orlando Salazar, in the above entitled and numbered cause, and files this, his Appellants Brief. In support of, the Appellant would show this Honorable Court as follows:

On September 9, 2008, Appellant was charged by a one count indictment with aggravated assault in cause number C-08-0822-SA in the 340th District Court ofTom Green County, Texas. Appellant entered a guiltyplea to paragraph one of the indictment pursuant to a plea bargain "though being coerce and compel under Duress". Appellant was placed on five years deferred adjudication. Said term of deferred adjudication was extended on March 26, 2012 for five years. On February 19'2015 a hearing on the State's fifth amended motion to adjudicate was held. Appellant plead not true to all allegations. Upon conclusion, the Court adjudicated the appellant and the Court sentenced Appellant to 6years confinement in the TDCJ-ID Appellant Perfected an appeal.

10 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

OnSeptember 9, 2008, Appellant was charged by a one count indictment with aggravated assault in cause number C-08-0822-SA in the 340th District Court of Tom Green County, Texas. By receiving an Indictment, Thru a Judge who appoints commissioner to nominate prospective Jurors under a system the U.S. Supreme Court has called "Susceptible ofAbuse". We are going to need a workable Criminal Justice System. I need to believe, I have a fair review by a Grand Jury. Thru the "Deficient Performance" by my Counsel, Appellant was placed on 5years deferred adjudication by "Coerce and compel under Duress". Said term ofdeferred adjudication was extended on March 26, 2012 for 5 years. On February 19, 2015 a hearing on the State's fifth amended motion to adjudicate was held. Appellant plead not true to all allegations. Upon conclusion and thru the "deficient Performance by my Counsel" the Court adjudicated the appellant and the Court sentenced Appellant to 6years confinement in the TDCJ-ID. The "Deficient Performance" by Hardesty, Brigman, and Brown after the post- Judgment saying this appeal was Frivolous. The Appellant Orlando Salazar perfected and Appeal thru In Propria Persona.

11 RESPONSE TO ANDERS BRIEF

Appellant, Orlando Salazar has reviewed the "Anders Brief". Appellant believes the "Anders Brief to be frivolous. Appellant states that the record on Appeal shows many reversible errors in his case. Appellant was able to raise many arguable grounds for appeal. Thru "Deficient Performance" by his lawyer, Appellant request for and an Oral Argument. Appellant filed a docketing statement that was filled out accurately and completely so it can be considered for inclusion inthe Pro Bono Program. Appellant would ask the court of Appeals to appoint Appellant a Constitution, Experienced, Practicing, Criminal lawyer. Usually, a party need not file a motion for new trial to preserve most errors in a non-Jury trial. (Park v. Essa Tex Corp., 311 S.W. 2d 228,229)(Tex, 1958). After a nonjury trial, there is no statutory requirement to file a motion for new trial to preserve complaints of factual or legal insufficiency of evidence, or that damages were to large or too small. (Strickland v. Coleman, 824 S.W. 2d 188,191) (Tex.APP-Houston [1st Dist. 1991, no wril]) Rather, these issues can be raised for the first time on Appeal.

Appellant believes that any lawyer appointed to represent him, should review the "Notice ofAppeal number 1and 3and the lawyer should ignore the notice ofappeal filed by Fred Brigman. Appellant has written his own Appellants Brief on his own with the Response to my lawyer's Anders's list. Appellant's lawyer should advise me on certain matters of the law and should neverfile or speak for me without my consent. He should know about being a Sovereign Human being. My appointed lawyer should study every case on my Appellants Briefunder "Index of Authority".

From the beginning of Appellant's trial and thru the Deficient Performance by Appellants Trial lawyer, he did not let me state. In a Court setting Appellant should have re-offered the Judge by stating, "Your Honor, I conditionally accept your offer to give you a NAME UPON Proof of Claim that if I do so it will not bind me to any contract

12 with the State of Texas. The Judge will keep trying to get Appellant into contract. Appellant must continue to conditionally accept the Judges offerby continually repeating, upon proof of whatever claim they are making. Appellant ask the Appellee to prove Jurisdiction and prove standing. Courts must prove Corpus Delicti. Appellant prays to the Court ofAppeals to review my Appellants Brief and grant Appellant the relief he ask in his Prayers.

13 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

The Appellant, Orlando Salazar observed many errors at trial. I will present these issues to the first court of Appeals. The courts violated may of my constitutional rights.

The plaintiff could not prove Corpus Delicti in 2008 and can't prove it now. The Improper Conduct placed in trial to violating Art.42.12. The court proceeded with substantial defects on the original charge by using unresolved facts. The Appellee did not turn over exculpatory evidence known as the "Brady Material".

The court also proceeded when there was a conflict of Interest and the lack of jurisdiction. The court used a fictitious plaintiff in suit, who abused their power.

My Due process of law was violated with the violation of color of law. I believe the Judge also abused its discretion in some form ofway bynot using findings of facts and conclusions of law. The motions I asked my lawyer to file were never filed, so I had to write up my own motions and were denied. Most important the court violated my Sovereign Human being, where appellant Orlando Salazar is a Sovereign Political Power Holder. The Appellant has a meritorious defense to the above errors. The Deficient performance bymy Counsel(s) should be grounds for a reversal. All these Errors will be in-depth under Issues presented.

14 ISSUES PRESENTED

The majority of courts do not operate according to any true rule of law, but by presumptions of the law. If presumptions presented bythe B.A.R. Guild are not rebutted they become facts and are therefore said to standtrue.

A) 1. The courts could not prove Corpus Delicti - Supreme courts ruled. "Without corpus delicti there can be no crime". In every prosecution for a crime it is necessary to establish the "corpus delicti'" i.e., the body or elements of the crime.

2. As a general principal, standing to invoke the Judicial process requires an actual Justiciable Controversy as to which the complainant has a real interest in the ultimate adjudication because he or she has either suffered or is about to suffer an injury.

3. Without standing, there is no actual orJusticiable Controversy and courts will not entertain such cases. "Typically ... the standing inquiry requires careful judicial examination of a complaint's allegations to ascertain whether the particular plaintiff is entitled to an adjudication of the particular claims asserted.

4. Does a courthave Jurisdiction without "Corpus Delicti"? NO! Courts have only and will only ever, have Jurisdiction, the literal translation and consequently the lawful definition, is Oath To Speak, a court only acquires oath to speak upon a given matter when an Individual goes to court and swears under oath, that their lawful rights have been in some manner violated. You must learn this because there is one other thing which can give a court jurisdiction and establish standing where it does not exist as a matter of fundamental law and that is consent. You can give your consent when you do nothing. The court, the Judge, and the prosecutor cannot merely assert Jurisdiction exist; they must prove all 3 elements of Corpus Delicti, which gives rise tojurisdiction.

B.^t This court used Improper court rulings. Improper Testimony. Improper conduct of prosecutor, and Improper conduct ofthe Defense lawyer- According to Public law 93-12,

15 been suspended. The courts actually "presume that all "parties" to a lawsuit to be artificial entities remain questionable. However, there is little doubt that most of the government entities that "appear" to sue us in court are corporations. They do have jurisdiction in their corporate capacities, through fraudulent presumptions. The entities that "appear" to sue us in court are corporations hence "persons". I'll rebut all corporate existence.

Courts of record and courts not of record, the former being those whose acts arid judicial proceedings are enrolled, or recorded for a perpetual memory and testimony and which have power to fine or imprison for contempt: Error lies to their judgments, and they generally possess a seal. Courts not ofrecord are those of inferior dignity, which have no power to fine or imprison, and in which the proceedings are not enrolled or recorded. "Inferior courts' are those whose jurisdiction is limited and special and whose proceedings are not according to the course of common law. Courts of record must proceed according to the curse ofthe common law, without the aid ofa statute. When acting to enforce a statue and its subsequent amendments to the present date, the Judge of the court is acting as an administrative officer and not in ajudicial capacity; courts in administrative or enforcing statues do not act judicially, but merely ministerial. "Without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void; and form no bar to a recovery sought, even prior to a reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification; and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences are considered in law, as trespasser." When ajudge acts when he of she does not have Jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason. Dismissal of charges is warranted, because of fraud placed on the court. Justice John Marshall explained that "The United States" was a corporation and all of the politicians ere the officers of that corporation. A corporation is dead or artificial at law because it is not real. Hence, the Latin word, "corpse" whichmeans dead body. The word corporation is not real because it is dead.

16 Many jurisdiction hold as legal rule that a defendant's out-of-court confession alone, is insufficient evidence to prove the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. A coroUy to this rule is that an accused cannot be convicted solely upon the testimony of an accomplice. Some jurisdictions also hold that without first showing independent corroboration that a crime happened. The "prosecution" may not introduce evidence of the defendant's statement.

Claim of Conusance, in practice, an intervention by a third person in a suit, claiming that he has rightful jurisdiction of the cause, which the Plaintiff has commenced our of claimants court. Now obsolete" Absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony, unless he was represented by counsel at his trial. Plaintiff has the burden of establishing its standing; it has filed to do so. A Judge ceases to sit as judicial officer because the governing principle of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and rational for that the agency. Additionally courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that ofthe agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or hearing arguments, presentation, or rational.

There was improper testimony by Natalie Rodriquez, Justin Boykin, and Deanna Garcia. Natalie Rodriguez gave improper testimony attrial. All she was saying was something another probation officer said in my lastM.T.R., so the probation records were testimonial in nature. They violated the sixth amendment. Those records should be excluded. Natalie isjust restating allegations. Justin Boykin was asked by Richard Villarreal (D.A.) to serve Appellant with Jail cases. Everything Mr. Boykin was saying was a lie and never wrote me a case for the "hooch" he spoke of in his testimony. He wrote three other inmates up. His testimony should be improper and be excluded. Deanria Garcia could not have a successful testimony. If Appellant would have refused to let Deanna Garcia fingerprint Appellant, she would have an improper testimony and her

17 Deanna Garcia fingerprint Appellant, she would have an improper testimony and her testimony would be testimonial. My lawyer told me I had to do it. I never would have let Deanna Garcia fingerprint me. There was so much improper conduct by my lawyer, Judge, Prosecutor, and witnesses that this should be grounds for reversal.

C.) This Court violated my Sixth Amendment ofthe U.S Constitution by violating the confrontation clause. "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right ...to be confronted with the witness against him. We have held that this bedrock procedural guarantee applies to both federal and state prosecutions.

The accuser must be named. He/she maybe an officer or a third party, but some positively identifiable person (human being) must accuse. Some certain person must take responsibility for the making ofthe accusation, not an agency or institution. This is the only valid means by which a citizen may begin to face his accuser. Also, the injured party (corpus delicti) must make their accusation. Hearsay evidence may not be provided. Anyone else testifying that they heard that another party was injured does not qualify as direct evidence.

D.) This court violated my Eight Amendment ofthe U.S Constitution. That said bail is excessive and in direct violation of reasonable bail. Under the eighth amendment to the Constitution of the United Stated and Section 13 of 1 of the constitution of Texas, the amount ofbail is a tool to guarantee the defendants presence in court and not to be used as an instrument of oppression,

E.) This Court violated Art. 42.12; Sec 5(B), community supervision; Sec 5, Deferred Adjudication; community supervision(B) on violation ofa condition ofcommunity supervision imposed under sub section (a) the defendant may be arrested and detained as provided in Section 21. The defendant is entitled to ahearing limited to the determination ofguilt on the original charge ifthe court finds that the only evidence supporting the 18 alleged violation of a condition of community supervision is the uricorroborated results of a polygraph examination. In a community supervision revocation hearing at which it is alleged only that the defendant violated the conditions of community supervision by failing to pay compensation paid to appointed counsel, community supervision fees, or court cost the state must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendantwas able to pay and did not pay ordered by the Judge. To obtain information pertaining to the factors listed under Article 42.037 and includes that information in the report required under Section 9 (a) or a separate report, as the court directs.

F.) This court violated my eligibility under Art.42.12 Section 14 of the Texas code of criminal procedure. The defendant is eligible for punishment under Article 42.12 Section 14 of the Texas code of criminal procedure and that the defendant attends and successfully complete a term of confinement and treatment in a substance abused treatment facility operated b the Texas Department of Criminal Justice under Section 493.009 Government Code. A term confine and treatment imposed must be an indeterminate term of not more than one year or less than 90 days

The Court will find that:

1. The Defendant is charged with or convicted of a felony other that a felony under Section 21.11, 22.011, 22.021, or 25.06 of the penal code;

2. Drug or Alcohol abuse significantly contributed to the commission of the crime or violation of Community Supervision;

3. The Defendant is a suitable candidate for treatment as determined by the suitability criteria established by the Texas board of Criminal Justice under section 493.009(b)

G.) This court violated my Fourth Amendment ofthe U.S Constitution. The accused must be properly identified in such a fashion; there is no room for mistaken identity. The Individual must be singled out from all others; otherwise, anyone could be subjected to

19 arrest and trial without benefit of "wrong party" defense. Almost always, the means of identification is a person (human being) proper name. BY ANY MEANS OF IDENTIFICATION IS EQUALLY VALID IF SAID MEANS DIFFERENTIATES THE ACCUSED WITHOUT DOUBT.

H.) This court violated my Eleventh Amendment of the U.S Constitution. The 11th amendment under the U.S Constitution reads as follows: "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state".

1. On December9, 1945 International Organization Immunity Act relinquished every public office of the United States to the UnitedNations.

2. This law makes all public officials foreign citizens, barring them from judicial power. All public officials are administrative agents of the U.S Constitution. They have no judicial power whatsoever.

3. 22 CFR (code of Federal regulations) 92.12-92.31 FRHeading "Foreign Relationship" states that oath is required to take office.

4. Title 8 USC 1481 states, once oath of office is taken citizenship is relinquished, thus the oath taker becomes a foreign entity, agency, or state. That means every public office is a foreign state, even all political subdivision; i.e., every single court is considered a separate foreign entity.

5. Title 22 USC, "Foreign Relations and Intercourse', Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.

6. The Eleventh Amendment also makes a foreign state separation from the position of the public office position to throw offthe people. The People have Eleventh Amendment immunity because there is no "Judicial Power of the "inferior courts" and the people have 20 Foreign Sovereign Immunity.

7. Municipal, County, or State Court lacks jurisdiction to hear any case under the foreign state definitions, coming from the 11th Amendment under the U.S Constitution. This jurisdiction lies with the United States District Court under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) Statues pursuant to 28 USC 1330.

I.) This court proceeded with substantial defect on the original charge. The statute of offense must be identified by its proper or common name. A number is insufficient. Today, a citizen may stand jeopardy or criminal sanctions for alleged violation of statutes, regulations, or even law- level bureaucratic orders. If a number were to be deemed sufficient, government could bring new and different charges at any time by alleging clerical error. For any act to be triable as an offense, it must be declared to be a crime. Charges must negate any exception forming part ofthe statutory definition of an offense, by affirmative non-applicability. In other words, any charge must affirmatively negate any exception found in the law. The acts ofalleged offense must be described in non-prejudicial language and detail so as to enable a person ofaverage intelligence to understand nature of charge (to enable preparation of defense); the actual act or acts constituting the offense complained of. The charge must not be described by parroting the statute; not bythe language of same, the naming ofthe acts ofthe offense. Facts must be 'stated. Conclusions cannot be considered in the determination of probable cause.

J.) this court used unresolved facts which are material to the legality of the applicants confinement- The presumptions that by custom a summons or warrant for arrest un- rebutted stand and therefore one who attends court is presumed to be a thing and therefore liable to be detained in custody by "Custodians", Custodians my only lawfully hold custody of property and "things" not flesh and blood soul possessing being. Unless this "presumptions" is only challenged by rejection of summons and/or at court, the presumptions stands you are a thing and property and therefore lawfully able to be kept in 21 custody by custodians, Lawyers know this, but ignore it. "The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the "citizenship to the agencies of government." The presumptions of Guilt, the presumptions that as it is presumed to be private business meeting of the "Bar Guild", you are guilty whetheryou plead"guilty", do not plead or plead "not guilty". Therefore unless you either have previously prepared an affidavit of truth and motion to dismiss with extreme prejudice onto the public record or call demurrer, then the presumptions is you are guilty and the private bar Guild can hold you until a bond is posted from you. My lawyer knows this but wishes to ignore this.

K.) This court prosecutor did notturn over exculpatory evidence. A Brady Primer: Evidence that is favorable to the defendant (exculpatory) and could impact the outcome of the defendant's case (material) is often called "Brady Material" because of the Seminal 1963 U.S. Supreme Court case. Brady v. Maryland. In that case the Supreme Court established a rule that prosecutors must disclose "Brady Material" to the defense. The failure to disclose such material is a "Brady Violation" a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Through Brady and it's progeny, the Supreme Court has made clear that "Brady Material" must be turned over to defense in a timely manner, whether the defense request it ornot, and that a prosecutor's good faith efforts to comply do not shield the state from a "Brady Violation". This includes not only affirmatively exculpatory evidence but also impeachment evidence and any consideration a witness may receive. It also includes evidence in possession of law enforcement, even if prosecutors themselves do not possess it or even know about it.

L.) Ineffective assistance of Counsel. Orlando Salazar's lawyer's performance was so ineffective that it deprived him of his constitutional right guaranteed b the Assistance of Counsel Clause of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S Constitution. His lawyer failed to inform Orlando of the direct consequences of a sentence. On July 9, 2009, Orlando signed a waiver ofright to appeal. Orlando had to sign this part of a plea agreement with

22 prosecutors, which is ground for ineffective assistance of counsel. It's very clear that an attorney is not a lawyer; the lawyer is a learned counsel who advises. An attorney is one who transfers a tenant's property, rights, allegiance, and titles. I do not have a right to an attorney. I have a right to Assistance of Counsel, and that is anyone, I happen to believe is competent to advise me in matters of law. Human beings must never retain or hire a lawyer, a state officer of the court, to speak or file written documents for us. If I retain a lawyer to represent me and speak in my place, I become "Non Compos Mentis", not mentally competent, and I then become considered a ward of the court. I lose all my rights and I will not be permitted to do anything herein. A lawyer cannot claim that you have rights. I indicated I was standing upon the right of a lawyer not to disclose the confidential communications of his clients. The Judge, before whom the matter was heard, assured him that his rights would be protected. "The privilege against self- incrimination is neither accorded tot the passive resistant, nor the person who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent therein. It cannot be claimed by attorneys (lawyers) or solicitors. It is valid only when insisted upon by belligerent claimant in person". An attorney cannot go into a court room and claim that you have rights. This is ineffective assistance of counsel.

M.) Sixmotions denied over the course of this trial. I never had an examination trial; I never had a Motion for Discovery. I never had a motion to suppress evidence. I never had a Bradymaterial. My writ of Habeas Corpus has been denied. Every motion I filed was by me, because my lawyer never did theirjob. Many motions have been denied. Why? I don't know

N.) The victim filed an affidavit of non-prosecution with the district clerk and prosecutor, Affidavit never found on record, The victim Valerie Martinez filed a statement, of Affidavit of non-prosecution with the District Clerk and with Richard Villarreal, the prosecutor, The victim told the prosecutor that she put herselfin harms way and it was the victims fault, not the defendants fault. This case should have been dismissed and

23 never filed.

O.) This Court's prosecutor abused their power, by falsely making a State's Fifth Amended Motion, when it's the State's Second Amended Motion. The State abandoned Paragraphs 4 and 7-which is onthe states 4th and 5th amended M.T.R. Probation, but not on the 2nd States Amended M.T.R., there was never a 3rd Amended M.T.R.. They made it seem like Orlando Salazar, the defendantviolated probation or had it seem like this was his 5th M.T.Rwhich in reality it was my 2nd M.T.R.. I want to know why the prosecutor purposely did this. Ifthe state abandons Paragraph 4 and 7, then it goes to its Original 2nd Amended Motion. Correct?

P.} This Court proceeded when there was a Conflict of Interest. The Judge is an administrator for the corporation known as STATE of TEXAS and is with the B.A.R. Associations, the British Accredited Registry which are both private foreign corporations and any lawyer the Judge may appoint me also works for the B.A.R. .. That is also another Conflict of Interest. I ask the Court of Appeals to dismiss my case with prejudice. How am I, Orlando Salazar entitled to a fair trial/hearing? When there is Conflict of Interest, when the Judge represents the State, and the state is the plaintiff, then the Judge represents a party in my case, isn't that a Conflict ofInterest. Judges do not enforce statues and codes. Executive Administrators enforce states and codes. There have not been any judges in America since 1789. There have just been administrators.

Q.) This Court used a Fictitious Plaintiff- What is a Fictitious Plaintiff? It's a person appearing as a claimant with no right to do so. It's a person appearing in the writ, complaint, orrecord as the plaintiff in a suit, and ofthe use ofhis name in it. It is a contempt of court to sue in the name of a fictitious party.

R.) This Court violated mv due process of law.- The Constitution guarantee of due process oflaw found in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S Constitution prohibits all levels ofgovernment from arbitrarily orunfairly depriving individuals of

24 their basic constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property. This clause limits the powers of the states, rather than those of the federal government. The Judge's arbitrary actions violated Orlando's due process rights, and I would like the appeals courts to vacate my conviction.

S.) This Court lacked and lacks jurisdiction to enforce judicial power. The fact that public officials are not citizens, but rather foreign citizens, all of the cases must be dismissed because the court lacked and lacksjurisdictionto enforce judicial power. The court is an administrate court and not a criminal court., in other words no judicial power makes this court an administrative court. Also this following act proves that this court is an administrative agency: The Administrative Procedures Act, Title 5- Government Organization and Employees Administrative Procedures Act part 1- the agencies generally chapter 5 subchapter ii* administrative procedure 551. Definitions for the purpose of this subchapter- *(1) "agency" means each authority of the Government of the United States, whether or not it is within or subject to review by another agency, Additionally," jurisdiction canbe challenged at any time, and the court cannot ignore lack ofjurisdiction". There is no discretion to ignore lack ofjurisdiction. Ajudgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the defendant is void. It is nullity. "A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid. It is clear and well established law that a void order can be challenged in any court". Defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subjectmatter may be raised at any time, even on an appeal. Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided a universal principle as old as the law is that proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity and its judgmenttherein without effect either on person or property. Jurisdiction is fundamental and a Judgment rendered by a courtthat does not have jurisdiction to hear is void ab initio. Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, it proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term. If any Tribunal (court) finds absence of proof of

25 jurisdiction over a person and subject matter, the case must be dismissed. When a suit is brought and determined in a court which has no jurisdiction in the matter, then it is said to be coram non judice, and the Judgment is void. "Where there is no Jurisdiction there is no Judge; the proceeding is as nothing. Such has been the law from the days of the Marshalsea".

T.) This court violated mv Sovereign Human being. Sovereignty itself is course not subjectto law, for it is the Author and source of law... A Sovereign is a private, non resident, non-domestic, non-person, non-individual, Not subject to any real or imaginary statutory regulations or quas; laws enacted by any state legislature whichwas created by the people. I'm not a U.S. Citizen which is a fictitious entity, and has no rights: "Therefore, the U.S citizens residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual entity a sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or absolute theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends. The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty (to submit his books and papers for an examination) to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land (common law) long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the Immunity of himself and his property from arrest of seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. A PERSON in all caps is legal entity - a trust, corporation partnership, association. I will not be fooled by my lawyer's statutory word trickery if he/she says I'm a natural person. An adverb cannot charge the root meaning of a word. Plain and simple, it is impossible to be a person. You are either a mail

26 or woman- a living being. A person is dead entity and lawyer (attorney) may only represent persons- commercial legal entities. Resident is the word term used to establish jurisdiction in a state. Citizen is the word term used to establish jurisdiction in a federal district. I remind the courts that they do not regulate any office of the Sovereign and that their statues only apply to those state employees in legislative created offices.

U.) This court violated the color of law. If something is "color of law" then it is not law, it only looks like law. Ifyou go to the website for the office of law Revision Counsel, you will see that most of the titles of the United States code are "Prima facia" means At first sight; onthe first appearance; onthe face of it; so far as can judge from the disclosure; presumably; a fact presumed to be true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary. Prima facia and color oflaw both go hand in hand, because if a law isprima facia evidence of the laws of the United States, that means it is color of law, by definition. In otherwords the bureaucrat presumes that the law applies to you until you defeat their presumptions. Color oflaw, and prima facia, and presumption are all associated with admiralty maritime law courts. "Color" means an appearance, semblance, or simulacrum, as distinguished from that which is real, a prima facia or apparent right. Hence, a deceptive appearance, a plausible, assumed exterior, is concealing a lack of reality; a disguise or pretext. "Colorable" means that whish is in appearance only, and not inreality; what it purports to be, hence counterfeit feigned, having the appearance of truth. "Color of law" means the appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal rights. Misuse ofpower, possessed byvirtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state is action taken under "color of law".

V.) This, court abused its discretion- Where a trial court must exercise discretion in deciding a question; it must do so in a way that is not clearly against logic and the evidence. An improvident exercise of discretion is an error of law and grounds for reversing a decision on an appeal. The court must find that the evidence offered is

27 relevant to the legal proceedings. Evidence that bears on a factual or legal issue at stake in a controversy is considered relevant evidence. The courts abused its discretionby admitting into evidence photographs withoutproof that it was authentic. Photographs authenticity may be established by a witaess's personal observations that the photograph accurately depicts who it purports to depict at the time the photograph was taken. Ordinarily the photographer who took the picture is in the best position to provide such testimony. A polite way of saying the trial Judge has made such a bad mistake ("clearly against reason and evidence" or against established law) during trial or on ruling on a motion and that a Orlando did not get a fair trial. I hope the court of Appeals will use a finding of this abused as reason to reverse the previous courts result. Abuse of discretion orjudge's mistakes includes not allowing an important witness to testify (victim). Making improper comments, showing bias, or making rulings on evidence that deny a person a chance to tell his or her side ofthe matter, or a side bench conference which was not on record that may have gotten a third party to influence the Judge's decision. This does not mean a trial or the Judge has to be perfect, but it does mean that the Judge's actions were so far out of discretion because the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to support this court's judgment.

W.) This court did no use findings offacts and conclusions oflaw. Any findings offact that is a conclusion of law shall be deemed a conclusion of law.

X.) This court did not find facts alleged for determination of sufficiency to support conviction. The court must be one of competent jurisdiction. Tojiave valid process, the tribunal must be a creative of its constitution, in accord with the law of its creation, i.e., Article III Judge lacking any of the elements or portions thereof, (unless waived, intentionally or unintentionally) all designed to ensure against further prosecution; It is the defendants lawyer duty to inform the court of facts alleged for determination of sufficiency to support conviction, should one be obtained. Otherwise there is no lawful notice, and charge must be dismissed for failure to state an offense.

28 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

The Appellant, Orlando Salazar will argue that there was many "errors" placed at his Bench Trial. Law has been twisted into a mechanism of oppression, and the order of due process has been morphed into a means to streamline the process of extracting capital. Lawis supposed to be a tool for the people to protect themselves nonviolently, against anyone who infringes their freedom or violated their rights or property. If a Human being cannot based upon a good faith belief, and sense of duty to claim and exercise rights. I will use the Halls of Justice in the defense of freedom to secure justice for violations of rights even against those who are agents of the state. When there aren't enough criminals one criminalizes lawful activities via bills that become statutory rules, but only bind those lawfully who are "in Contract". Through conventional wisdom and intimidation alone, preying upon ignorance of the masses, lawful activities that are routine everyday rights are not in themselves criminalized because the action itself criminalizing them is unlawful, a crime itself. So in reality all such legislation is retroactively void ab initio to the very begirining date it was enacted, impotent, as if it had never existed, unenforceable by any court once the Human being learns and understands how it is that courts acquire jurisdiction. Appellant has a meritorious defense to the cause of action alleged in this case/appeal.

29 ARGUMENT

My argument thru this appeal is the focus on specific things that happened during my trial such as improper court rulings, improper testimony or even improper conduct of the prosecutor and defense lawyer. The things are known as "error" if the error is bad enough, I would like my appeal to result in a reversal, reduced sentence or even a acquittal. The seriousness of my appeal is measured by how directly it affects my "Rights" under the U.S. Constitution.

Many mistakes were made at trial; my lawyer only preserved error under the confrontation clause, under the 6th amendment but did not bring up anything about my 14th amendment or all other errors made at trial. I would like to argue about not receiving the "Brady material", my Discovery, an examining trial, or even the proof of Corpus Delicti. I have received my transcript ofthe trial but never received all the motions filed. How am I supposed to have a successful appeal, when it's my right to have everything to observe? This is the same situation that I getfrom all the lawyer I cease and desist or who withdrawn from my case. I ask them to file motions and their reply was always the same. "We don't want to get the D.A (District Attorney) mad". It's not my counsel's (lawyer) duty to help the state over the finish line and hold me accountable. It's my counsel's duty to win my case and hold the state accountable for its actions offraud placed incourt.

I, Orlando Salazar the appellant would like to argue a side bar discussion where a third party had influenced the judge's decision of the improper testimony of Natalie Rodriguez, Justin Boykin, and Deanna Garcia. When Deanna Garcia did my fingerprints, my lawyer, Hardesty, told me go do it. When I came back Mr. Hardesty told me it was voluntarily. I never would have consent. Natalie Rodriguez was repeating everything said at my last M.T.R Hearing. I would appreciate if my appeal is reviewed and not frowned upon. The notice ofAppeal and Appellant brief is a powerful tool for the unsuccessful 30 litigant. It is the only vehicle for preserving evidence and rulings not captured in tae trial court record so that it can be presented to tae court of appeals. I believe tae courts improperly and prejudicially excluded evidence. An Affidavit of non-prosecution was filed with the District clerk and D.A. Richard Villarreal. The affidavit was never found on record. There has to be a fundamental principal of fairness in all legal matters, both civil and criminal especially in tae courts.

All legal procedures set by statute and court practice, including notice of rights, must be followed for each individual so taat no prejudice or unequal treatment will result. While somewhat indefinite tae term can be gauged by its aim to safeguardboth private and public rights against unfairness.

The arguments stated and errors presented thru tae Appellants Briefamounted to such a denial of tae Appellant, Orlando Salazar's Constitutional rights as was reasonably calculated to cause and probably did cause rendition of an improper judgment in this case. Appellant, Orlando Salazar, has a meritorious defense to tae cause of action alleged in this appeal thru his Appellants Brief.

31 PRAYER

Appellant, Orlando Salazar prays to tae Honorable Judge of tae First District Court of Appeals to set aside tae court's rulings arid finaljudgment dated February 19, 2015.

Appellant prays to tae Honorable Judge to grant the appellant reliefof a Reduction of Sentence, from six years to three years. Grant appellant a reversal of tae court ruling, to where Appellant would not have a conviction, or Grant Appellant an Acquittal

Appellant, Orlando Salazar, hereby states taat all of tae facts set out ontae above and aforementioned Appellate Brief is true and correct.

32 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

As required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.3 and 9.5 (b), (d), (e), I certify taat I have served this document on all other parties which are listed below on bltLl\l^ as follows:

Ashley Knight 124 W. Beauregard San Angelo, TX 76903 Attorney for the State of Texas By: Hand-delivered or mail

Orlando Salazar, Appellant C/O Tom Green County Jail 122 W. Harris San Angelo, TX 76903

Court of Appeal, First District 301 Fannin Street Houston, TX 77002-2066

33 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I certify pursuant to TRAP 9.4 (i) 3 taatthis document complies with said rule. According to tae word count on word on tae Appellants spouse's computer, tae number ofwords in tae Appellant brief filed by tae Appellant's wife is g,^?,?) .Appellant did not personally count tae words contained intae brief and can only certify to tae numberreflected in the Appellants wife's word processing program.

34 I, Orlando Salazar, Hereby state that all ofthe facts set out on the above and aforementioned is true and correct. Respectfully submitted,

5rlando Salazar # 56029 In Pfbpia Persona 122 W.Harris San Angelo, Tx (^ynxy^c^. (325)227-1620

2$ JTgfs

3» c » .c