Nothing in the Maryland election law allows a judge to rule that my claims are not crimes. Most election challenges have been over polling issues but there is nothing that says these are exclusive issues. The judge in this case refers to plaintiff failing to identify laws that were broken and I can assume only that the judge is making the polling violations the only course for contesting an election----AND THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE. The time is gone when simply having problems casting a vote at the polls is a problem. The problem in elections today is enforcement of laws surrounding candidates for office. We know campaign contribution laws and Citizens United Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations to donate more and more----and indeed Maryland raised these limits----will eliminate any candidate that is not backed by money. That is what Maryland is trying to do in this election and my court case. By saying that as a candidate without financial backing I do not have the rights to protection under IRS 501c3 and FCC election laws, they are trying to eliminate any way for the average citizen to exercise their rights to run for office and the voters to vote for the platform they want. We do not want the only way to win elections to be by who has the most money behind him/her.
THIS IS WHAT THIS COURT CASE IS ABOUT! MARYLAND HAS HAD CAPTURED ELECTIONS FOR SOME TIME BUT I AM SURE THIS IS COMING TO YOUR NECK OF THE WOODS. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW NEO-LIBERALS TO KEEP 80% OF LABOR AND JUSTICE FROM RUNNING CANDIDATES BY BREAKING ELECTION LAWS AND DENYING CANDIDATES THEIR RIGHTS TO RUN FOR OFFICE.
Election law and court proceedings are no doubt boring---it is why I couldn't be a lawyer----but it is critical to look at these laws and consider what the Maryland Assembly and Maryland Court system has in mind when it allows the individual courts to operate outside of procedure and allows for selected access to courts. I am not the first of course-----there are many people SHOUTING against this loss of Due Process and Equal Protection. This is not a class or race issue----this is happening across the board because corporations and their pols are trying to make sure no opportunity to vote them out can occur and no opportunity to remove corrupt politicians or prosecution of past crimes can occur.
THIS IS THE KIND OF ELECTION TAMPERING THAT HAPPENS IN DEVELOPING WORLD ELECTIONS FOLKS!
Below you see the law regarding judicial challenges. As 12-201 states the subtitle applies to any issue arising in an election. Precedent has election challenges tied to polling issues but it does not say these election challenges cannot rise from the candidates over election laws protecting the rights to run for office.
MARYLAND STATUTES AND CODES Section 12-201 - Scope of subtitle. Listen § 12-201. Scope of subtitle.
This subtitle applies to an issue arising in an election conducted under this article.
[An. Code 1957, art. 33, § 12-201; 2002, ch. 291, §§ 2, 4.]
Now, a candidate for office in Maryland MUST BE A REGISTERED VOTER. I am a voter and I have the right to challenge elections under these laws. This does not mean I can only challenge my rights to access to polls as a voter----it means I have the right to have candidates with platforms I support have equal access and protection during elections so they have the ability to compete in elections.
What this judge seems to be saying is that Maryland statute protects the voter at the poll but not the right to have candidates with rights to conduct a campaign with their protections under law.
All of this would have been discussed in the trial and I would have had the opportunity for the defendants and/or judge to explain why I do not have these rights. That is why this case did not make it to trial and a vague opinion by the judge failing to address any of these issues.
NONE OF THE ISSUES ADDRESSED IN THIS CASE HAD A HEARING SO AS TO NOT ALLOW PRECEDENT IN COURT.
Below you see the statute clearly says 'or any other law applicable to the election process'. It also clearly states that the plaintiff can elect to file a complaint after the election is certified-----within 3 days. This election was certified on July 10, 2014 and I filed in Baltimore City Circuit Court on July 11. 2014. I have the documents that prove this. Where the judge and defense lawyers are coming up with late July as a filing date I do not know. The plaintiff had too many venues violating election laws to take every one to court as they happened. This is where the judge and defense lawyers are using the 10 day timeline after the offense. Can you imagine the cost of taking 25 defendants to court filing each within 10 days of infraction? This one case is costing 1 thousand dollars and I did not even make it to trial. These 25 are simply the larger venues.....there could have been more. I clearly stated the dates and place of infractions in my 'Response' and reminded the court of the ability to file after the election was certified.
MARYLAND STATUTES AND CODES Section 12-202 - Judicial challenges. Listen § 12-202. Judicial challenges.
(a) In general.- If no other timely and adequate remedy is provided by this article, a registered voter may seek judicial relief from any act or omission relating to an election, whether or not the election has been held, on the grounds that the act or omission:
(1) is inconsistent with this article or other law applicable to the elections process; and
(2) may change or has changed the outcome of the election.
(b) Place and time of filing.- A registered voter may seek judicial relief under this section in the appropriate circuit court within the earlier of:
(1) 10 days after the act or omission or the date the act or omission became known to the petitioner; or
(2) 7 days after the election results are certified, unless the election was a gubernatorial primary or special primary election, in which case 3 days after the election results are certified.
[An. Code 1957, art. 33, § 12-202; 2002, ch. 291, §§ 2, 4.]
Below you see where the court was required from the start to handle this expeditiously as the circumstance required. This was an ongoing election and as I stated when I filed the injunction on September 26, 2014------we were coming close to 60 days from filing. You see the requirement of filing the appeal within 5 days after decision. When the court clerk mails the decision on October 3----a Friday-----and plainiff receives it October 6, 2014 one knows plaintiff could not meet the appeal timeline, which was the point. The Clerk of Court signed the decision on September 22, 2014 and SHOULD HAVE MAILED THE DECISION ON SEPTEMBER 23, 2014. The plaintiff would have had 3 days to respond with an appeal. Now, the Clerk may not expedite the mailing of decisions having 30 days to appeal but the Clerk knows Maryland law and knew this case had the 5 day appeal timeline. This action in itself along with the clerk's office accepting a motion for injunction after the court case was dismissed just so I would not know the case date of dismissal is grounds for special ruling on my ability to appeal.
THIS SHOULD NOT HAPPEN AT ALL AND IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. ARBITRARY PROCESSES IN THE COURT SYSTEM ALLOW INDIVIDUAL CASES TO BE UNDERMINED BY LACK OF CONSISTENCY OF PROCEDURES. THIS IS HOW DEVELOPING WORLD NATIONS HANDLE RULE OF LAW.
MARYLAND STATUTES AND CODES Section 12-203 - Procedure. Listen § 12-203. Procedure.
(a) In general.- A proceeding under this subtitle shall be conducted in accordance with the Maryland Rules, except that:
(1) the proceeding shall be heard and decided without a jury and as expeditiously as the circumstances require;
(2) on the request of a party or sua sponte, the chief administrative judge of the circuit court may assign the case to a three-judge panel of circuit court judges; and
(3) an appeal shall be taken directly to the Court of Appeals within 5 days of the date of the decision of the circuit court.
(b) Expedited appeal.- The Court of Appeals shall give priority to hear and decide an appeal brought under subsection (a) (3) of this section as expeditiously as the circumstances require.
[An. Code 1957, art. 33, § 12-203; 2002, ch. 291, §§ 2, 4.]
All of my evidence of exclusion and violations of 501c3 and FCC laws were easily evident. I had the postings by the organizations themselves of candidate exclusion, media coverage that highlighted the candidate exclusion, and personal email conversation between the candidate and the organization as I fought to be included. THE EVIDENCE WAS OVERWHELMING AND WITH MERIT. There was no way for a judge to pretend there was not
CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE.
Had we had the trial on September 22, 2014 instead of a dismissal I would have been able to present what would have been without a doubt evidence that the election results may have been changed by these election irregularities. By not allowing it to come to trial they are blocking not only my opportunity for justice but the precedent set by a ruling in my favor. They want no record of these kinds of complaints.
THIS IS WHY WE NEED TO FILL THE COURTS WITH THESE KINDS OF COMPLAINTS AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE GIVEN DUE PROCESS.
MARYLAND STATUTES AND CODES Section 12-204 - Judgment. Listen § 12-204. Judgment.
(a) In general.- The court may provide a remedy as provided in subsection (b) or (c) of this section if the court determines that the alleged act or omission materially affected the rights of interested parties or the purity of the elections process and:
(1) may have changed the outcome of an election already held; or
(2) may change the outcome of a pending election.
(b) Act or omission that changed election outcome.- If the court makes an affirmative determination that an act or omission was committed that changed the outcome of an election already held, the court shall:
(1) declare void the election for the office or question involved and order that the election be held again at a date set by the court; or
(2) order any other relief that will provide an adequate remedy.
(c) Act or omission that may change outcome of pending election.- If the court makes an affirmative determination that an act or omission has been committed that may change the outcome of a pending election, the court may:
(1) order any relief it considers appropriate under the circumstances; and
(2) if the court determines that it is the only relief that will provide a remedy, direct that the election for the office or question involved be postponed and rescheduled on a date set by the court.
(d) Clear and convincing evidence.- A determination of the court under subsection (a) of this section shall be based on clear and convincing evidence.
[An. Code 1957, art. 33, § 12-204; 2002, ch. 291, §§ 2, 4.]
Below you see the process that should occur in filing and processing a complaint through Maryland Circuit Court. All I had to do as a plaintiff was file the complaint with copies for each defendant with the Baltimore City Circuit Court clerk's office and the case is given a # and the file opened. This happened July 11, 2014, clearly within the 3 day after election certification. THIS IS WHEN THE TIMELINE BEGINS.
What the court might say is that when I missed that 5 day timeline for appeal the court has no redress in moving this case forward. The appeal process is over and that includes the right for a second appeal called a petition for a writ of certiorari. This is why it was so important to time the lower court decision and the secrecy behind that date to eliminate all of the appealing options.
If you think this is an isolated case you do not know there is widespread claims of being denied Due Process because of the same reasons I give in my case. IT IS SYSTEMIC WITHIN THE MARYLAND COURT SYSTEM.
We have a lot of work to do to reform Maryland's enforcement of Rule of Law and repairing court process to allow Due Process and Equal Protection. This is what a candidate for office means when they shout for oversight and accountability. These arbitrary actions only happen because these officials are told to do it by higher up and that they know they will not be held accountable. Let's all work to rebuild Rule of Law in Maryland and
STOP THE NEO-LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL FROM DISMANTLING RULE OF LAW GIVING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE NO RECOURSE.
General Information Regarding Filing a Civil Case
The rules for filing a civil case are in the Maryland Rules of Procedure, Title 2, Civil Procedure – Circuit Court (Chapters 100 through 600). Click here for the on-line Maryland Laws available from Maryland State Law Library.
A civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the court. Again, a company cannot represent itself.
The caption of the complaint should be “In Montgomery County Circuit Court, Maryland”. The case caption should also include the name, address and telephone number of the Plaintiff (initiated by) and the name and address of the Defendant (filed against).
In the body of the complaint, state the facts of your case and what relief you are seeking from the court. If you are requesting a trial by jury, this should be stated at the end of your complaint and should be titled as such. The document must also be signed by the Plaintiff/person filing the case.
In addition to the original, one copy of the complaint must be provided for each defendant. You might also want to make a copy for your record.
An appeal is a proceeding in which a party to the case disagrees with the Circuit Court judge’s ruling and wants the case to be heard in a higher court. The appeal has to be made within 30 days after the final judgment is entered. The appeal is noted in the Circuit Court to the Court of Special Appeals if a defendant in a criminal case or either party in a civil or family law case does not agree with the court decision.
Once an appeal is filed with the Appeals Clerk at the Circuit Court (located in the court’s Civil and Family Law window), all necessary original papers, including the original transcript (to be provided by the person filing the appeal) are sent to the Court of Special Appeals by the deadline provided in the order from the Court of Special Appeals.
Filing Fees: $110.00 (cash, money order, or check payable to the "Clerk of Court"). No credit cards accepted.
Appeals filed from the District Court to the Circuit Court
After the Circuit Court decision, if a party wishes to appeal the second time, a petition for a writ of certiorari must be filed with the Court of Appeals in Annapolis in a timely manner.