Posted on 07/30/2015 8:13:38 AM PDT by don-o
In re Clendennen amicus action
The state was ordered, on July 16, to file a response within 14 days. It is possible that the state will file a motion to extend time, which would certainly be granted because the court won;t render a decision without hearing from opposing parties who appear to be noticing the court.
The Clenednnen case seems to be the only one that is active at all. Are the rest just waiting to see how it plays out?
There are at least 20 pending examining trials, one of which is Clendennen. See Retired judge sought to hear Twin Peaks bikers' examining trials - Waco Trib - July 28, 2015
Matthew Clendennen, Hewitt Daniel Pesina, San Antonio Mitchell Bradford, Gordon Juventino H. Montellano, San Antonio Joseph Ortiz, San Antonio Richard R. Donias, San Antonio Lawrence Garcia, San Antonio John Guerrero, San Antonio Tom M. Mendez, San Antonio John R. Wilson, Waco Clayton D. Reed, Burleson Matthew R. Folse, Dallas Morgan J. English, Brenham William H. English, Brenham James A. Venable Jr., Mart Royce Van Vleck, San Antonio Drew David King, Dripping Springs William C. Aikin, Talco Jimmy Lee Pond, Austin Thomas P. Landers, Georgetown
There was also a hearing for Ronald Atterbury, reported at Biker attorney challenges 'cookie-cutter' arrest warrants - Waco Trib - July 2, 2015. From the report, it reads as a bail hearing, but the questioning veered into probable cause. I think this was NOT an examining trial, at least not in Judge Johnson's view, otherwise the more recent reports would not included remarks about "how rare" examining trials are without mentioning Atterbury's hearing.
Atterbury's 2003 Harley Davidson is/was the subject of a forfeiture action.
There are a few other legal actions floating around, like two negligence suits vs. Twin Peaks (one for the estate of a dead biker, one by Don Carlos for loss of business); the complaint against Peterson pending in the Judicial Commission.
Feeding the Hussein-licking fascist trolls really muddies up the thread, and they enjoy as well as profit by it.
Let’s prevent one of their evil pleasures whenever we can.
07/31/2015 Reply brief filed Relator [Relator=Broden/Clendennen] 07/30/2015 Brief filed - oral argument requested State 07/29/2015 Supplemental petition for writ of mandamus filed Relator
The Examining Trial is at the end of next week. Right?
With the order to recuse Peterson, that date may be up in the air. I'd take that as the earliest.
I sure would like to find links to the briefs! Meanwhile, Aging Rebel will have to do.
Quite a contrast to what is happening in Cincinnati.
Some parallels too. The DA in both places is working to suppress information from the public.
The attorney representing Clendennen, one of the Twin Peaks defendants charged with engaging in organized criminal activity during a shootout between police, and members of the Cossacks and Bandidos Motorcycle Clubs, wrote to the U.S. Attorney and the Department of Justice saying that the allegations in the affidavit of warrantless arrest are defective because they specify no individual probable cause that he committed the offense. ..."I have also been provided credible information that Reyna and members of his staff were told by Waco Police Sgt. J.R. Price that the criminal complaints did not support most of the arrests and that other police officers refused to sign the complaints."
Found while searching for the reply brief filed by Reyna, in the gag order case, and Broden's response to the State's reply.
This is the first I've seen that some of the Waco police are alleged to have recognized the cookie-cutter affidavit as deficient. Looking forward to seeing the the Examining Trial judge follows my speculation, doubling down and finding probable cause where none exists.
If you feel like doing some "legal reading," Suits Against Public Officials in Their Individual Capacity | Federal Practice Manual for Legal Aid Attorneys gives the broad outlines with case citations for immunity to the judges and prosecutor involved in depriving a person of civil rights. The general rule is "absolute immunity for judicial/prosecutorial acts."
Previously posted this thread. Took eight years to get the probable cause ruling in a mass arrest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.