Opinion

MALOUFF, CHARLES a Jr.

Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
Filed: Jan 5, 2015
Status: Published
Cited by: 0 cases
Authority: More cited than 3.0%

The opinion

December 22, 2014

Justice Sharon Keller

Presiding Judge Court of Criminal Appeals RECEIVED IN

P.O. Box 12308 Capitol Station COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Austin, TX 78711

This document contains some JAN 0 5 Z015

RE: 03-13-00723CR

D-1-DC-13-904021A pages that ar~ of p~or quality ""'"" A osta, Clerk

at the time of 1magmg. AYJJ'Ud C ·

Dear Judge Keller,

I am co~ing to you in an attempt at preventing a furtherance

of a miscarriage of justice. I am in dire straits, and I am

pleading for help!

M. Ariel Payan is my Appellate Attorney of record, and I have

an irrepairable Conflict of Interest with Payan.

As you can see by the enclosed documents and civil rights

complaints, Payan and his wife are more than material witnesses in

criminal conduct and gross violations of State and Federal law,

Texas and United States Constitution's Rights of Due Process,

Judicial Misconduct on the State Trial Judge, Karen Sage Complaint

No. CJC No. 14-0~26-01, and egregious violations of the American

Bar Association Model Rules of Professional Conduct, by Travis

County District Attorney's Holly Taylor, my Prosecutor, Susan

Oswalt, Greg Coxx and RoseMary Lehmberg, and my two trial attor-

neys, Jackie Wood and Tamera: Needles, and Payan hims~lf.

This fundamental miscarriage of justice and obscene Depriv-

ation of Rights not only to myself, but my co-defendant, Mary-Jo

Woodall as well. The State's malicious and vindictive efforts to

cover multiple felonies, including Attempted Murder, through Payan's

negligence and abandonment caused me to file a 132 page Brief with

over 1800 pages and photos, not including the two co's of Tri~l

Court records in a Writ of Habeas Corpus received by your office,

WR82,475-01 on 11/24/14. This after being dismissed by Sage, in

another innapropriate action, as she is the subject of a Judicial

Misconduct complaint and a Federal Civil Rights Complaints on her,

and her refusal to act on my Motion(s) To Remove Counsel and Bond

For Certain Applicant's leaves me wrongfully imprisoned.

I have not been conferred with over, nor provided a copy of

Appellate Counsel's M. Ariel Payan's Brief. However, I have been

informed through outside sources, that he has made several Patently_

False and Malicious statements in the Brief that must be Adamantly

objected to!

According to Jeffery Kyle, Clerk, Third Court of Appeals,

that Court cannot remove Payan, and I cannot be present at oral

arguments. I have bar grievances and civil rights complaints

filed against Payan and any representation he provides me is a fur-

therance of this miscarriage of justice.

Your Honor, how do I get rid of Payan and get a conflict free

attorney?

Respectfully,

Charlie Malouff

CBQLBS A. ULOOPP, JR. §

AD CHARLIE IIALOOPF

v. § CASE RO. 03-13-00723-CR

S'J.'Aft OP 'lBXAS

.MO'l'IOR '1'0 REMOVE APPODrl'KD APPELLA"l'B COORSEL

'1'0 "filE BOROBABLB JUDGE OF SAID COURT

Now comes, Petitioner, Charlie Malouf£, pro se, ~ the

~terest of justice to move the Honorable Court to remove appoin-

ted Appellate Counsel, M. Ariel Payan, from this case and appoint

another attorney who is not intimately involved with Petitioner's

Trial Counsel; the Trial Judge; employees of the Travis County

District Attorney; the Travis County Sheriff's Office; the United

States Attorney's office; the City of Jonestown; or persons who

testified as Government Witnesses in Petitioner's trial in the

299th District Court of Travis county, case No. D-1-DC-13-904201.

DISCUSSioR

Petitioner was convicted of Securing A Document By Deception

in State Court. M. Ariel Payan was appointed Appellate Counsel

by trial Judge, Karen Sage. An' irrepairable Conflict of Interest

has been created by Payan's appointment, unproffessional conduct,

abandomnemt and failure to recuse, furthering a fundamental mis-

cariage of justice.

CJIABLBS ·~ IIALOUPf' I

.lR §

AD: CBARLD IIALOUPI'

v. § CASE RD. 03-13-00723CR

D-1-DC-13-904021 A

S'l"AD OP 'rBDS

IIO'fiOR POll BORD !!OR CBilrADI APPLICAlftS

'fO 'ftiB RORORABLB JUDGB OP SUD COUR'I'

Row comes, Applicant, Charlie Malouff, pro se, in the

interest of justice to move the Honorable Court to GRART Appli-

cant's prayer for bond under Article 11.65,. Code of Criminal Pro-

cedure, while seeking relief from judgement in the above·criminal

case.

DISCUSSION

Applicant was convicted of Securing A Document By Deception

in State Court. A motion to remove Appellate counsel M. Ariel

Payan resulting from an irrepairabl.e Confl.ict of Interest, was

entered at the 'lhird Court of .Ajppeals on october 30, 2014. An

Application for Writ of Habeas corpus Seeking Relief From Final

Felony Conviction Under Code of· Criminal Procedure, Article 11.07,

As A Result of Violations of Article.1, sections 8, 9, and 10 of

the Texas Constitution and the 'irst, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth

and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution Re-

sulting from Police, Prosecutorial, Judicial and Professional Mis-

conduct was filed with the District Court of Travis County, Texas,

Flied in The Distlict Court

of Travis County, Texae

TRULINCS 66089179- MALOUFF, CHARLIE- Unit: BAS-C-A

FROM: 66089179

TO: Malouff, Charles

SUBJECT: Payan

DATE: 05/30/2014 08:57:08 PM

5-26-14

Mr. Payan,

I want to be sure there is no doubt as to the irreparable Conflict of Interest in your representation. This is not a politically correct

letter nor is it intended to be. I don't know what they taught you in LAW SCHOOL, but I will tell you what they taught us in the

POLICE ACADEMY.

Attempted Murder is a CRIME. Sabotage is a CRIME. Destruction of a Federally Funded Energy Project is a CRIME. Theft of

Trade Secrets is a CRIME. Industrial Espionage is a CRIME. Destruction of Evidence is a CRIME. Theft is a CRIME. Abuse

of Office is a CRIME. Official Oppression is a CRIME. Conspiracy is a CRIME. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE is a CRIME.

ALL found in the Texas Penal Code and/or the United States Code. Do I need to keep going? Wood fucked my case because

of her reliance that her "best friend", Sage, would show her favoritism.

The windmills in the Jonestown Wind Project were SABOTAGED. That is a CRIME. There are POLICE REPORTS FILED

months BEFORE the Gestapo showed up at my door. People tried to KILL me .. not once, but twice! {They should have gotten

me when they had the chance. Fortunately, God wasn't ready for me.) That is a CRIME x2. Toby Miller and his fuckbuddy

Lori Carter are covering up multiple felonies (CRIMES) committed by Miller and his cohorts, and CONDONED by Holly Taylor,

YOUR BUDDY, and the District Attorney. And, Sage violated my right to due process, IN ADDITION to committing CRIMES for

pecuniary interests in her re-election. MY constitutional rights have been GROTESQUELY violated, leaving Mary Jo out of this

for the moment. Am I pissed ... YOU FUCKING BET I AM. Do I have a right to be pissed .. YOU FUCKING BET I DO!! Am I

going to sit around and let you fuck me some more? NO FUCKING WAY!

You, Jackie and Tamara made those statements, and at the time were sincere in your comments. You had no way to know my

reaction. The fact that you said in your email ... the statements "WE" made ..... "WE" means not only is that an admission that

not only you but at least two of you, DID make them, but the three of you are now getting your stories together because YOU

THREE FUCKED UP. THAT, MR. PAYAN, is CONSPIRACY to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE (do I need to give you the Black's

definition of OBSTRUCTION of JUSTICE?), because not only did I file the Judicial Misconduct against Sage (which YOU have

refused to do) I filed a CRIMINAL COMPLAINT (which YOU did not do either) with the Texas Attorney General's Office for

Abuse of Office for Pecuniary Interest, and Official Oppression. And, your attempt to thwart that by trying to suck wind on your

statements. The fact is, that is OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. A CRIME. CONSPIRACY, also a CRIME, is two or more

persons, with the intent... and the three of you knowingly and intentionally trying to thwart criminal charges against Jackie

Wood's "best friend" Karen Sage, is CONSPIRACY. AND, I would bet a dollar to a -doughnut, you have discussed this with not

only your wife, but your_ pal Holly Taylor and her husband .. as you said, "We are a tight nit group and we all talk." .Further adding

to your efforts to OBSTRUCT JUSTICE because no one has filed any motions or made any complaints to the Attorney General

or U.S. Attorney. Not only in the Abuse of Office by Sage, but in the Destruction of a Federal Energy Project. In addition to

your inaction CRIMINAL CONDUCT, it violates the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Conduct 8.04 (4).

You ARE a material witness to CRIMES, and Professional Misconduct Mr. Payan. As a material witness in both State and

Federal CRIMINAL actions, and professional license administrative action, you cannot represent me, or stay on as my counsel

for ANY length of time, as each day you remain violates my right to due process, and is furtherance of your intentional

OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE as you are doing nothing in light of your responsibility to report. I didnt put up with Miller and

Cook's criminal conduct and I wont put up with Sages or yours.

Sage and the District Attorney, with their biased Austin American Statesman (go read the articles during my trial), may control

what happens in their little circle, but I PROMISE, I will be out of here shortly and I WILL BE ALL OVER THE INTERNET,

INTERNATIONAL NEWS AND WASHINGTON DC. This was FEDERAL FUNDS!! And those are FEDERAL CRIMES begin

COVERED UP!!

So, like I said. I will make this very Clear. Get OFF my case and get me an attorney who's spouse does not work for the District

Attorney, who is NOT fucking Toby Miller, his wife, Lori Carter, Jackie Wood or Tamara Needles or is 'best friends" with Karen

Sage before you dig yourself deeper into CRIMINAL CONDUCT.

Charlie Malouff

TRULINCS 66089179 - MALOUFF, CHARLIE- Unit: BAS-C~A

FROM: 66089179

TO: Malouff, Charles

SUBJECT: Conflict of Interest

DATE: 05/23/2014 12:09:23 PM

5-22-14

Mr. Payan,

In light of the circumstances, I have given this ser~ous thought. I feel the irreparable Conflict of Interest has come to pass.

I have filed a Judicial Misconduct with the State Judicial Commission, a formal complaint with the TX Attorney General, formal

complaints to Congressmen Bob Goodlatte, Chairman House Judiciary Committee; Daryl lssa Chairman House Oversight

Committee; Senator Ted Cruz; and the U.S. Department of Justice. I am in the process of contacting numerous international

news agencies. Austin news has proven to be biased. As I said in my previous letter, I have NO INTENTION. of letting this

~~ .

We both know you and Jackie made those statements. Your earlier response saying they were "taken out of context" is an

admission they were made. Sucking wind now to say they were out of context, considering the magnitude of circumstance,

doesn't cut it with me. We both know Sage "GOT IT". She knew I was innocent. She knew Taylor was still hiding Brady. She

knew Carter and Miller were liars and full of shit. Speaking of SHIT, she read just about every piece of discover BEFORE it was

brought into trial. That is in trial statements early on with Joe Turner, over Lori Carter's, multi-author, original police report that

she LIED about on the stand, trying to pass off a 25 page document when it the actual report was over 225 pages and actually

ended up being even larger.

Sage's decisions WERE POLITICALLY motivated. SOMEONE WANTS THAT WIND ENERGY PROJECT DESTROYED.

Pecuniary interest is illegal. Plain and simple. That said, you are now a hostile defense witness in criminal allegations against

Abuse of Office for Pecuniary Interest, Official Oppression, Judicial Misconduct and whatever else comes out of this. AND,

since there will be no attorney client privilege, you are also subject to interrogation over what you do know about the case in

general, as this is a COVER UP FOR MULTIPLE FELONIES AND CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS.

What needs to be done immediately is a demand for new trial considering these allegations, a change of venue, and formal

criminal investigations. Her denial of these motions is further proof of her politically motivated intentions to convict and imprison

INNOCENT PEOPLE!

As a material witness, who is going to be contradictory to my allegations, I cannot in any way see how you can effectively give

me the zealous advocacy I am entitled to, or how, in any way shape or fashion, I can have any attorney client privilege with you,

let alone trust in your ability to provide me effective counsel. Your attitude about Sage, and your relationship with Holly Taylor

and the District Attorney's Office, is too compromised to give me effective representation against Wrongful Conviction, False

Imprisonment and the Abuse of Office and Official Oppression for Pecuniary Interest.

I am still working on getting a polygraph examiner. Thanks to the Debarment action by DOE, that has been pushed back a

little. The Judicial Misconduct is addressed in that action too. I have demanded, as my right under the Code of Federal

Regulations to have a hearing, and I have demanded that hearing be in front of both Congressional and Senate committees.

Copies of my letters to DOE and OPR have been sent to multiple legislators and others.

I stand by my request of you finding me an attorney who's spouse does not work for the District Attorney; is best friends with

Sage or anyone at the DA; or is fucking Toby Miller, Lori Carter, Jackie Wood or Tamara Needles. This needs to be done as

soon, as possible as further delay will only be taken as intentional action to continue to violate my rights and exacerbate the

COVER UP of Attempted Murder, the Destruction of a Federally Funded Energy Project, Theft of Trade Secrets, Destruction of

Evidence, Abuse of Office, Official Oppression, Coercion, Falsifying Time Sheets, Malfeasance by Federal Agents, Corruption,

Miranda and Brady Violations, Selective Prosecution, Prosecutorial and Judicial Misconduct.

Respectfully,

...._____

. r·

Charlie Malouff

TRULINCS 66089179- MALOUFF, CHARLIE- Unit: BAS-C-A

. .

----------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM: Harris, Stacey

TO: 66089179

SUBJECT: Ariel

DATE: 03/21/2014 06:51:01 AM

'Mr. Malouff,

I certainly respect your efforts.

the

.....__trial. transcript is due by 4-2 according to the 3rd court of appeals web site

the court reporter has requested a 30 day extension to turn in you record

as I put in my initial letter to you, this is a long process and will take quite a bit of time.

for instance at the current rate it is taking to put the record together, I would not be surprised if the appellant's brief is not filed till

september or october, or possibly later.

most jury trials take 3 to 5 days and have less than 50 exhibits, and the records are turned in within 180 days of sentence. Your

trial was a month long, and the volume of exhibits exceeds that of a capital murder trial. that means it takes loriger, no matter

how inpatient a person gets, it takes a long time.

The delay is standard, read the initial letter I sent you again. Whatever Judge Sages decisions were or the rationale behind

them, _they have no bearing on the procedures of the 3rd Court.

Also I think you are misconstruing what~told you about the 'political' nature of the rulings on certain of your motions, and

pulling that one phrase out of context otOU'fconversation.

Sincerely,.

Ariel Payan

TRULINCS 66089179- MALOUFF, CHARLIE- Unit: BAS-C-A

FROM: 66089179

TO: Malouff, Charles

SUBJECT: Ariel

DATE: 05/11/2014 04:42:32 PM

5-10-14

Mr. Ariel Payan

1012 Rio Grande

Austin, TX 78701

Dear Mr. Payan,

As you know, I am a decorated, and honorably retired, chief of police, and Military Veteran with 29 years service to my country.

I was shit on by the government for the conduct of another, while I was off fighting a war, back in 2006. While I tried to put in for

a Presidential Pardon, it was NOT denied and left open for me to re-apply. Recently, I found the United States v James V Vest

case, and it is clear what the intent of Congress was on those laws, further infuriating me as to the misconduct and abuse of ·

power of the government. Now I am in jail for crimes I did not commit, perpetuated by the cover up of criminal conduct by

persons in positions of trust in the government, and decisions made by a judge for picunary interest.

The case against me here is not just a simple abuse of power, but an outrageous and unconstitutionally oppressive miscarriage

of justice. We are talking about violations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments, Articles I and II

of the U.S. Constituti.on, I dont know all of the Texas Constitution violations (by amendment or article), and multiple violations of

Federal and State criminal· laws, by the police, prosecutor and state trial judge, compounded by the ineffective assistance of my

trial attorney who is also the judges best friend, and now further complicated by the Department of Energy in Washington, DC,

at the urgance of the Travis County District Attorney. ·

In addition to responding to the Department of Energy, I have sent a formal complaint to the US Department of Justice, Office of

Professional Responsibility, for an official investigation. Additionally, I am doing everything in my power to get a Congressional

Investigation into this case, and the conduct of DOE, the District Attorney, Miller and Sage. I have had it. I am NOT a criminal

minded person! ·

There is no question the statements made in my allegations regarding Sage are true, and will be shown as true in multiple

polygraph examinations. I have no intention of letting that go. I have found several cases now where the judges ruled against

the attorneys in similar cases, stating "it is not the context of the statements made by the attorney, but the fact that the attorney

made the statements."

It is clear this is a complicated and complex case. It is also clear that I have multiple grounds of Ineffective Assistance of

Counsel, and Bar Grievances against Jackie and Tamara and Wannamaker, and a Judicial Misconduct on Sage.

Cutting to the chase, you know as well as I do, your "good old boy we are lawyer buddies association", is going to do what you

can to fight me in my arguments and grievances. I expect that. I will be out of here in 8 months. Shortly thereafter, I will parole

out of TDC should I go there. I promise all my grievances, supporting documents and video, and polygraph results will be

posted all over the internet and on TV. Austin papers may be biased in favor of the DA, but international news loves US

government abuse to its own people. Social media has proven its effective against government oppression.

That said, right now there is a crack in the sidewalk you and I are walking on. While I do not want to see it become an

uncrossable gorge, I have been denied my rights to see the evidence against me by Jackie, along with her constant refusal to

get me important court. documents and evidence I left with her prior to my incarceration. Not just for my federal case, but for

important exculpatory review for my state case. I am NOT an idiot. As she said, no one knows more about my case than I do.

There is NO RECORD on file of Jackie, or Tamara EVER coming to Bastrop to see me. There should only be three visits

during the times I was incarcerated in Travis County Jail of their visits, and I think the longest was 45 minutes. THAT IS

BULLS HIT for a capital case that is as complicated and complex as this. As you said, my trial was longer than a capital murder

trial, and we didnt put on a defense because Jackie Wood KNEW Sage "has my back." You know it and so do I. And, so do

they! Then, to top it off with this shit with Sage and her re-election ...

Right now, I really feel it is in both of our best interest you consider recusing yourself from my counsel. The facts that you will

not file complaints with the Judicial Commission against Sage, or the Bar against Wood, or file a motion for a new trial; your

wife works for the District Attorney and the statements you made regarding Sage; your telling me to my face, that day of the last

TRULINCS 66089179 - MALOUFF, CHARLIE - Unit: BAS-C-A

hearing with Sage, you were going to argue Taylor's motions and challenge Carter's Affidavit, and you stood there and did

nothing, has disintegrated and prejudiced any level of trustworthiness that has been developed between us, so far. And, to lie

about those statements will irrepairably disintegrate any level of honesty that I have in respect for you as an officer of the court,

further prejudicing my rights to due process and a fair appeal. I already lost a fair trial, by people I was supposed to trust.

However, in the interest of fairness, and the benefit of the doubt to your integrity and intentions as an officer of the court, at this

stage, please tell me how you think this crack can be patched? If it cannot be patched, before you become a target of more

critical oversight, micromanagement and lAC, please consider finding me an appellate attorney who's spouse does not work for

the District Attorney; is best friends with Sage; is not fucking Toby Miller, Lori Carter, Jackie Wood or Tamara Needles; and,

·who is experienced in both Texas and Federal Constitutional laws in a complex and complicated case, further compounded by

the DOE"s latest act of Official Oppression at the behest of the Travis County District Attorney.

I admit, I AM an ASSHOLE!! I have never denied that. I will tell you that to your face and put it in writing. Being an asshole

does not make me a criminal. But, I am also a fair person, and every man carries his own weight, integrity, honesty and

trustworthiness. If you think you have the balls, integrity, and honesty to step up to the plate and not fuck me around anymore,

please arrange to come visit with me in a face to face and let's get this worked out. Otherwise, as time is of the essence, and in

both of our interests, please find me a competent appellate attorney without the baggage stated above, to zealously, honestly

and ethically represent me, and move on.

Respectfully,

Charlie Malouff

TRULINCS 66089179 - MALOUFF, CHARLIE - Unit: BAS-C-A

--------------------------------------------------------------------------~--------------------------------

FROM: 66089179

TO: Malouff, Charles

SUBJECT: ARIEL

DATE: 03/29/2014 01:00:32 PM

3-28-14

Mr. Payan,

Both Jackie and Tamara told me that " ... Holly Taylor should not be prosecuting this case." YOU told me Holly Taylor should not

have P,.osecuted this case. Jackie and Tamara both told me there needed to be a Special Prosecutor. This was AFTER 1

sUIDnitted my 2255 and Jackie and Joe Turner both got copies of it. I cannot believe that they did not address this to the Court.

My 2255 alleging Police Misconduct and Selective Prosecution was submitted over a month before my state trial. It boggles me

to believe that none of the newspapers did not ·contact Karen Sage for comment before or during my trial. If not, they sure as

heck contacted the DA. And, because Karen Sage made her decisions to deny me my motions for mistrial, dismissal, Franks

hearing and other motions, for POLITICAL considerations, someone I am sure intimately GOilnected to Rosemary Lehmberg,

contacted her. I WILL find out who. Just a matter of when~ Holly Taylor, m~ prosecutor, was specifically named in accusations

of the covering up of criminal conduct, Constitutional .and Civil Rights violations and violations of Federal law in my 2255. Yet

she still stayed on as my prosecutor. What part of violation's of the Constitution and Due Process am I missing??

The Preamble: A Lawer's Responsibilities in the Texas Rules of Professional Conduct (see attached), Section 1 states you are

my representative and an officer of the legal system and that you have an obligation to maintain he highest standards of ethical

conduct. Section 2 states, as my advocate you have a responsibility tci zealously defend me. Section 3 says you are to

zealously pursue my interests within the bounds of the law. My instructions and complaints not only fall within the bounds of the

law under the Constitution's of both Texas and the United States, but also the very rules that regulate you as attorney's and

judges. 1have legitimate complaints of violations of law. Section 8 says you have a responsibility to assure these regulations

are undertaken in public interest and not in self-interested concern and any neglect of these responsibilities compromises both

the profession and the public interest. Consitutional violations of this magnitude are definately public interest.

The Texas Attorney General investigates the corruption of public officials. I am instructing you to, in addition to filing the

appropriate complaints with the Texas Bar Association, and Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct, file a formal complaint with

the AG. The Obstruction of Justice, covering up crimes under the color of authority, and for POLITICAL reasons are included in

the term CORRUPTION, as defined on page 397 of the Black's Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition.

YQ!!_need to read BOWEN and VIDRINE. Bot~ are beginning to pale i~ comparison in a precedent MISC~RRIAGE OF

JUSTICE. BOWEN was mostly the egregious conducf of the prosecution. VIDRINE was mosty the egreg1ous and outrageous

misconduct of the police. THIS not only involves the prosecutors, but the cops, elected officials, multiple government agencies,

local, state and Federal, AND the presiding state JUDGE. AND, the MALICIOUS, VINDICTIVE, and SELECTIVE, prosecution

of TWO. INNOCENT people FOR PERSONAL GAIN and POLITICAL FAVORTISM!!!!!I!!!I!!!I!!!!!!!!!I!

Sincerely,

Charlie Malouff

TRULINCS 66089179 - MALOUFF, CHARLIE- Unit: BAS-C-A

--------------------~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FROM: 66089179

TO: Malouff, Charles

SUBJECT: ARIEL

DATE: 03/22/2014 06:34:04 AM

3-24-14

Mr. Payan,

The Supreme Court just ruled against Terry. That is how I found this. I have been yelling and screaming since the day I was

arrested, this case is NOT about fraud or deception, or insider information, but the COVERING UP of Miller's crimes,

Constitutional and Civil Rights violations by Carter and Taylor, and the DESTRUCTION OF A FEDERALLY FUNDED WIND

PROJECT BY DOE, THE DA AND JONESTOWN!! What part of FEDERAL CRIME do you people NOT understand? I said it

then, and I stand by it now!

Sage is a judge who supposedly "GOT IT," according to her BEST FRIEND, AND Tamara Needles, who has no stake in their

friendship. Political office does not give imunity to persons engaged in or in covering up crimes. There is NOTHING

MISCONSTRUED in my statements!!!

So you are aware, I was, a long time ago, directly involved in .SEVERAL elected offical corruption cases. Three specifically,

that I will address here, were, former Speaker of the House, Jim Wright, who took a forced retirement, former Congressman

Albert Bustamante, who finally got three years on contract fraud, but was involved in much more, and Bob Bullock, our former

Lt. Governor, who, in his early years; and when he was Comptroller, was directly connected with the Mafia Kingpin, Carlos

Marcello. It was I that brought that connection to light through an investigation I was conducting (Lead Investigator) over in

Houston. The outcome is irrelevant. He is gone. There are more. What is important now, is YOU, Jackie nor anyone else can .

tell me this is NOT a cover up to multiple crimes, state and federal. I can show you MULTIPLE cases, with convictions, of

elected officials, JUDGES included, in recent years, and in Texas alone, that were involved in corruption. More and more cases

against District Attorney's wrong doings are coming to light

I am VERY SERIOUS about my allegations and my intentions to get a federal investigation into this cover up. I am not doing

this just to blow smoke up peoples asses. There are pictures, and statements, and witnesses, and physical evidence to these

crimes!! Its called EVIDENCE. PHYSICAL EVIDENCE. You, as attorney's are officers of the court. You have a DUTY TO

REPORT! If it involves attorneys and judges playing games, so be it. It is already full of crooked cops and prosecutors.

1am NOT a criminal minded person and according to Jackie, EVERYONE knows we were WRONGED. Mary Jo and I already

knew this. Mary Jo committed NO CRIME and for that matter, I COMMITTED NO CRIME. There is absolutely NO WAY Mary

Jo could have ever gotten a fair trial in Sage's court, not after this blillshit. ·

1. 1told Jackie, Tom Walsh, Kristen and the first lady atty that was before Tamara, in the first big meeting in Jackie's office, that

we could not get a fair trial in Sage's court.

2. There needed to be a change of venue.

3. Jackie told me then that we didnt want a change of venue and "Karen is my best friend," and "this is good we have her."

4. Jackie and Tamara told me there needed to be a SPECIAL PROSECUTOR. Duh!

There is more. Please do not take me lightly, or ignore me on my instructions, or my participation in this appeal process. It will

not end up good. See you at polygraph.

Respectfully,

.. . . . .. ·-····· ... _... ,._,

. .

··' ······ ·:· ................_:"'·.-·.-· .. ·· .: ... .... - .... _.....~.~·· ...... -- .......... _- ..... --·.., .... __ ..

·~. , -:-·~·";·~- .....- ... -._ .. , .... ~-···------· ...... .

. ..... .: . ~ ..... ....... :. . ·-·-·· .--- ·----· . ·-·

t\.:1_4 . ........:.. . _: ........ ·_: .... ·... ,"_:_, ____ .... ~ -··--·- -· -----~--~~---· ~- .........•:· ........ :.: --~--~-~--- 7

.:_ _____ ••• _ .. • . . __ · - ~- _ .•.

A~.tf_~- ,_ _ _,·. . :· • · -·----·-'· -'--- ·- ----~----· ·"· . :.~:

·ex. iz 'lor> l ~ -.··------·-- ·-: -----·

··· o · ·• .. _c ••.•...•....... . . . . . . . . . ::.. • . . ··.. . . .

... _. . ·lA. · !Jv/ l.£-~ ·JetU --··--:··-·-

. -v\J . ~~ ·. _$(;~j~Vl~ -~ .·. . . . . . . -·. . . . ...

..• . .• • •. • . •·.· · · · · · ~· .• -. g;;~~-0 :~;~~-:-~=~-=~~~-~~~:~---~-~-~=

.. ·---· . . - t> aw~-.c- 1?_)~-!?!..~_'f'-J_ ·--'~-~-~_..,.___ _/f____~---~--.fu . . . . .:. . . ---·- .

w ·-·- f-~ .MUL~:f~!;v~~~f:,-~-~T_we- e,~~ .---- ..... .

· ·~ .:--~..___ ·.(h..-J_~-~~--------~c.R.-~-~~:?.7"~~'?~-:-·-oi.:.:-"_V_l_Q!"\,-~~---:.b.1.~---G~~"'t:._f!_:~-~-

·.__·.-.•..•________________ .:f~2 ~~--:~~~s:;~-fu=~~~~~~::;_: ---7--~----

_____________________ __fft.~-------u~\v'w.t _ _·_~_1_h~L~.l___ {P!J_$_~fY!.~-/- __Jfvj~-h~--- _

··-:--.-=-·····• .~~it.~~~~~~~~n!;~:·:~~~--.:-

-__ . . ·-----··-·---~--- . . . . :. . .:.V_L:~J~-h.~>.,~}_____ :~t. . =r'-':)~~,:~L .. __ :~--------~J)(6L.~-~·-··-~G.-~~~----~:>~-~------ ··---------··

=======~~~~~~==~=

(;ck- . · & .

· . . ·. · do fu . ~- .f,) v\9 r!-. o·( Co~~~ Lu?~. . ·

·----~--=-···~-: ~-oi······~~~-:;_;;g,·-_~3~:JL~:=.v~-- ~~-···;~~·~~--·==

... ·. ....... . ... &ecY$5-<:'f:.l-s.): :f9c S~.Pk'L.~~,<~_L:;"_._c···-· ----~-:.. .

• m» ().,!~ _w~. ••~.:;.L_ ~-':fG "--'-"' "'<:.1'--.Z~f t_ 6l.;±:_ .0f "

_.. • • • • • > u •u • -•• •-• •

~: •. -_·-· · . ···~=::·==::·~-=~---~~~~~~==·-~;=~:~-·~:~~~~,=~:=.:~--=~·--~=

-· .. ··---- --- ------··· ..... -··--···-·--- ~ .~--· -----·- ... ~- ·-- - ---·- --~-·-::.c--·.:._. .:~~-~-----~-~--~-·---~~::_.~·--···- ·--·-····--~~----'-..--------···--······ -···-···----·-·'--······

.. _............ _.......... -.--,....... ,_ .........~---- --.. -;-·:,.. : ........_:.. ___ ...:

;....., .

....:_.~····-':.,._____. ··-·:··-----·------;_-~~-----·:_-:·-·'--.----'-.:._-.. ____ .....~--- =:..--·~·-·----·---:_ . __ ,. _._,___________________ ...... ---------~-~-:

..... .- ..... --~·····---=-·;_.. __ ...... --- - ...... -. ...:.-.•. -- . ·----~----- ........._......._.... ~-,..·····--- -·- - · .

'-..------ ---·- ·~ -~ ., _________. ____._______ --~---• ...... ·--· ----- ......... _~_ . ,_ -~--------- ·-- -- -----------------

February 12, 2014

Mr. Ariel Payan

Attorney at Law

1012 Rio Grande

Austin, Texas 78701

Re: Violations of The Texas Code of Judicial Conduct; Texas Rules of Professional

Conduct: Texas Disciplinary Rules of Conduct; Sixth Amendment Right of Due Process

Mr. Payan:

These issues need to be addressed now versus later. These are the facts of the above violations

of professional conduct and law:

1. When Jackie Wood was first appointed my trial counsel, I expressed serious concerns

regarding the integrity of the 299th District Judge, Karen Sage, because of her relationship

to the Travis County District Attorney, and the Democratic Party. I told her this case was

a case of malicious prosecution perpetrated by Travis County Deputy Sheriff, Toby

Miller and his friends at the District Attorney's office. Jackie told me Karen Sage was

"my best friend," and that their friendship was "a good thing," inferring judicial integrity.

2. In my last visit at the Travis CountyJail with Jackie Wood, just prior to trial, she again

told me Judge Karen Sage was her "best friend" and "Karen has my back." While I do

not have the jail records showing the exact date of the meeting, it was the meeting where

she left me documents addressing both sides witnesses after giving me an email dated 7-

22, 2013, 8:06a.m. (see attached). This was in the visiting room where I met you, on the

3rd floor.

3. During the course of the trial, juror's kept falling asleep. One time, as many as five jurors

were falling asleep and not paying attention. I brought this up to Tamara Needles, my co-

counsel and Jackie. Tamara told me as long as they were falling asleep on the

prosecution, that was a good thing. I made notes on the yellow tablets given to me by

counsel.

After the prosecution "rested," we excused to go back and confer in the visit room. Once

in there, we discussed the jurors falling asleep, and the situation with the jury and where

to go with the defense. According to Jackie and Tamara, we were "losing the jury." I

could see they were falling asleep, but I did not recognize that as "losing the jury." We

had only gone into the prosecution side, and it is incumbent on the defense attorney's to

keep them awake during the defense presentation. In that conversation both Tamara and

Jackie told me Sage "got it!" Jackie said, "Karen's got it!" She told me this several

times. She also said "Karen has my back!" We discussed having Dan Dodson, City

Administrator for the City of Jonestown, and Mike Fox, my former Installation

Supervisor, testifying. Jackie and Tamara both told me we had "disproved" the state's

case. Jackie said she was concerned we were losing the jury; and if we put on a defense

we might lose them. She said we had several week's worth of witnesses. Again, we

discussed at least putting on Dodson and Fox. Again, Jackie said, "Karen has my back!"

Jackie told me she has "a lot of experience with jury's," that I should "trust me" and we

should rest. Tamara was in and out of the room during a lot of the conversation. I told

Jackie I really wanted Fox and Dodson to testify. I was also mad over the Karlson issue.

Jackie said, he, (Karlson) said there was a stack of blank pre-signed papers. I told her I

wanted to see them. And, there was also a power chart, in addition to a video we had of a·

working prototype at the UT JJ Pickle Center, that Karlson had done the testing on, and

that Eric Graham created from Karlson's test somewhere in Discovery. And that the DA

was still hiding that if they had not offered it up. I told her Karlson's declaration was

similar to Fred Herber's because I used Karlson's to create Herber's. They would look

almost the same, side by side. She was insistent she wanted to rest. Jackie told me "trust

me!" I still <;rrgued for Dodson and Fox to testify. Again, she told me "Karen's got it!"

And, "We should rest." And, "trust me!" I told her "I trust you." The rest is history.

4. In our visit at the Travis County Jail, when you hand delivered your letter dated October

22, 2013, in a "let's cut to the chase" conversation, you told me "my wife works for the

prosecutor's office." "We are friends with Holly Taylor and I know her husband." And,

"We all talk." And, "It's a close knit group." You also told me "the judge's decisions

were political." And, ''The judge is not likely to decide on something that can effect her

election."

Combined, your statement's and Jackie's statement's regarding Karen Sage's decision's

based on "political" reasons, considering she is up for re-election, March, 2014, equate to

a violation of the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3, B(2), "A judge should be

faithful to the law and shall maintain professional competence in it. A judge shall not be .

swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear of criticism." And, (5) "A judge

shall perform judicial duties without bias or prejudice."

As in Henderson v. Perry, 399 F. Supp. 2d. 756, June 9, 2005 (Dist. Ct. 5th Cir)

( ... actuated by the instinct of political survival) for you. and Jackie to make those

independent statement's and observations, Sage is clearly concerned with getting political

support from the local Democratic Party, and not in the interests of justice. From this,

Karen Sage violated my rights to due process. Anthony v. Cain, U.S. Dist. LEXIS

100697 (Dist. Ct. 5th Cir. 2009) ( "A judge will, however, violate a defendant's due

process rights if he (she) is biased against the defendant or has an interest in the

outcome of the case."). Personal reward of getting votes and campaign contributions for

re-election, is having an "interest" in the case.

You cannot tell me that the public flack Sage got over the Nestande DWI case, that was

going on early in my trial process (we were both in the papers at the same time), or the

ongoing criminal/disbarment issues the Travis Comity District Attorney, Rosemary

Lehmberg, was going through at the same time of my trial (again sharing front page

coverage), were not weighing on her decisions that could adversely affect her political

support.

Sage heard testimony the jury did not. She was privy to behind closed door

conversations between the defense and the prosecutor. She listened to Miller admit to

falsifying timesheets and committing multiple felonies. She listened to Carter admit to

violating my Miranda and targeting me for free speech, both Constitutional 'violations.

She listened to other Government witnesses, some from agencies that have law ·

enforcement Criminal Investigation sections that reviewed the grant, and searched Mary

Jo Woodall's work computer weeks before Carter applied for her warrants, and the DA's

own forensic auditor all say there was no crime, when "she got it" as described by

Jackie and Tamara, and visibly observed by me, by her throwing her head to the side and

sitting back in her seat with a look of disgust. On August 20th, she even ruled that Carter

mislead the magistrate. It was clear _by the testimony of Carter and Miller, (in Sage's

own words) this was a "travesty of justice." Sage's failure to grant a mistrial, or dismiss

with prejudice, and her rulings and failures to rule on other motion's, her behavior

manifested this ongoing miscarriage of justice rendering my trial so fundamentally

unfair it violated my due process.

According to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Conduct, Rule 8.02 "A lawyer shall not

make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its

truth or falsity concerning the qualification or integrity of a judge." I do not believe you,

Jackie, or Tamara made those statements falsely or recklessly, therefore, I am taking

them as true. As such, judicial integrity over the fairness of my trial, and the eventual

plea bargain agreement of Mary Jo Woodall, based on a pretty good presumption she

would not have gotten a fair trial, is at issue, because Mary Jo never gave me insider

information, or provided me with information that was not authorized by policy or law.

And, the employees of the Texas Comptroller, State Energy Office, all said Mary Jo was

doing her job as proscribed 'by policy and law and there were numerous measures in place

to detect any fraud or wrongdoing. Not to mention, Martin Cano, the Chief of

Enforcement for the Investigations Division, testified HE, along with an IT person,

searched Mary Jo's work computer and a personal USB and gave it all back and allowed

her to continue working because there was no evidence of wrongdoing. In United

States v. Nolen, 172 F. 3d. 362 (5th & 11th Cir. Dec. 2006) the Court states Rule 8.2

"Solely proscribes false or reckless statements questioning judicial qualifications or

integrity."

I provided Jackie with a complete copy of my Federal2255 Motion to Vacate, Cause No.

A-13-CA-572-LY, (see attached) that was filed in Federal District Court, July 9th, 2013, a

month prior to our going to trial. In that motion, I allege corruption, cover-up,

destruction of evidence, the destruction of a Federally funded energy project, and police

misconduct, among other things, on the part of the District Attorney and others. That

Motion was also sent to all of the Austin news media outlets, Travis County

Commissioner's and Senator's and Congressmen. I intend to investigate if there was any

contact, from any party to Sage regarding this case prior to, or during trial, again

furthering integrity issues.

My next question is; does the Texas Disciplinary Rule of Professional Conduct Rule

8.03 (a) "A lawyer having knowledge that another lawyer has committed a violation of

applicable rules of professional conduct that raises a substantial question as to that

lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects shall inform

the appropriate disciplinary authority, apply to Sage? I know it applies to you, Jackie

and Tamara. While she is a judge, she is also a lawyer.

According to the Board of Directors of the State Bar of Texas, Model Rules of

Professional Conduct Rule 8.3 (1983), "A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has

committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial

question of that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other

respects shall inform the appropriate authority. Clemons v McNamee, U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 36916, May 2008 (5th Cir.); 2012 Bankr LEXIS 2306, In Re Jarvis Adventure

Bldg, LLC., May 2012 (5th Cir).

I, as a client, must be able to trust that my lawyer(s) will faithfully and zealously

represent me. Howell v. State Bar of Texas, 843 F. 2d. 205, ·1988 (5th Cir.), and making

a decision to rest without putting on a defense in such a high profile case, making the

front page of the papers daily, and that was inundated with police misconduct, selective

prosecution, Constitutional and civil rights violations because my lawyer(s) believe the

judge "has her back," who, unless was previously told so by that judge, would have no

way to know how the judge's ruling could go, but made such a strong showing in the

confidence of that belief, shows a complete disregard for a clients welfare. That

irresponsible and unethical conduct is not trail strategy. Especially when the judge,

who personally witnesses and listen's to the testimonies of the Government agents

admitting to multiple felonies and Constitutional and civil rights violations and continues

to not stop the trial, and rules against me il!- motions that have clearly provided legal

sufficiency in their claims.

While the doctrine of separation of powers in a Constitutional scheme of government

prohibit free judicial interference in the exercise of discretionary powers of attorney's in

criminal prosecutions, the judiciary has always borne the basic responsibility for

protecting individual's against unconstitutional invasions of their rights by the

Government. United States v Johnson, 577 F. 2d. 1304, 1308 (5th Cir 1978); United

States v Falk, 479 F.2d. 616, 624 (7th Cir. 1965), quoting Stamler v Willis, 415 F 2d.

1365, 1369-70 (ih Cir. 1969), cert. denied sub. nom., Ichord v Stamler, 399 U.S. 929, 90

S. Ct. 2231, 26 L. Ed. 2d. 796 (1970). See United States v Butler, 297 U.S. 1, 62-63, 56

S. Ct. 312, 80 L. Ed. 477 (1936); Marbury v Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137, 2 L. Ed. 60

(1803); Calder v Ball 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 386, 1 L. Ed. 648 (1798). See also A. Hamilton,

· Federalist Paper No. 78, reprinted. in Cook(e) (ed.) The Federalist 521--; 524-25 (1961).

This case falls into that rare situation in which the decision to prosecute was so abusive

of this discretion because it encroached on Constitutionally protected rights and the

judiciary must protect against unconstitutional deprivations, .not turn a blind eye for

political favoritism.

To rule in a separate hearing, on August 20, 2013, for Mary Jo Woodall, that Carter

"mislead" the magistrate on the Search Warrant Affidavit,· and (1) not to hold a full

Franks hearing in her case; (2) not to stop my trial to hold a full Franks hearing, and (3)

to tell me Carter's "misleading" did not apply to "my" search warrant affidavit, when that

very information was the foundation information on all of the search warrant affidavits in

the Government's case, is in error. Allowing evidence that was clearly fruits of the

poisonous tree from Carter's admission to violating my Miranda rights be admitted, for

"political" reasons is unethical.

For two experienced attorney's to tell me "she got it," plus my own personal observation-

a person who HONORABLY RETIRED ·from Law Enforcement with 29 years

experience that "she got it!" and for a third, experienced attorney, who regularly has

personal interaction with the very people who are prosecuting me to tell me the "the

judge's decisions were political." And, "The judge is not likely to decide on something

that can effect her election." And, for that judge to recognize the manifestation of a

"Travesty of Justice" (her words), and to rule as she did for "political" reasons, be they

for re-election, or as a favor to the District Attorney in the furtherance of ongoing Brady

violations, exculpatory evidence, the destruction of a Federally funded 1wind project, and

police misconduct, is an unethical miscarriage of justice and professional conduct.

While polygraph examinations are seldom, if ever, admissible into evidence in a criminal

procedure, they are allowed in Bar Association and Judicial Misconduct hearings. I am

making arraignments to take a polygraph regarding the aforementioned statements and

attached Sworn Affidavit. I challenge you, Jackie, and Tamar(ltO polygraph examination

too, as you told me she, Jackie, (and I assume you too) would claim trial strategy. This

is not any "strategy." Or, you can provide the examination independent of me and I will

take your examiner's test(s), or both. Preferably I would like to take both so there is no

discrepancy as to my telling the truth about these statements. I have already told Jackie I

am going to press the FBI to provide one for me.

I want all of this on the record in my appeal, and brought to the attention of the proper

authority as ~equired by the Rules of Disciplinary and Professional Conduct, and

Judicial Conduct.

My resume and a full copy of my 2255 Motion to Vacate, was provided to both Jackie,

and Joe Turner, showing the file date and my allegations against the Travis County

District Attorney right after filing July 91h.

I have over 20 years experience investigating police and state and federal elected

officials, and I do not make these allegations frivolously, or take their seriousness lightly.

Respectfully,

'·~

Charlie Malouff

66089179

P.O. Box 1010

Bastrop, TX 78642

·,.

SWORN AFFIDAVIT

I, Charlie Malouff, the defendant in the 2991h District Court of Travis County, Case No.

13-904021, under the penalty of perjury, question the integrity of proceedings conducted

in this Case and make the following declaration:

1. When Jackie Wood was ftrst appointed my trial counsel, after Daniel H.

Wannamaker was relieved for a Conflict of Interest, (see Federal2255 Motion To

Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Cause No. A-13-CA-572-LY), I expressed

serious concerns regarding the inability of getting a fair trial and integrity of the

299th District Judge, Katen Sage, because of her relationship to the Travi~ County

District Attorney, and the Democratic Party, and the selective and malicious

prosecution by the Travis County District Attorney's office.

2. I told her, this case was a case of malicious prosecution perpetrated by Travis

County Deputy Sheriff, Toby Miller and his frien.ds at the District Attorney's

office. Jackie told me Karen Sage was "my best friend," and that their

friendship was "a good thing," inferring to judicial integrity.

3. In my last visit at the Travis County Jail with Jackie Wood, just prior to trial, she

again told me Judge Karen Sage was her "best friend" and "Karen has my

back." While I do not have the jail records showing· the exact date of the

meeting, it was the meeting where she left me documents addressing both sides

witnesses after giving me an email dated 7-22, 2013, 8:06a.m. This was in the

visiting room on the 3rd floor.

4.. During the course of the trial, juror's kept falling asleep. One time, as many as

ftve jurors were falling asleep and not paying attention. I brought this up to

Tamara Needles, my co-counsel and Jackie, and I made notes on the yellow

tablets given to me by counsel.

5• After. the prosecution "rested," we excused to go back and confer in the visit

room. Once in there, we discussefthe jurors falling asleep, and the situation with

the jury and where to go with the defense. According to Jackie and Tamara we

were "losing the jury." I could see they were falling asleep, but did not recognize

that as "losing the jury." We had only gone into the prosecution side, and.to me

it is incumbent on the defense attorney's to keep them awakFtluring ~he defense

presentation. Not to quit on a "perception" when you have numerous

exculpatory defense witnesses and mounds of exculpatory documentary

evidence. . .

6. · In that conversation both Tamara and Jackie told me Sage "got it!" Jackie said,

"Karen's got it!" She told me this several ti~es. She also said "Karen has my .

back!"

7. We discussed at least having Dan Dodson, City Administrator for the City of

Jonestown, and Mike Fox, my former Installation Supervisor, testify. Jackie and

Tamara both told me we had "disproved" the state's case. Jackie said she was

concerned we were "losing the jury," and if we put on a defense we might lose

them. She said we had several week's worth of witnesses. Again, we discussed

at least putting on Dodson and Fox.

8. Again, Jackie said, "Karen has my back!"

9. Jackie told me she has "a lot of experience with jury's," that I should "trust

me" and we should rest. ·Tamara was in and out of the room during a lot of the

conversation.

10. I told Jackie I really wanted Fox and Dodson to testify. I was also mad over the

Karlson issue. Jackie said, he, (Karlson) said there was a stack of blank pre-

signed papers. I told her I wanted to see them, and that there was also a power

chart, in addition to a video we had of a working prototype at the UT JJ Pickle

Center, that Karlson had done the testing on, and that Eric Graham created from

Karlson's test somewhere in Discovery. And that the DA was still hiding that if

they had not offered it up. I told her Karlson's declaration was similar to Fred

Herber's because I used Karlson's to create Herber's; They would look almost

the same, side by side.

11 • She was insistent she wanted to rest. Jackie told me "trust me!" I still argued for

Dodson and Fox to testify. Again, she told me "Karen's got. it!" And, "We

should rest." And, "trust me!" In the end, I told her "I trust you."

12. After trial, in a visit at the Travis County Jail, with my appointed appellate

attorney, M. Ariel Payan, when he hand delivered a letter dated October 22,

2013, in a "let's cut to the chase" conversation, he told me "my wife works for

the prosecutor's office." "We are friends with Holly Taylor and I know her

husband." And, "We all talk." And, "It's a close knit group."

1 3. In the same conversation, he told me "the judge's decisions were political."

Arid, "The judge is not likely to decide on something that can effect her

election."

14. Over the next several months I sent Jackie Wood and . Ariel Payan. multiple letters

and email addressing what I felt was a compromise in the integrity of Karen Sage

and my trial, and never heard back from them. ".,.-

1 5. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Conduct, Rule 8.02 states, "A lawyer shall not

make a statement that the lawyer knows to be false or _with reckless disregard as

to its truth or falsity concerning the qualification or integrity of a judge."

16. I do not believe Jackie Wood or Ariel Payan ~ade' those statements falsely or

recklessly, and they should be taken as true. As" such, judicial integrity over the

fairness of my trial is at issue.

17. Also at issue is the plea bargain agreement of my co-defendant, Mary Jo Woodall.

This is based on a pretty good presumption she would not have gotten a fair trial-

because Mary Jo. never gave me insider information, or provided me with

information that was not authorized by policy or law, and if Karen Sage

compromised her integrity in my trial, then there is an unethical miscarriage of

justice and professional conduct in the prosecution of Mary Jo WoodalL

1 8. The Board of Directors of the State Bar of Texas, Model Rules of Professional

Conduct Rule "8.3 (1983) states, "A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has

committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a

substantial question of that lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a

lawyer in other respects shall inform the appropriate authority. .

19. I, as a client, must be able to trust that my lawyer(s) will faithfully and zealously

represent me. Making a decision to rest without putting on a defense in such a

high profile case, making the front page of the papers daily, and that was

inundated with police misconduct, selective prosecution, Constitutional and civil

rights violatimis because my lawyer(s) believe thejudge "has her back," who,

unless was previously told so by that judge, would have no way to know how the

judge's ruling could go, but made such a strong showing in the confidence of that

belief, shows a complete disregard for a clients welfare. That· irresponsible and

unethical conduct is not trail strategy.· .Especially when the judge, who, by her

own words, is concerned about a "Travesty of Justice" personally witnesses and

listen's to the testimonies of the Government agents admitting to multiple

felonies, Constitutional and civil rights violations, continues to not stop the trial,

and then rules against motions that have clearly provided legal sufficiency in their

claims.

20. The combined statement's of two of the three of my attorney's regarding Karen

Sage's decision's based on ''political" reasons, considering she is up for re-

election, March, 2014, violate the Texas Code of Judicial Conduct, Canon 3, B(2),

"A judge should be faithful to the la~ and shall maintain professional competence

in it. A judge shall not be swayed by partisan interests, public clamor or fear

of criticism." And, (5) "A judge shall perform judicial duties without bias or

prejudice."

21 • I have instructed my appellate. attorney, Ariel Payan, to pu['all of this on the .

record in my appeal, and be brought to the attention of the proper authority as

required by the Rules of Disciplinary and Professional Conduct, and Rules of

Judicial Conduct.

I declare under the penalty of perjury pursuant to 28 USC 1746, the foregoing is true and correct

to the best of my knowledge.

,.{.., .

Executed on thifhDay ofFebruary,2014 by ~ '-'

·Notary Public · Charlie Malouff

~~Q~

b~~·~~·~~

~~. ~~ \~l~

\' ·:::

'mi"

;;-;'

8. SCHAPPAUGH

MY COMMISSION EXPIRESc:,.

Apll20, 2014

~-.

.. ---·

State Commission on Judicial Conduct

orracers Executive Director

Steven L. Seider, Chair Seana Willing

M. Sue Kurita, Vice Chair

Valerie E. Ertz, Secretary

Members

Karry K. Matson

Patti H. Johnson

Joel P. Baker

Edward J. Spillane, Ill

Martha M. Hernandez May 14,2014

Diane D. Threadgill

Ricky A. Raven

Demetrius K. Bivins

Douglas S. Lang

Orlinda L. Naranjo

CONFIDENTIAL

Charles A Malouff Jr

PO Box 1010

Bastrop TX 78602-1010

Re: CJC No. 14-0826-DI

Dear Mr. Malouf!:

We have received your complaint against a Texas judge. All complaints receive a thorough

review and investigation relevant to the allegations, and are presented to the Cortunission. After its

consideration, the Commission may dismiss a complaint, impose sanctions against a judge, or take

other appropriate action. The Commission's actions are governed by Article V, Section 1-a of the

Texas Constitution and Chapter 33 of the Texas Government Code. ·

Please be. advised that our proceedings are confidential. We are prohibited by Section

33.033(c) of the Texas Government Code from identifying by name the judge against whom you have

filed a complaint. In order to assist us with our investigation, please reference the above-listed CJC

case number in all future correspondence. Additionally, if you intend to submit additional documents

for our consideration, please send photocopies.

For your additional assistance, we have enclosed an information sheet that will explain more

completely the process involved in investigating allegations of judicial misconduct.

We will inform you in writing of the Commission's action on your complaint.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact our office. When

calling, please mention the above-listed CJC case number so as to expedite your phone call.

STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT

Enclosure

PO Box 12265 (512) 463-SS33

Austin TX 78711-2265 www.scjc.state.tx.gov Toll-Free (877) 228-5750

• f

C1"""i .

For SCJC use only.

State Commission on Judicial Conduct

PO Box 12265

Austin, TX 78711-2265

Tel. (Sl2) 463-SSJJ ·Toll Free: (877) 228-S7SO .

Complaint Form

• Ifyou are filing a complaint about more tlmn one judge, please use a separate form for each judge.

• You may complete this form online before printing.

• Send the completedform and any additional pages or related documents to SCJC

* Indicates required fields. Please note that faxed complaints will NOT be accepted.

*Yourname: Charles A. Malouff. Jr. *Judge: Karen Sage

*MailingAddress: /166089179 P.O. Box 1010 *Court Number: 299th ·District _.:C:::.;o:::.;u::.:. r.:;.t_ __

*City, State Zip: Bastrop, TX 78602 · *City and County: Austin, Travis County

*Date of Birth: 12.27. 195 7

Your Phones: Day ( 5ll- ) ,..,3..,2..,.1........,.3~9.:;:.0.:::.3_ _ _ __ Evening ( _ _ )

Cell/Other ( ) -~=---=5=-----

Best time to call you:a [] A.M. IV1

f!..l P.M.

It your complaint involves a court case; please provide tbe following information:··

. Cause Number: D-1-DC-13-902041 Status ofyourcase: DPending Dconcluded !;Jon appeal

Yourattomey: Ariel Payan OpposingAttomey: TCADA Holly Taylor

Address: 1012 Rdlo Grande Address: Trav~s County Courthouse

City/Zip: Austin, TX 78701 City/Zip: Austin, TX 78701

Phone Number(s): . Phone Number(s):

----------------~----~

PLEASE FILL IN ALL INFORMATION AVAILABLE FOR ANY WITNESSES (attach additionill pages as needed)

Name: _ _~J~ai.Joc~k~i::..::e=--W::..o=o.;:;d..,.,......,Au.t....t...;y'-_,_---- Name: Tamara Needles, Atty

Address:.......,........o.s.uO.;.t.S--D.W....~~l.l.IOu.t..J.Jh~--~oSuto.-lift~liWOL-<l!..-.,-.- - - - Address: 805 W. lOth St 1101

Phone Number(s): _______________ Phone,Number(s):._·_ _ _ _ ___..._ _ _ _ __

What did this person witness? What did this. person witness?

See Attached Affi4avit and Se~ Attached Affidavit and