Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Cuneo v. Pennsylvania

Supreme Court brief1999

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

No.

IN THE

Supreme Court of the Hnited States

Albert E. Cuneo,

Petitioner,

vs.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

Respondent.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Albert E. Cuneo

5245 Baptist Road

Pittsburgh, Pa 15236

(412) 886-1722

PRESENTATION OF QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW

1. Was the petitioner afforded due process or

compulsory process under the United States

Constitution in a criminal action, filed by a state in

connection with a motor vehicle law?

2. Did the petitioner receive appropriate

discharge of judicial claims as presented by law, for

services rendered under the laws of the state, or in

consequence of any act, law or treaty of the United

States as guaranteed by Article IV section 2

paragraph 3?

3. Were the petitioners rights properly

administered by the court of the state under Article

VII amendments IV, V, and VI of the Constitution

of the United States, summarizing rights of a

defendant on accusation in all criminal

prosecutions?

4. Was the petitioner subject to violations of

constitutional guarantees given under the

Constitution of the United States Article VII

amendments VIII, XIII and XIV?

D. Did the petitioner receive appropriate judicial

administration under the Constitution of

Pennsylvania as set forth in Article 1 through 27,

and Article 5 section 9?

6. Does a state in prosecuting and accused enter

a judicial proceeding on the basis of being similarly

situated with an accused in any prosecution

containing a series of charges or related events?

Cn a ee ee a

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Cover page

Questions for Review ..........2008- i.

Table of Contentea «wc cee eee il

Tables of Authorities .............. ili |

aes OF PUTAMEN NS eee cs 1. |

Constitutional and Statutory References -

Statement of the Case .............. 23.

Reasons for granting the writ ......... ai.

Cane i“ ttt 29.

pt ee re ere es WS 30.

AUG GB tsi‘é eiéC ee er 35.

US tC aa ee ee O77.

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Case References

Alexander vs. Whitman,

114 F.2d 1392, certiorari denied 118

S.Ct. 367, 189 L.Ed.2d 286 =... ....... 27

Aponte vs. Scully,

oS 27

Atwell vs. Blackburn,

800 F.2d, certiorari denied 107

S.Ct 13878, 480, U.S. 920, 94

Sa tit he wee we we ws 27

Associates General Contractors of

California, Inc., vs. City and County

of San Francisco

eee tt —“(—t*st ww ww ew ee 27.

Brandon vs. Dist. of Columbia Bd. of

Parole, 734 F.2d 56, 236 U.S. App D.C.

155 certiorari denied 105 S.Ct 811, 469

U.S. 1127, 83 L.Ed.2d 804 on remand 631

F.Supp 435 affirmed 823 F.2d 644 262 U.S.

aan 060C—C—tC—“—~SC*C*~S we wee wee <2

Collins vs. Kidd,

D.C. Tex., 38 F.Supp. 634, 687 ......... 27.

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Case References

Dudosh vs. Warg,

668 F.Supp. 944 vacated 853 F.2d

917 certiorari denied 109 S.Ct 367,

102 L.Ed.2d 356

Erret vs. Commonwealth of Pa

713 F.Supp 837

Goshtasby vs. Bd. of Trustees

for the University of Illinois,

141 F.3d 761

Garrity vs. State of N.J.,

U.S.N.J., 385 U.S. 493, 87 S.Ct.

616, 618, 17 L.Ed.2d 562

Hoffman vs. U.S.,

767 F.2d 14381

Joyce vs. Mavromatis,

783 F.2d 56

Kaha vs. State of Minnesota,

580 F.Supp. 971

Keyes vs City of Albany, NY.

594 F.Supp. 1147

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Case References

McGhee vs. Sipes,

68 S.Ct 836, 334 U.S. 1, 92

L.Ed. 1611, 3 ALR.2d 441 ~=—........... 27.

People vs. Chambers,

56 Misc 2d 683,

289 NYS2d 804 j= ———— wcecvveee 28.

People vs. Liaetta,

30 NY2d 68, 330 NYS2d 351,

281 NE2d 157 1972, certiorari denied

407 US 973, 32 L.Ed.2d 809 S.Ct.

eS TS I Se viewer 28.

Reeder vs. Kansas City Bd. of

Police Commissioners

796 F.2d 1050, certiorari denied,

107 S.Ct 951, 479 US 1065,

uae.) =6——“‘“‘“<i‘<—<“‘C rh hh he wr Ss ae.

Rogers vs.Richmond,

365 U.S. 354, 81 S.Ct. 735,

Oia Fm aa wie eee ss 28.

Salahudin vs. Coughlin,

Re | ee 27.

Shelly vs. Kraemer,

68 S.Ct 836, 334 US 1

ee rs 27.

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Case References

Sherman vs, United States

356 US 369, 383-884 .....see,

State vs. Fort,

197 N.J.Super. 113, 484 A.2d

a a

Stoneman vs. U.S.,

107 S.Ct. 668 479 U.S. 1017,

O93 LAEG.2d 720 qj. - + -__ «evvvvces

Transportation Corp. vs Holt,

845 F.Supp. 4638 = = ......e..

U.S. vs. Hughes,

964 F.2d 536, rehearing denied,

certiorari denied 113 S.Ct. 1254,

507 U.S. 909,122 L.Ed.2d 658 .........

U.S. vs. Humphreys,

982 F.2d 254, rehearing denied,

certiorari denied 114 S.Ct 61, 510

U.S. 814, 126 L.Ed.2d 31 denied post

conviction relief affirmed 89 F.3d 840

certiorari denied 117 S.Ct. 612,

186 L.Ed.2d 5387 | — ....scuee

U.S. vs. Moore,

115 F.3d 1348,

rehearing denied = 3 .........

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

Federal Case References

U.S. vs. Nguyen,

88 F.3d 812, certiorari denied

117 S.Ct. 443. 186 L.Ed.2d 339......... 28.

U.S. vs. Perez,

574 F.Supp. 1429, affirmed ......... 28.

U.S. vs. Powell,

gg A Gre Sere ee 28.

U.S. vs. Smith,

789 F.2d 196, certiorari denied

107 S.Ct. 668, 479 U.S. 1017, 93

Manne (ee etewee se 28.

U.S. vs. Torres,

740 F.2d 122, certiorari denied

105 S.Ct. 2117, 471 U.S. 1055,

5 SSS ne Se wn es eee er 28.

U.S. vs. Walker,

1 F.3d 423, rehearing denied,

appeal afternewtrial ......... 28.

Wiggins vs. Procunier

., 3 & &. Gee 27

Vii

FEDERAL STATUTES AND

CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCES

28 U.S.C section 1257(a) ......... 5;

ae Ce BE - Cn wee ees 1.

Us. Comet. Art. Tiel cc cescess 2

U.s. Comat. Art. Wi s2O j§§=..cccccccs , a

U.S. Const. Art. IVs.1 ......... 2.

U.S. Const. Art. IVs2 ......... z.

U.S. Const. Art. 1Vs.4 ......... 3.

U.S. Const. Art. VI[2] ......... 3.

U.S. Const. Art. VI] Am.1.......... 3.

U.S. Const. Art. VI]Am.2 ~=_............ 3.

U.S. Const. Art. VI]Am.4 —_............ 3.

U.S. Const. Art. VI]Am.5 3 .......... 4.

U.S. Const. Art. VITAm6 ......... 4,

U.S. Const. Art. VII Am.7 ~~ ........... 4,

Vili

FEDERAL STATUTES, RULES AND

CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCES

U.S. Const. Art. VI]Am.8 ......... 5.

Us. Comet. At. VIE AMIE 9 ccc cwwoes 5.

U.S. Const. Art. VI]Am.13 _........... D.

U.S. Comet. Ast. Vil AMIE cc ce eces 5.

U.S. Const. Art. VII Am.14s.4 ......... 5.

U.S. Const. Art. VIE Am.15 =«s._ uc ee ween 6.

oe Re A y re re 23.

Model Penal Code s.212.56 ......... 23.

Model Penal Code s.223.4 ......... 23.

18 U.S.C. section 241 «lw ee we 6.

18 U.S.C. section 871 et seq. ......... 6.

18 U.S.C. section 1941/48 «san cre veces 6.

18 U.S.C. section 1512 0 lc ce es 6

18 U.S.C. section 15138 —= ......2e- 6.

18 U.S.C. section 1515 =... wee aeee 6.

FEDERAL STATUTES, RULES AND

CONSTITUTIONAL REFERENCES

18 U.S.C. section 1581 .........

18 U.S.C. section 1621 —.........

18 U.S.C. section 1622 .........

18 U.S.C. section 1623 X .........

18 U.S.C. section 1962 0 lw cece

29 U.S.C. section 206 si¥iaw iw we eee

42 U.S.C. 5.1983; 1985(2K3) ww ww we ee.

42 U.S.C. section 1994 —_...... «ses

CONGRESSIONAL ACTS

AND SITES OF CODIFICATION

Civil Rights Act j= —§ .useveeee

Employees Income Retirement Security Act

29 U.S.C. section 1001 et seq. .........

Equal Credit Opportunity Act

15 U.S.C. section 1691 et seq .........

Equal Access to Justice Act

42 U.S.C. section 1988 —.........

CONGRESSIONAL ACTS

AND SITES OF CODIFICATION

Declaratory Judgements Act

28 U.S.C. s. 2201 and 2202 —s(iyw. 1... A

Embezzlement Act

te Ue OGG =. ech eiwec cs -

Equal Employment Opportunicy Act

42 U.S.C. section 2000(e) ......... we

CONGRESSIONAL ACTS

AND SITES OF CODIFICATION

Internal Revenue Code

26 U.S.C. section 61(a) et seq. ......... 7.

Federal Tort Claims Act -

28 U.S.C. sections 1291, 1346, 1504, 2110, 2401,

2401, 2402, 2411, 2412, and 2671 to 268 7.

SUBORDINATE REFERENCES TO THE

CONSTITUTION OF PENNSYLVANIA

Pa Const. Art. 1 s.1

Pa Const.

Art.

1 s.6

1 s.8

1 s.9

1 s.10

Art. 9 sd

xii

PENNSYLVANIA

State Case References on Related Vehicle Matter

Com. Dept. of Trans eau 0 affic

Safety vs. Calloway, 482 A.2d 322

60 Pa Cmwlth.647,1981 ......... 28.

0 t. ans. Bureau of Driver

Licensing vs. Diamond, 616 A.2d

1105, 151 Pa. Cmwlth. 351, 1992,

appeal granted 631 A.2d 1011, 535

ee 28.

Com vs. Harvey,

Pa 9 D&C 4th 87,1990 —s._........... 28.

xiii

REFERENCES TO PENNSYLVANIA

CONSOLIDATED STATUTES

Corporations and Unincorporated Associations

15 Pa C.S.A.

s.110

s.132

s.1713

s.1767

s.1768

s.1981

s.1982

s.1984

s.1985

s.1986

eseaeece@es@geée#e@ees

REFERENCES TO PENNSYLVANIA

CONSOLIDATED STATUTES

Pennsylvania Criminal Code

18PaC.S.A.s109 ......... 12.

18PaCS.A.s110 | |... 12.

1PaCS.A.s111 ......... 12.

18PaCS.A.s112 | ......... 12.

18PaC.$.A.8s303 |... 12.

18PaCS.A.s306 |... 12.

18PaC.S$.A.s318 $j |...” 12.

18PaC.S.A.s9038 ......... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s3901 ......... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s39038 ......... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s3921 |... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s.3922 ....... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s3928 |... 12.

18PaC.S.A.s3925 ......... 12.

18 PaC.S.A.s.3926 ......... 12.

REFERENCES TO PENNSYLVANIA

CONSOLIDATED STATUTES

Pennsylvania Criminal Code

PEC SA GG = 8° aveweusee 12.

WreCSA abi 8 8 §§=§=—=— ae eeweees 13.

So 7a USA. GP! oS 6 See 13.

REFERENCES TO PENNSYLVANIA

CONSOLIDATED STATUTES

Pennsylvania Domestic Code

seraCsA. 60) = 3 ewes eee 13.

ao PaCB.A.e3388 <cuvecess £3.

sereCSRA alee. - -sherieuae 13.

meTeGCSA. BAe) lll eee 13.

sePaeUCSaA. ame $ i= seasesces 13.

SereCRA. ce 8 ©. sé eneeians 13.

2oFPaC.S.A.83006 jg — = .sesccers 13.

2oPeC.S.A.0000) aasvesess 13.

SeraC SA. GaN - <seceeeees 13.

REFERENCES TO PENNSYLVANIA

CONSOLIDATED STATUTES

References to Domestic Code of Pennsylvania

a es 13.

ee 13.

a 13.

23 PaC.S.A.s4305 ~~ ........., 14.

23 Pa C.S.A. s.43806(aMb) = ......... 14.

oe 14.

PPPOC BA. G40IR ss nvevsvees 14.

23 Pa C.S.A. s.4863(aXb) ......... 14.

23 Pa C.S.A. s.4364(aXb) ......... 14.

23 PaC.S.A.8s4365 = ......... 14.

Pa R. Civ. P. 1910.16(12\3\4\5) (06a Oe

ke 14.

PENNSYLVANIA

Reference to Motor Vehicle Code by Citation

75 Pa C.S.A. section 3731 = ......... 14.

75 Pa C.S.A. section 1543(b) «ww. ws. 21.

xvii

OPINIONS BELOW

The decision of the state Supreme Court is

reported at No. 866 Western District Allocatur

Docket 1998. The decision of the court of appeals is

reported at No. 2429 Pittsburgh 1997. The decision

of the trial court is reported at No. CL 3920 Of 1997

Allegheny County. Site of Publication is unknown.

BASIS FOR JURISDICTION

The final judgement was entered in the form

of an order following petition by the Supreme Court

of Pennsylvania refusing to grant allocatur for

review. On June 4, 1999, the order was made part

of the record in this action. Understandably, this

Court has jurisdiction to review the order of the

state Supreme Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section

1257(a). Further provisions as set forth under U.S.C

section 2403(b) may be applicable as defined by

section 451. Certification status unknown.

CONSTITUTIONAL, STATUTORY, AND

REGULATORY PROVISIONS INVOLVED

FOLLOWING PREAMBLE:

United States Constitution, Article 1 section IX & X

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto law shall

be passed. (at X) make any Thing but gold

and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of

Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post

facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of

Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

United States Constitution, Article III, section 1

The judicial power of the United States, shall

be vested in one supreme Court, and in such

inferior courts as the Congress may from time

to time ordain and establish. The Judges,

both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shal]

hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and

shall, at stated Times, receive for their

Services a Compensation, which shall not be

diminished during their Continuance in

Office.

United States Constitution, Article III, section 2[3]

The trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of

Impeachment, shall be by Jury:

United States Constitution, Article IV, section 1

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each

State to the Public Acts, Records, and judicial

proceedings of every other State. And the

Congress may by general Laws prescribe the

Manner in which such Acts, records or

Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect

thereof.

United States Constitution, Article IV, section 2

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to

all privileges and Immunities of Citizens in

the several States.

Unites States Constitution, Article IV, section 2[3]

No person held to Service or Labour in one

State, under the Laws thereof, escaping

into another, shall in Consequence of any

Law or Regulation therein, be discharged

from such Service of Labour, but shall be

delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom

such service or Labour may be due.

United States Constitution, Article IV, section 4

The United States shall guarantee to every

State in this Union a Republican Form of

Government, and shall protect each of them

against Invasion; and on application of the

Legislature, or of the Executive (when

Legislature cannot be convened) against

domestic violence.

United States Constitution, Article VI paragraph 2

This Constitution, and Laws of the United

States which shall be made in the Pursuance

thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall

be made, under the Authority of the United

States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land;

and the Judges in every State shall be bound

thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or

Laws of any State to the contrary

notwithstanding.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. I

Congress shall make no Law respecting the

establishment of religion, or prohibiting the

free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom

of speech, or of the press; or the right of the

people to peaceably assemble, and to petition

the Government for a redress or grievances.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to

the security of a free State, the right of the

people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be

infringed.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. IV

The right of the people to be secure in their

persons, houses, papers, and effects, against

OS ee me

unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not

be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but

upon probable cause, supported by Oath or

affirmation, and particularly describing the

place to be searched, and persons or things to

be seized.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. V

; nor shall any person be subject to the same

offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or

limb; nor shall any person be compelled in

any criminal case to be a witness against

himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or

property, without due process of Law; nor

shall private property be taken for public use,

without just compensation.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. VI

In All criminal prosecutions, the accused shal]

enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial,

by an impartial jury of the State and district

wherein the crime shall have been committed,

which district shall have been previously

ascertained by law, and to be informed of the

nature and cause of accusation; to be

confronted with witnesses against him; to

have compulsory process for obtaining

witnesses in his favor, and to have the

Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. VII

In Suits at common law, where the value of

the controversy shall exceed twenty dollars,

the right to trial by jury shall be preserved,

and no fact tried by jury, shall be otherwise

re-examined in any Court of the United

States, than according to the rules of the

common law.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor

excessive fines imposed, nor cruel or unusual

punishment be inflicted.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend XI

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.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend XIII

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,

except as a punishment for crime whereof the

party shall have been duly convicted, shall

exist within the United States, or any place

subject to their jurisdiction.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. XIV

All persons born or naturalized in the United

States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,

are citizens of the United States and the

State wherein they reside. No State shall

make or enforce any law which shall abridge

the privileges or immunities of citizens of the

United States; nor shall any State deprive

any person of life, liberty, or property,

without due process of law; nor deny to any

person within its jurisdiction the equal

protection of the laws.

United States Constitution, Article VII, Amend. XIV

section 4

The validity of the public debt of the United

States, as authorized by law, including debts

incurred for payment of pensions and

bounties for services in suppressing

insurrection or rebellion, shall not be

questioned.

United States Constitution, Article VII Amend. XV

The right of the citizens of the United

States to vote shall not be denied or abridged

by the United States or by any State on

account of race, color or previous condition of

servitude.

Criminal Code of the United States 18 U.S.C.

Section 1341: Fraudes and Swindles.

Section 1343: Fraud by Wire, Radio of Television.

Section 1512: Tampering with a witness, victim or

informant.

Section 1513: Retaliating against a witness, victim

or informant.

Section 1515: Definitions for certain provisions.

Section 1581: Peonage; obstructing enforcement.

Section 1621: Perjury.

Section 1622: Subornation of Perjury.

Section 1623: False declarations before grand jury

or court.

ACTS OF CONGRESS; PUBLIC LAWS

Civil Rights Act, R.S. s 1979; P.L. 96-170 s 1 Dec.

29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1284, codified at U.S.C. 18 section

241; U.S.C. 42 section 1983 and 1985(2\3); and

U.S.C 28 section 1343.

Civil Rights Act, U.S.C 42 section 1994.

Employees Retirement Income Security Act, P.L. 93-

406, 88 Stat. 829, codified at U.S.C 29 section 1001

et seq.

ACTS OF CONGRESS; PUBLIC LAWS

Equal Credit Opportunity Act, P.L. 93-495, 88 Stat.

1521, codified at U.S.C 15 section 1691 et seq.

Equal Access to Justice Act, P.L. 94-559 Stat. 2321,

codified at U.S.C. 42 section 1988(a).

Declaratory Judgements Act, codified at 28 U.S.C.

2201 and 2202.

Embezzlement Act, P.L. May 29, 1920, ¢ 212, 41

Stat. 630, codified at U.S.C. 18 section 645.

Equal Employment Opportunity Act, P.L. 88-352, 78

Stat. 241, codified at U.S.C. 42 section 2000e et seq.

Internal Revenue Code, codified at U.S.C. 26 section

61(a) et seq.

Federal Tort Claims Act, codified at 28 U.S.C.

sections 1291, 1346, 1402, 1504, 2110, 2401, 2402,

2411, 2412, 2671 through 2680.

Equal Pay Act, codified at 29 U.S.C. section 206.

Appropriate sections of the Federal Criminal Code

and all Federal Regulations are incorporated by

reference to Public Law, shall not be limited as cited

above.

SUBORDINATE REFERENCES TO THE

CONSTITUTION OF PENNSYLVAN IA

itutio ) wealt lvania

/ Article 1 section 1; Inherent Rights of Mankind

All men are born equally free and

. independent, and have certain inherent and

. indefeasible rights, among which are those of

enjoying and defending life, liberty, of

acquiring, possessing and protecting property

and reputation, and of pursuing their own

happiness.

onstitutio the Commonwealth of Penns lvania

| Article 1 section 6; Trial by jury.

Trial by jury shall be as heretofore, and the

right thereof remain inviolate. The General

Assembly may provide, however, by law,

that a verdict may be rendered by not less

than five-sixths of the jury in any civil case.

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Penns lvania

Article 1 section 8: Security from searches and

seizures.

The people shall be secure in their

persons, houses, papers and Possessions from

unreasonable searches and Seizures, and no

warrant to search any place or to seize any

person or things shall issue without

describing them as nearly as may be, nor

without probable cause, supported by oath or

affirmation subscribed by the affiant.

Constitution of t ommonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 9; Rights of accused in criminal]

prosecutions. In all criminal] prosecutions the

accused hath a right to be heard by himself

and his counsel, to demand the nature and

the cause of the accusation against him, to

meet witnesses face to face, and to have

compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in

his favor, and, in prosecutions by indictment

or information, a speedy and public trial by

an impartial jury of the vincage; he cannot be

compelled to give evidence against himself,

nor can he be deprived of his life, liberty or

property, unless by judgement of his peers or

the law of the land. The use of suppressed

voluntary admission or confession to impeach

the credibility of a person may be permitted

and shall not be construed as compelling a

person to give evidence against himself.

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 10; Initiation of criminal

proceedings; twice in jeopardy; eminent domain.

Except as hereinafter provided no person

shall, for any indictable offense, be proceeded

against criminally by information, except in

cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in

the militia, when in actual service, in time of

war or public danger, or by leave of the courts

of common pleas may, with the approval of

the supreme court, provide for the initiation

of criminal proceedings therein by

information filed in the manner provided by

law. No person shall, for the same offense, be

twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall

private property be taken or applied to public

use, without authority of law and without just

compensation being first made or secured.

iii alkali

Article 1 section 11; Courts to be open; suits against

the Commonwealth.

All courts shall be open; and every man for

an injury done him in his lands, goods, person

or reputation shall have remedy by due

course of law, and right and justice

administered without sale, denial or delay.

Suits may be brought against the

Commonwealth in such manner, in such

courts and in such cases as the Legislature

may by law direct.

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 13; Bail, fines and punishments

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 19; Attainder limited.

No attainder shall work corruption of blood,

nor except during the life of the offender,

forfeiture of his estate to the

Commonwealth.

Constitution of the Co wealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 20; Right of Petition

The citizens have a right in a peaceable

manner to assemble together for their

common good, and to apply those invested

with the powers of government for redress of

grievances or other proper purposes, by

petition, address or remonstrance.

Constitution o we of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 21; Right to Bear Arms.

The right of the citizens to bear arms

in defence of themselves and the state shall

not be questioned.

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 1 section 26; No discrimination by the

Commonwealth or its political subdivisions.

Neither the Commonwealth nor any political

subdivisions thereof shall deny to any person

the enjoyment of any civil right, nor

discriminate against any person in the

exercise of any civil right.

Constitution of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Article 5 section 9; Right of Appeal.

There shall be a right of appeal in all cases to

a court of record from a court not of record;

there shall also be a right of appeal from a

court of record or from an administrative

agency to a court of record or to an appellate

court, the selection of such court to be as

provided by law; and there shall be other

such rights of appeal as provided by law.

SOBORDINATE REFERENCES TO SELECTED

ANNOTATED PENNSYLVANIA STATUTES

Corporations and Unincorporated Associations;

15 Pa.C.S.A. Section 110. Supplementary general

principles of law applicable;

Section 132: Functions of Department of State;

Section 1713: Personal liability of directors;

Section 1767: Appointment of custodian of

corporation on deadlock or other cause;

Section 1768: Voting trusts and other agreements

among shareholders;

Section 1981: Proceedings upon application of

shareholder or director;

Section 1982: Proceedings upon application of

creditors;

Section 1984: Appointment of receiver pendente lite

and other interim powers;

Section 1985: Liquidating receiver;

Section 1986: Qualifications of receivers.

Pennsylvania Criminal Code;

18 Pa C.S.A. section 109; When prosecution barred

by former prosecution for same offense.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 110; When prosecution barred

by former prosecution for different offense.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 111; When prosecution barred

by former prosecution in another jurisdiction.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 112; Former prosecution before

court lacking jurisdiction or when fraudulently

procured by the defendant.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 303; Casual relationship

between conduct and result.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 306; Liability for conduct of

another; complicity.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 313; Entrapment.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 903; Criminal conspiracy.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3901; Definitions relating to

theft.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3903; Grading of theft offenses.

18 Pa C.S.A. section Theft by unlawful taking or

disposition.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3922; Theft by deception.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3923; Theft by extortion.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3925; Receiving stolen

property.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 3926; Theft of services.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 4501; Definitions for offenses

against public administration.

Pennsylvania Criminal Code;

18 Pa C.S.A. section 5301; Official oppression.

18 Pa C.S.A. section 5701; Definitions for offenses of

invasion of privacy.

Note: Other relationships to other laws or crimes

may be made by inference de facto, and therefore

these citations shall not be limited to exclude those

references which may be made under the plenary

powers of this Court on review of this matter.

Pennsylvania Domestic Code;

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3321; Hearing by master.

23 Pa C.S.A. Section 3323; Decree of court

1990, Dec. 19, P.L. 1240, No. 206, Section 2,

effective in 90 days.

23 Pa C.S.A. Section 3502; Equitable division of

marital property;

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3503; Effects of divorce on

property rights generally.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3504; Disposition of property

after termination of marriage.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3505(a)(bXc\d)(e); Disposition

of property to defeat obligations.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3506; Statement of reasons for

distribution.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3507; Division of entireties

property between divorced persons.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 3701; Alimony.

23 Pa C.S.A section 4102; Proceedings in case of

debts contracted for necessaries.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4104; Right of married person

to separate earnings.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4105; Loans between married

persons.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 43805; General administration

;

of support matters.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4306(aXb); Duties of District

Attorney.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4321; Liability for Support.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4322; Support Guidelines.

23 Pa C.S.A. section 4363(a\(b); Trustee to

distribute proceeds of sale.

23 Pa C.S A. section 4364(a)(b); Credit to plaintiff

who purchases property.

23 Pa C.S.A section 4365; Rights of divorced person

in entireties property sold for support. See further,

Pa. R. Civ. P. 1910.16 (1-5)

42 Pa C.S.A. section 8321 et seq. (Tortfeasors

contribution Act).

Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code:

75 Pa C.S.A. section 3731; Driving under the

influence of alcohol or controlled substance.

(a) Offense defined.- A person shall not drive,

operate or be in actual physical control of the

movement of any motor vehicle: (1) while

under the influence of alcohol to a degree

which renders the person incapable of safe

driving; (2) while under the influence of a

controlled substance, as defined in the act of

April 14, 1972 (P.L. 233 No. 64) known as the

Controlled Substance, Drug, Device and

Cosmetic Act, to a degree which renders a

person capable of safe driving; (3) while under

the combined influence of alcohol and any

controlled substance to a degree which

renders the person capable of safe driving; (4)

while the amount of alcohol by weight in the

blood of the person is 0.10% or greater; or

(5) if the amount of alcohol by weight in the

blood of the person is 0.10% or greater at the

time of a chemical test of a sample of the

person's breath, blood or urine, which sample

is: (i) obtained three hours after the person

drove, operated or was in actual physical

control of the vehicle; or (ii) if the

circumstances of the incident prevent

collecting the sample within three hours,

obtained within a reasonable additional time

after the person drove, operated or was in

actual physical control of the vehicle. (a.1)

Defense.- It shall be a defense to a

prosecution under section (a)(5) if the person

proves by preponderance of evidence that the

person consumed alcohol after the last

instance in which he drove, operated or was

in actual physical control of the vehicle and

that the amount of alcohol by weight in his

blood would not have exceeded 0.10% at the

time of the test but for such consumption.

(b) Authorized use not a defense. (c) Certain

arrests authorized.- In addition to any other

powers of arrest, a police officer is hereby

authorized to arrest without a warrant any

person who the officer has probable cause to

believe has violated the provisions of this

section, regardless of whether the alleged

violation was committed in the presence of

such officer. This authority to arrest extends

to any hospital or other medical treatment

facility located beyond the territorial limits of

the police officer's political subdivision at

which the person to be arrested is found or

int i

was taken or removed to for purposes of

emergency treatment examination or

evaluation provided there is probable cause to

believe that the violation of this section

occurred within the police officer's political

subdivision. (d) Certain dispositions

prohibited.- The attorney for the

Commonwealth shall not submit a charge

brought under this section for Accelerated

Rehabilitative Disposition if: (1) the

defendant has been found guilty of or

accepted Accelerated Rehabilitative

Disposition of a charge brought under this

section within seven years of the date of the

current offense; (2) the defendant committed

any other act in connection with the present

offense, which in the judgement of the

attorney for the Commonwealth, constitutes a

violation of any of the specific offenses

enumerated within section 1542 (relating to

revocation of habitual offender's license); or

(3) an accident occurred in connection with

the events surrounding the current offense

and any person, other than the defendant,

was killed or seriously injured as a result of

the accident. (e) Penalty.- (1) Any person

violating any of the provisions of this section

is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second

degree, except that a person convicted of a

third or subsequent offense is guilty of a

misdemeanor of the first degree, and the

sentencing court shall order the person to pay

a fine of not less than $300.00 and serve a

minimum term of imprisonment of: (i) Not

less than 48 consecutive hours. (ii) Not less

than 80 days if the person previously

accepted Accelerated Rehabilitative

Disposition or any other form of preliminary

disposition, been convicted of, adjudicated

delinquent or granted a consent decree under

the Juvenile Act (42 Pa C.S. section 6301 et

seq.) based on an offense in this or other |

jurisdiction within the previous seven years. |

(iii) Not less than 90 days if the person has

twice previously if the person has twice

previously been convicted of, adjudicated

delinquent or granted a consent decree under

the Juvenile Act based on an offense under

this section or of an equivalent offense in this

or other jurisdictions within the previous

seven years. (2) Acceptance of Accelerated

Rehabilitative Disposition, an adjudication of

delinquency or a consent decree under the

Juvenile Act or any other form of preliminary

disposition of any charge brought under this

section shall be considered a first conviction

for the purpose of computing whether a

subsequent conviction of a violation of this

section shall be considered a second, third,

fourth or subsequent conviction. (3) The

sentencing guidelines promulgated by the

Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing

shall not supersede the mandatory penalties

of this section (4) The Commonwealth has the

right to appeal directly to the Superior Court

any order of court which imposes a sentence

for violation of this section which does not

meet the requirements of this section. The

Superior Court shall remand the case to the

sentencing court for imposition of a sentence

in accordance with the provisions of this

section. (5) Notwithstanding the provision for

direct appeal to the Superior Court, if, in a

city of the first class, a person appeals from a

judgement of sentence under this section from

a municipal court to the common pleas court

for trial de novo, the Commonwealth shall

have the right to appeal directly to the

Superior Court from the order of the common

pleas court if the sentence imposed is in

violation of this section. If, in a city of the

first class, a person appeals to the court of

common pleas after conviction of a violation

of this section in a municipal court and

thereafter withdraws his appeal to common

pleas court, thereby reinstating the

judgement of sentence of the municipal court,

the Commonwealth shall have 30 days from

the date of withdrawal to appeal to the

Superior Court if the sentence is in violation

of this section. (6) Any person who accepts

Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition of any

charge brought under this section shall accept

as conditions the imposition of any the judge

shall impose in addition to any other

conditions all of the following: (i) A fee to

cover the costs referred to in section 1548(e)

(relating to costs). (ii) A mandatory

suspension of operating privilege for a period

of not less than one month but not more than

12 months. (iii) A condition that the

defendant, as a condition to entering the

program, make restitution to any person who

incurred determinable financial loss as a

result of the defendant's actions which

resulted in a charge of violating this section.

(iv) Court supervision for any defendant

required to make restitution or submit to

counseling or treatment.

(v) Court supervision for a period of not less

than 6 months when the Court Reporting

Network indicates that counseling or

treatment is not necessary and not less than

12 months when the Court Reporting

Network indicates that counseling or

treatment is in order. (vi) A fee to cover the

reasonable costs, if any, of a municipal

corporation in connection with a charge

brought under this section which results in

Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition. (7)

Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition or

other preliminary disposition of any charge of

violating this section may be revoked and the

court shall direct the Attorney for the

Commonwealth to proceed on the charges as

prescribed in general rules if the defendant:

(i) is charged with or commits any crime

enumerated in Title 18 (relating to crimes

and offenses) or in section 1542 within the

probationary period; (ii) fails to make

restitution as provided for in this section; (iii)

fails to successfully complete the alcohol

highway safety school required by section

1548(b); (iv) fails to successfully complete any

program of counseling or treatment, or both,

required as a condition of Accelerated

ee a

Rehabilitative Disposition; or (v) violates the

terms and conditions of Accelerated

Rehabilitative Disposition in any other way.

(7.1) In addition to the conditions set forth in

paragraph (7) for Accelerated Rehabilitative

Disposition of any charge brought under this

section, the judge may impose, and the person

shall accept, the condition that the person

engage in a program of collecting litter from

public and private property, especially

property which is littered with alcoholic

beverage containers. The duration of the

person's participation in a litter collection

program shall not exceed the duration of the

probationary period imposed on the person

under Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition.

(8) With exception of brogram costs referred

to in section 1548(e) or any restitution

referred to in this section, and with the

exception of any fees imposed pursuant to

paragraph (6\vi) which shall be distributed to

the affected municipal corporation, any fee of

financial condition imposed by a judge as a

condition of Accelerated Rehabilitative

Disposition or any other preliminary

disposition of any charge under this section

shall be distributed as provided for in 42 Pa

C.S. section 3571 (relating to Commonwealth

portion of fines, etc.) (f) Preliminary hearing

or arraignment.- The presiding judicial officer

at the preliminary hearing or preliminary

arraignment, relating to any charge of a

violation of this section, shall not reduce or

modify the original charges.

(g) Expired. 1984, Feb. 12 P.L. 53 No. 12,

effective June 11, 1988. (h) Work release.- In

any case in which a person is sentenced to a

period of imprisonment as a result of a

conviction for violating any provision of this

section, the judicial officer imposing that

sentence shall consider assigning that person

to a daytirne work release program pursuant

to which the person would be required to

collect litter from public and private property,

especially property which is littered with

alcoholic beverage containers. (i) Driving a

commercial motor vehicle while under the

influence of alcohol or a controlled substance. -

a person shall not drive, operate or be in

physical control of the movement of any

commercial vehicle while:

(1) under the influence of alcohol; (2) under

the influence of any controlled substance as

defined in section 1603 relating to definitions

(3) under the combined influence of alcohol

and any controlled substance; (4) the amount

by weight in the person's blood is 0.04% or

more.

75 Pa C.S.A. 1543. Driving while operating privilege

is suspended or revoked.

(a) Offense defined.- Except as provided in

subsection (b), any person who drives a

motor vehicle on any highway or trafficway of

this Commonwealth after the commencement

of a suspension, revocation or cancellation of

the operating privilege and tefore the

operating privilege is restored is guilty of a

summary offense and shall, upon conviction,

be sentenced to pay a fine of $200.00. (b)

Certain offenses. -(1) Any person who drives a

motor vehicle on any highway or trafficway of

this Commonwealth at a time when their

operating privilege is suspended or revoked

as a condition of Accelerated Rehabilitative

Disposition for a violation for a violation of

section 3731 (relating to driving under the

influence of alcohol or controlled substance)

or because of a violation of this section.

1547(b)(1))relating to Suspension for refusal)

or 3731, shall upon conviction, be guilty of a

summary offense and shall be sentenced to

pay a fine of $1,000 and undergo

imprisonment for a period of not less than 90

days. (2) This subsection shall apply to any

person against whom one of these

suspensions has been imposed whether the

person is currently serving this suspension or

whether the effective date of suspension has

been deferred under any of the provisions of

section 1544 (relating to additional period of

revocation or suspension). This provision shall

also apply until the person has had the

operating privilege restored. This subsection

shall also apply to any revocation imposed

pursuant to section 1542 (relating to

revocation of habitual offenders license) is

any of the enumerated offenses was for a

violation of section 3731. (c) Suspension or

revccation of operating privilege.-Upon

receiving a certified record of the conviction of

any person under this section, the

department shall suspend or revoke that

person's operating privilege as follows: (1) If

the department's records show that a person

was under suspension, recall or

cancellationon the date of violation, and had

not been restored, the department shall

suspend the person's operating privilege for

an additional one-year. (2) If the department's

records show that the person was under

revocation on the date of the violation, and

had not been restored, the department shall

revoke the person's operating privilege for an

additional two-year period. (d) Citation to

appropriate subsection.-Prior to filing a

citation for a violation of this section with the

issuing authority named in the citation, the

police officer shall verify the basis for the

suspension with the department. Upon

receiving the verification, the officer shall cite

the appropriate subsection of this section on

the citation.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The Constitution of the United States, having

conferred the supreme authority of the law and of

the land upon this Honorable Court, provides a

direct means of redress of the grievances contained

in this petition.

Under the Laws of the Nation and state, the

petitioner and respondent matched in a controversy

known as criminal litigation, based upon the state's

propensity to provide spiritual implications by

substance, for which it convicts and penalizes the

people in large numbers, based upon certain

activities seen by the people as being necessary, or

those seen by the people as illnesses, which the

people contract. The petitioner happens to be a

person within the Commonwealth which

administers certain laws, in particular !aws directed

to abate abuse of spirits when the activity involves

operation of a motor vehicle within its jurisdictional

limits intending to obstruct, impair or disregard

longstanding Constitutional guarantees to suit its

own ends, implicating upon a person long term

punitive effects in person, process, money, property

or other inalienable rights.

The parties entered the initial controversy

under the Pa C.S.A. section 3731 on June 2, 1993,

which was made as an action under that section of

the state motor vehicle code at a time when the

petitioner had been involved in a substantial

amount of other related litigation, of which a

petition at No 263-99 presently stands before this

Honorable Court’.

A second charge followed in 10th Judicial

District of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on

May 6, 1994, in Magisterial District 10-2-10 with

preliminary hearing held on July 14, 1994, which

exceeded the time requirement for preliminary

hearings under Commonwealth Criminal Rules. The

matter was bound for court and was followed by a

An actuon by the Commonwealth was docketed as a first offense in Washington County,

Pennsylvania within Magisterial District 27-3-01 for a misdemeanor of the second degree at

No Cr-168-92 The action was waived to the Court of Common Pleas of Washington County and was

dacketed at No 693 1993 with the Washington County Gerk of Courts. A series of 7 field and chemical tests

were performed at the in sistance of the law enforcement officer who did not possess and could not show the

petitioner a warrant of any type on behalf of the Commonwealth in its request to examine evidence or cause.

On the insistence of counsel, the petitioner accepted terms of ARD, and underwent imposition of a XD day

operating privilege suspension, fines, costs, supervision and related administration as defined by the section.

Nowhere in the charging officers affidavit is there reference to miranda advise having previously bean given,

or that which defines the officers requirement to state options to preference on the accused for tests.

trial by jury on April 20, 1995”.

The third charge that followed, occurred on

January 17, 1996. The charging officer's citation

was based upon a finding and verification of

petitioner's motor vehicle operators record kept by

the Commonwealth and cited section 1543(b) as its

site for prosecution purposes. The charge was

brought in the 27th Judicial District of the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in Magisterial

District 27-2-01°.

The fourth and final charge followed on April

29, 1997, through citation of a charging officer

which was not filed until June 4, 1997, beyond the

30 day limitation for which to file. A hearing on the

causd procured by the charging officer and was held

with a determination of guilt made. An appeal

followed to the Court of Common Pleas in the 5th

Judicial District of the Commonwealth of

An action was docketed at 2132-C-1994 as the second action. Following

trial by jury, the petitioner was convicted on all but one count, which was nolle prossed

on motion of the Commonwealth Attorney. The petitioner was sentenced to 1 year bss

of operating privileges, 30 days confinement in a county prison, and assessed fines,

costs, supervision and other related impositions as defined by the penalties

corresponding to the conviction. The purpose intended by the law is to maintain access

for more severe punishments upon people within the limits of the Commonwealth for

an unreasonable period of not less than 7 years, by making a persons operators license

or motor vehicle record operate as a device for its own use and entry into evidence in

its courts to receive the convictions of its people and to mete out punishments.

Action in the third charge was determined before a district justice

at No Tr 066-1996, and thereafter was appealed to the Court of Common Pleas of

Washington County and dooketed at No. 878-1996 on summary appeal in trial denovo.

Petitioner was found guilty on evidence in possession of law enforcement personnel on

or about December 25, 1995, which was deduced by the petitioner as having

entrappment propensities. Attaching punishment relating to the conviction was

thereafter meted out by the court, which was not vacated or reversed on appeal.

Pennsylvania and docketed at No. CL 97-3920 with

request to convene trial de novo‘. The judgement of

the court was followed by appeal. The ruling of the

Superior Court of Pennsylvania is shown in

Appendix "A". The trial court judgement and

opinion are shown in Appendix "B". And the ruling

of the State Supreme Court is shown in Appendix

a ta

Judicial procedure in prosecution of the

accused requires due process under specific

provisions of United States Constitution. Nowhere,

in the applications of record in the trial court, or

any appellate court is there any finite pattern that

would conclusively identify proper procedure under

the guarantee of due process, which is inalienable to

the petitioner.

Trial denovo was held on charges under 75 Pa C.S.A. section 154%b), with wit

present by subpoena for the presentation of the petitioner's case im chief. Subpoenaed witnesses con:

persons or officials who by association were related to the official acts im the prior actions and conv

witnesses were not afforded an opportunity to testify by the court over objection of the petitioner to

veracity in the underlying convictions as a defense. The petitioner was thereafter convicted and atta

punishment was meted out. Trial de novo was held November 5, 1997.

REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT

I. THE INTENTIONS OF THE FRAMERS OF

OUR CONSTITUTION WAS TO PROHIBIT® AND

REASONABLY LIMIT® POWERS CONFERRED

TO GOVERNMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT

OFFICIALS TO GUARD AGAINTP ACTS OF

ABUSE, IN PROCESS, AND OPPRESSIVE

CREATIVITY TO GUARANTEE PROTECTION OF

INALIENABLE RIGHTS IN JUSTICE BEING

ADMINISTERED.

This case presents the important question of

whether there is too much permissiveness under

applicable state and federal measures that restrict

the appropriate activity in processing or prosecuting

the laws of the land upon its people. These are acts

situated as official acts on a person's life or property

presently enforceable upon our entire population

acting as one well informed protected person. There

is no provision or place in law, for obstruction of

process by official acts in light of the equal

protection guarantee. [See Brandon vs. District of

olumbia B v vs.

of Minn; Vv : Vv

Warg:; Joyce v av i

Contractors of California, Inc. vs. City of County of

Sa rancisco; Reeder v it olice

Commissioners; Salahudin v oO in: t vs.

oO onwealt vania: Vv i

Keyes vs. City of Albany; Atwell vs.

Wiggins vs. Procunier]

There can be no justification for the pattern

of prosecuting that this chain of events has taken,

resulting in convictions preferential to the state

without enforcement of due process or equal

protection guarantees in compounded trials. [See

Goshtasby vs. Bd of Trustees for the University of

: vs Li - Vv ited

v lt; US vs. Hughes; US

vs. Humphreys; US vs Moore: US vs. Nguyen; US

Vv Vv ; Vv ith: V es;

vs. Wa ; Co ureau

ic Vv way; oO

“a - ae ener

For reasons, set forth herein and those which

clearly appear in this action, a writ of certiorari is

necessary to the State Supreme Court to hear an

appeal.

Other actions before inferior courts,

including but not limited to the inferior appellate

courts of this particular region have been made of

record and clearly show, the methods of causation

for this request being beyond the state court of last

resort.

The petitioner believes that law was made to

financially use the population for government gain.

Unreasonable impositions are made upon person,

property and well being of the public daily. These

applications under the law should not be the role of

government or courts. The medicinal properties of

alcohol for consumption should be retained for the

enjoyment of people, with gross offenses punished.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the petition for a

writ of certiorari should be granted.

Respectfully Submitted,

1 yh]

Yi oh 5 IS ae

Albert E. Cuneo,

Petitioner

—- sd

hE EE ORDED a Pets

Sl lt

APPENDIX A

J. A2024/98:

In the Superior Court or Pennsylvania

Pittsburgh District

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

Appellee,

v. No. 2429 Pittsburgh 1997

Albert E. Cuneo, Appellant.

Appeal from Judgement of Sentence of November 5,

1997, entered in the Court of Common Pleas of

Allegheny County, Criminal Division

at No. CL 97-3920

Before: Musmanno, Orie Melvin JJ, and

Cirillo, P.J.E.

MEMORANDUM FILED: NOVEMBER 24, 1998

Appellant, Albert E. Cuneo, appeals from a

judgement of sentence imposed by the Court of

Common Pleas of Allegheny after he was found

guilty in a trial de novo of driving while his license

was suspended, DUI related.’ Due to the inadequacy

of Mr. Cuneo's brief, we are unable to conduct

meaningful appellate review. Therefore we quash

the appeal without reaching the merits.

The facts and procedural history may be briefly

summarized as follows. On April 29, 1997

Pennsylvania State Trooper Richard Swank was

conducting a traffic safety check at which a vehicle

being operated by Mr. Cuneo was stopped. In the

course of the traffic stop Mr. Cuneo was unable to

display a valid operator's permit and further

investigation revealed his driving privileges were

under DUI related suspension at the time’. Trooper

Swank testified he requested a copy of Mr. Cuneo's

record and upon receipt of that certified copy dated

May 5, 1997, he filed the citation on June 4, 1997.

On July 29, 1997 Mr. Cuneo was found guilty

of violating 75 Pa C.S.A. section 1543(b) before a

district justice. He took an appeal to the Court of

Common Pleas of Allegheny County where on

November 5, 1997,after a trial de novo, he was

found guilty and sentenced to ninety days

imprisonment and fined $1,000.00. Its from this

judgement of sentence which appellant has filed

timely appeal.

On appeal, Mr. Cuneo has raised a number of

vague and incomprehensible allegations. In the

"Statement of the Questions Involved” section of his

brief Mr. Cuneo presents the following issues:

1.) | Was due process served before Courts

in the 5th, 10th and 27th Judicial Districts of

the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to

suspend an operators license under 3731 or

1543 (b) which contained a reasonable doubt

of inapplicable procedure in finding the

defendant's guilt?

2.] Was the defendant provided due

process in compliance with the rules of

criminal procedure as provided by the

Constitution of the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania, in strict compliance with time

for filing consistent with 75 Pa. C.S.A section

1543 (b), permitting dismissal and a probe of

underlying convictions in rebuttal

presumption for the purpose of the

presentment of a defense?

3.] Has the defendant, as a result of

impositions and convictions at law, sustained

OS Dann MO as 0 A Ta es ial iil

fam =. gts

ee ee

a fraudulent term of unnecessary

administration by the specific Courts

mentioned in the enforcement of the laws of

the Commonwealth by and through its’

representative agents in specific districts,

with a motive to infringe upon the defendants

wealth and earning capability for no apparent

reason?

4.) Has the defendant been given prompt

and correct judicial directives on application

in the respective judicial districts by law in

his foregoing history of actions before the

Courts of the Commonwealth from 1990 to

the present?

5.] Was the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania, and its’ satellite benefactors

(alcohol awareness schools/probation and

parole divisions, fine collectors etc.) within

their legal limits in taking concerted actions

against the defendant to detain and

compromise the defendant from time to earn

a living, retain and manage assets, income,

and to pursue liberty without the use of his

financial resources and additiona] property,

by application in criminal and civil] Court?

6.) Was the defendant entrapped and

convicted by definition in this action?

Mr. Cuneo's brief at 7.

Although Mr Cuneo raises the above six

issues in the "Statement of the Questions Involved”

in his brief, the argument portion of his brief does

not address these issues. Instead, in the argument

section of his brief Mr. Cuneo lists six additional

questions for the Court's consideration.

Mr. Cuneo has presented this Court with an

unintelligible brief that does not provide sufficient

facts to support his allegations, does not cite to

pertinent legal authority and in no manner develops

his legal arguments. What Mr. Cuneo has presented

to the Court is a rambling discourse in the form of

multiple questions. Under the circumstances, we

- find Mr. Cuneo;s claims are not reviewable. See

Commonwealth vs. Rivera, 685 A.2d 1011 (Pa.

Super 1996) (stating underdeveloped arguments will

not be considered); Commonwealth vs. Adamo, 637

a.2d 302 (Pa. Super 1994); (stating that failure to

elaborate on mere assertion in brief results in

waiver); Commonwealth vs. Maris, 629 A.2d 1014

(Pa. Super 1993) (holding substantial defects in

brief, including pro se appellant's undeveloped

arguments, unsupported statements and largely

inapplicable caselaw prevented meaningful judicial

review).

Mr. Cuneo's pro se status does not relieve

him of his responsibility to raise and develop his

claims. Nor does it entitle him to have this Court

advocate on his behalf. See Commonwealth vs.

Sanford, 445 A.2d 149 (Pa Super. 1982) (stating

that the Superior Court is not a pro se litigant's

counsel and will not consider the merits of issues

not property raised and developed in briefs). Since

the defects in Mr. Cuneo’s Brief are substantial and

preclude this Court from conducting any meaningful

appellate review, we quash his appeal. Pa R.A.P.

2101; Rivera, supra.

Appeal quashed.

— ea en Net m= NA anal ie EO BR he.

Saintes: sass, ee Se

In the Superior Court or Pennsylvania

Pittsburgh District

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,

Appellee,

Vv. No. 2429 Pittsburgh 1997

Albert E. Cuneo,

Appellant.

JUDGEMENT

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is now

here ordered and adjudged by this Court that

appeal quashed.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Eleanor R. Valecko

Deputy Prothonotary

Dated: November 24, 1998

APPENDIX B

In the Court of Common Pleas of

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania

Summary Appeals Branch

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Plaintiff,

vs. CL#3920 of 97

Albert E. Cuneo,

Defendant.

ORDER OF COURT

AND NOW, TO WIT, THIS 5 DAY OF

NOVEMBER, 1997 DEFENDANT IS ADJUDGED

GUILTY OF THE OFFENSE OF 1543(B)

HEREWITH HE STANDS CHARGED, AND

DEFENDANT IS SENTENCED TO PAY A FINE

OF $1,000.00, PLUS COSTS. TO THE CLERK OF

COURTS WITHIN 60 DAYS UNLESS

OTHERWISE NOTED. 90 DAYS ALLEGHENY

COUNTY JAIL, SENTENCE EFFECTIVE 12-8-97.

BY THE COURT,

/s/ Watson, J.

Original Conviction Date:

7-29-97

Charge VC 1543 B

Citation # F0239766-2

TR 1301-97

Note: Defendant has from the date of this decision

Thirty (80) days to appeal to the

Superior/Commonwealth Court.--Delivered U.S.Mail.

A hl CE A bce ast ae Pena

oe ee ee er era eee Pe ern eee en

In the Court of Common Pleas of

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania

Summary Appeals Branch

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Plaintiff,

vs. CL#3920 of 97

Albert E. Cuneo,

Defendant.

OPINION: March 26, 1998 Delivered US Mail.

On April 29, 1997, Pennsylvania State

Trooper Richard Swank was conducting a "traffic

safety check" at which a vehicle being operated by

the Defendant, Albert E. Cuneo, was stopped. in the

course of the traffic stop Defendant was unable to

display a valid operator's permit and further

investigation revealed that his privileges were

under a D.U.I.-related suspension at the time.

Defendant was cited for this offense and appealed to

the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County.

At trial certified documents evincing the

suspension were offered by the Commonwealth and

admitted into evidence by this court.

Defendant did not offer discernable

substantive defense to the charge and we rejected

his legal arguments. In the face of the certified

documents and the credible testimony of the trooper

we found the Defendant guilty as charged by our

order dated November 5, 1997.

Per Curiam,

/s/ Watson, J., J.

Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania,

Respondent,

Albert E. Cuneo,

Petitioner.

PER CURIAM

APPENDIX C

In the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Western District

No. 886

Western District

Allocatur Docket

1998

Petition for

Allowance of

Appeal from Order

Memorandum

Opinion of the

Superior Court

AND NOW, this 4th day of June, 1999, the

Petition for Allowance of Appeal is hereby DENIED.

A true Copy Patricia Honard

As of: June 4, 1999

Attest: /s/ Patricia Honard

Chief Clerk

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Western District

Amy J. Ceraso, Esquire

Deputy Prothonotary

Patricia A. Honard

Chief Clerk

June 4, 1999

TO: Mr. Albert Cuneo

Re: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

Respondent,

Albert E. Cuneo

Petitioner.

No. 0886 W.D. Allocatur Docket 1998

Dear Counsel:

‘ baie alee a »

ahd eetutitiets ents Oat

This is to advise you that the attached order

has been entered on the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal filed in the above-captioned matter.

Very truly yours,

, Office of the Prothonotary

} Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

/Kap

c: Honorable J. Warren Watson, SJ

Allegheny; CL97-3920; Civil

Michael Streily, Esquire

Sandra Preuhs, Esquire

‘

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.