Docstoc

proof

Document Sample
proof Powered By Docstoc
					Table of Records Submitted in Hickel v KCCWLB(partial only)
          Document                 Record/Submission             Date      Section                                         Proof or Showing
Plaintiff's Complaint   People v Swint Case                      1997         1      Constitutional question de novo on appeal
Plaintiff's Complaint   People v Swint Case                      1997         1      Purpose of CCW law is to limit access of CCW to criminals only
Plaintiff's Complaint   Schubert v Debard Case                   1980         2      Self-defense is a proper reason
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Discretion must involve Consideration of MI Const. Art. 1.6
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Equal Protection argument as Marlinga's county is shall issue
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Looks for no threat and reason of self-defense
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Proves Appellee Knowingly violated Equal Protect. And MI Art 1.6
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Shows McFadden is too broad and ambigous
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Shows expansion of Const.Right is preferred
Plaintiff's Complaint   Marlinga Letter                          1995         3      Shows General permits must be issued for self-defense
Plaintiff's Complaint   Macomb Crime Plummets                    1999         4      Shows Crime in Marlinga's County drop on broad issuance of general CCW's
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellee Letter to Appellant           8/16/1999      6      Shows policy of board for general is only under extreme conditions; not reasonable
Plaintiff's Complaint   Listing of CCW General Holders         95/96/97       7      Shows preponderance of General CCWs going to criminal justice
Plaintiff's Complaint   Listing of CCW General Holders         95/96/97       7      Shows only one General issued to a Mr. Peter Cook
Plaintiff's Complaint   Picture of Military Pass on Car          1999         8      Shows Rank insignia on Appellant's car; submitted as proof in Militia
Plaintiff's Complaint   People v Zerillo                         1922        9a      RKBA not subject to will of the Sheriff
Plaintiff's Complaint   People v Brown                           1931        9b      RKBA is for all the People; Pistols protected by RKBA.
Plaintiff's Complaint   Supplement to Hickel's App               1999        9c      State's Appellant is Suitable Person as told to him by Appellee
Plaintiff's Complaint   Supplement to Hickel's App               1999        9c      State's Appellant's desire for CCW is self-defense
Plaintiff's Complaint   Supplement to Hickel's App               1999        9c      Charges Appellee during application of Extreme Reason
Plaintiff's Complaint   Supplement to Hickel's App               1999        9c      Charges Appellee of Due process and Equal Protection violations
Plaintiff's Complaint   Supplement to Hickel's App               1999        9c      Establishes link to Board's Issuance of General CCW to Criminal Justice
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee              10/5/1999     10      Establishes link of Hickel to select militia and need for greater security
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             10/29/1999     11      Shows Appellee US v Emerson (2nd is individual right)
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             10/29/1999     11      Discusses US v Verdugo-Urquirdez, 110 S. Ct 3039 (1990). US 2nd is individual right
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             10/29/1999     11      Discusses Appellee's intentional violation USC 42; Title 18
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             10/29/1999     11      Discusses Oath each member of board took to uphold constitution
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             10/29/1999     11      Requests board to uphold US 2nd Ammendment and Civil Rights
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellee Letter to Appellant           11/4/1999     12      Appellee makes License subject to proof of need from Navy
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             11/29/1999     13      States Appellee is violating Civil Rights and US 2nd Amendment
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellant Ltr to Appellee             11/29/1999     13      Shows undisputed evidence that Board would issue General for Navy letter
Plaintiff's Complaint   Appellee Letter to Appellant          12/17/1999     13      Denies request for license
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Reiterates CCW is for full-time self-defense; shows Discriminatory Intent
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Statutory ambiguity brought up
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Establishes General CCW as only means of full-time self-defense
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Establishes that only reason Appellee issued licenses was for self-defense
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Establishes Equal Protection Argument; shows willfull violation
Plaintiff's Complaint   Open Letter Given to Appellee          3/2/2000      14      Establishes Equal Protection Argument by discussing MI shall-issue counties



Appendix 1                                                                   Page 1                                      a0ba00fb-56a3-46e1-9fbf-78c1b1dd8d19.xls
Plaintiff's Complaint       Open Letter Given to Appellee    3/2/2000      14     Establishes Privlege and Immunities of Appellant's FL CCW license
Plaintiff's Complaint       Open Letter Given to Appellee    3/2/2000      14     Shows board stands between full-time right to bear arms
Plaintiff's Complaint       Open Letter Given to Appellee    3/2/2000      14     Establishes role of board as being to find particularized threats.
Plaintiff's Complaint       Open Letter Given to Appellee    3/2/2000      14     Establishes Strict Scrutiny evolving from RKBA
Plaintiff's Complaint       Racist Roots of Gun Control      3/16/2000     15     Establishes the tie in of MCL 28.426 to Racist Roots of Gun Control
Plaintiff's Complaint       Document on Strict Scrutiny      3/16/2000   Append   Sets Ambach v Norwick, 441 US 68, 75; 99S CT 1589; 60 L Ed 2d 49 (1979)
Plaintiff's Complaint       Document on Strict Scrutiny      3/16/2000   Append   Sets Strict scrutiny analysis for MCL 28.426.
Plaintiff's Complaint       Document on Strict Scrutiny      3/16/2000   Append   Shows need to distinguish discretion between dangerous and non-dangerous
Plaintiff's Complaint       Email to and from IN State Pol   4/27/2000   Append   Email showing how Appellant's FL is accepted by INDIANA; not by MI
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.1   150 Question Interogatories showing Appellee doesn't feel board impacts RKBA
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.2   Three-years worth of Stats on total CCW licenses by Restriction and total
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.2   Above stats shows that Generals go 98% to criminal justice
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.2   Above stats shows that the Unequal creation of 25 classes of restricted licenses
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.2   Above stats shows that 12 restricted licenses in 1 yr. Aren't for self-defense
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.3   Appellant's Application to Carry Approved on May 4, 2000 after 10 mos.
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/27/2000    Att.3   Appellant's Application shown to be for personal protection (full-time)
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                              Jul-99     Att.4   Appellant's original letter to board establishing link to select militia
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            29-Jul-99    Att.4   Appellant's notice of promotion to Capt and increased desire for security
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                              Jul-99     Att.6   Appellant's military ID, Driver's license, and Civil Air Patrol ID card as submitted
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            9/8/2000     Att.7   Appellee's Policy manual showing policy to issue Generals only to CJS Persons
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            11/4/1999    Att.7   Appellee's November 4 minutes discussing Hickel needed Navy ltr for General
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                             Mar-00      Att.7   Appellee's March minutes last page discussing reading docs submitted by Hickel
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            5/4/2000     Att.7   Appellee's May minutes that show Hickel wasn't discussed by license issued.
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/17/2000    Att.7   Email showing Shall issue Counties in MI
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            9/8/2000     Att.7   Detroit News story on Racial roots of MI CCW law
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/19/2000    Att.7   The Racist Roots of Gun Control
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/13/2000    Att.7   Saenz v Roe, 119 S. CT 1518 (1999);Priv.&Immunities;Right to travel
Plaintiff's Response to Response dated 8Sep2000
                            Brief                            8/13/2000    Att.7   Saenz v Roe, 119 S. CT 1518 (1999);Right of MI residents to visitors with CCW issue




Appendix 1                                                                Page 2                                      a0ba00fb-56a3-46e1-9fbf-78c1b1dd8d19.xls

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:30
posted:7/31/2012
language:English
pages:2