Prisoners argue constitutionality of U.S. criminal code
For dozens of prisoners, attorneys Barry Bachrach and James W. Parkman, III, filed a petition today with the United States Supreme Court that challenges Public Law 80-772 (including Title 18, or the U.S. Criminal Code). Tens of thousands of federal prisoners prosecuted since 1948 may be affected by the Supreme Court’s response.
“Public Law 80-772 is invalid," Bachrach argued. “This is a case where numerous procedural errors occurred. The law is clear; an act of Congress cannot become a law unless it follows each and every procedural step as defined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution.”
A bill originates in either the House of Representatives or Senate, but its exact text must be approved by a majority vote in both chambers. While Congress is in session, that text must be certified as having been passed in identical form by both Houses (or “truly enrolled”) and then signed by the Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate. After, the bill is presented to the President to sign into law.
According to Bachrach, spokesman for the petitioners, H.R. 3190 was passed by the House on May 12, 1947. The resolution came before the Senate, but Congress adjourned before the bill could be passed. The Senate should have returned the bill to the House to be resubmitted to the Senate during a later session. Instead, during the following session, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary continued its review of H.R. 3190 and added a volume of amendments to the bill. The Senate passed “H.R. 3190 As Amended,” which was sent to the House for a vote. While the House agreed with the amendments, the members failed to vote on “H.R. 3190 As Amended.”
According to the Constitution, valid business is conducted only when Congress is in session and a majority of members of both Houses are present. Yet, Congress authorized the House Speaker and President of the Senate to sign enrolled bills during an adjournment of indefinite length that began on June 20, 1948. This incomprehensible error was compounded when the Chairman of the Committee on House Administration mistakenly certified as enrolled the original H.R. 3190. Still more errors occurred: the House Speaker and President of the Senate signed the Senate’s “H.R. 3190 As Amended,” the bill was then misrepresented to President Truman as being enrolled, and Truman signed the bill.
“Congressional journals clearly show that the House and Senate each passed two separate bills that were grossly different. According to the Constitution, this means that neither bill ever became law,” Bachrach said.
“Under P.L. 80-772, U.S. district courts were given jurisdiction over all federal offenses. With P.L. 80-772 being invalid, however, the district courts clearly lack jurisdiction. The convictions and sentences of these prisoners are therefore void.”
Countries having extradition treaties with the U.S. since 1948 and their citizens, who were turned over for trial in U.S. district courts, also may be affected by the outcome of this case.


www.nocriminalcode.us (http://www.nocriminalcode.us/)

What is this telling me?
That there are thousands of people in prison who were tried in a court that did not have authority to hold the trial?

What is this telling me?
That there are thousands of people in prison who were tried in a court that did not have authority to hold the trial?

well the courts have authority to hold the trial, but it is saying that the code they were charged under was unconstitutional...if this appeal wins, it will cause a major impact on federal prisons..i know someone who is one of the "dozens" in the appeal... this is a major appeal and if the supreme court actually goes by constitutional guidelines, then we will see a huge victory for federal prisoners. anyone with a loved one convicted under Title 18 needs to show this press release to their loved one

The website does not give a clue as to who is behind all this and the links are to general public information. If it's a credible story they aren't letting us in on the sources. PLUS, who in their right mind would think that a Republican Supreme Court is going to let all the prisoners in the country out of jail???

oops i tried to fix my post and it posted twice, since the second post is correct just read that one.

The website does not give a clue as to who is behind all this and the links are to general public information. If it's a credible story they aren't letting us in on the sources. PLUS, who in their right mind would think that a Republican Supreme Court is going to let all the prisoners in the country out of jail???

yes it does..they have the actual appeal in a PDF file on the site, it has the name of the lawyers and petitioners on it. It is located under the menu option case files on the website

Also the very first line of the press release states who's behind it:

For dozens of prisoners, attorneys Barry Bachrach and James W. Parkman, III, filed a petition today with the United States Supreme Court

The website does not give a clue as to who is behind all this and the links are to general public information. If it's a credible story they aren't letting us in on the sources. PLUS, who in their right mind would think that a Republican Supreme Court is going to let all the prisoners in the country out of jail???

LOL I tend to agree and suspect this is the outfit behind this. They say that their arguments are copyrighted. Not only would they have to let all federal prisoners out of jail but all past pleas and convictions would be invalid back to 1948. sounds to me like a money making scam but we can always hope it's legit. It's been argued in the Appelate courts before and thrown out

http://www.intlegalservices.com/AprilNewsletter.html

LOL I tend to agree and suspect this is the outfit behind this. They say that their arguments are copyrighted. Not only would they have to let all federal prisoners out of jail but all past pleas and convictions would be invalid back to 1948. sounds to me like a money making scam but we can always hope it's legit. It's been argued in the Appelate courts before and thrown out

http://www.intlegalservices.com/AprilNewsletter.html

how is this a "money making scam?" it has been filed with the supreme court and they have not asked money of several of the petitioners, some people have invested into it because they were the original ones filing it. I have been well aware of this appeal for about 10 months or so, and I know that the legal teams have worked very hard on this.

Maybe i am missing something, but where does it say it has been argued and thrown out? I do know that the origination of this appeal started in Texas, and the lawyers throughout the country banded together to submit the main appeal to the supreme court (the one mentioned in my original post). The team in texas is the one who started this whole fight and I know that they have all been working together on this.

dont get me wrong. I hope this is legit but when you have a legal firm coptrighting legal arguments, it just sounds suspicious. Didnt mean to come off so pessimistic. Here is one of the appelate cases that I mentioned where they refer to SCOTUS dealing with this before

http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/06D0424P.pdf

i tried to view that pdf and it said errors on the page and was blank :(

i know that there is reason for strong pessimism for this, but there is also hope, and right now all i can do is hope... i want to believe it can pull through but i also know that i do NOT trust our justice system, so i don't know that justice will prevail..i guess time will tell if this appeal wins.

I would be happy for anything that might help at this point, but (sorry for asking) what is Title 18 and/or the code that they'd have to have been charged under and who/what does it generally pertain to? Thanks, inkedchick!

I would be willing to bet a significant amount of money that this petition is dismissed almost out of hand.

I would be happy for anything that might help at this point, but (sorry for asking) what is Title 18 and/or the code that they'd have to have been charged under and who/what does it generally pertain to? Thanks, inkedchick!

if you go to the site and click on the federal law links about title 18, it will tell you all the things it covers...it's one of the main things federal prisoners are convicted under..you can also google title 18 and read the law. it's a really long list, so i can't list it all here

Title 18 of the U.S. Code is the section that sets out any and all crimes, punishment, etc. prosecutable under federal law (also the Uniform Code of Military Justice is contained in Title 18).

For some reason I have a suspicous feeling about this, not sure what it is though. Besides as previously mentioned, with the spreme court we have now, I wouldn't hope for too much out of that group.

I had my husband's lawyer view this and he said for me not to get my hopes up, that the information on the cite is very sketchy.

I still have absolutely no idea why people are saying how "sketchy" and uneasy they are with this site...i have viewed the appeal in it's PDF form and it's a legitimate appeal. I have been in Terre Haute while the lawyers met with Yorie (i don't know him personally, but my visitor had told me all about the appeal and how excited Yorie and his lawyers were about it). This appeal has been in the works for at least a couple years and it's very exciting, yes we are pessimistic, but we also have to have hope.

I have no idea what people are looking at, but there is a real appeal filed and it is 49 pages long and can be read in a PDF form on that site.

Someone above mentioned ILS. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070730154315AA3f4wN

Anytime you talk with someone who wants money in order to represent you legally, the first thing to do is ask for their Bar
number and then check with the Bar in the state in which they practice and find out if they are a practicing attorney in good standing with the Bar. If the person is not an attorney, you need to ask for the name and Bar # of the supervising attorney and then check them out AND TALK with that attorney before ever handing over any money!!

Secondly, if something sounds too good to be true - it merits a lot of investigation!!

Thirdly, if you think the Supreme Court is going to throw out the whole federal criminal code and overturn the convictions of thousands of prisoners, I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. Z.

I still have absolutely no idea why people are saying how "sketchy" and uneasy they are with this site...i have viewed the appeal in it's PDF form and it's a legitimate appeal. I have been in Terre Haute while the lawyers met with Yorie (i don't know him personally, but my visitor had told me all about the appeal and how excited Yorie and his lawyers were about it). This appeal has been in the works for at least a couple years and it's very exciting, yes we are pessimistic, but we also have to have hope.

I have no idea what people are looking at, but there is a real appeal filed and it is 49 pages long and can be read in a PDF form on that site.

I think that the first thing that gets people's radar going is the fact that most serious appeals don't have a website, or leak press releases. Additionally, despie the press release issued, a google news search for the names of either of the attorneys listed shows no hits (though a standard google search shows they are both actual attorneys).

As to is the appeal filed, that is an open question. Contrary to what the press release indicates, Nothing was filed with the Supreme Court. In fact, a westlaw search shows no filings by Yorie von Kahl within the last 60 days.

This is also in addition to the fact that if this case had any merit to it, SOMEONE in the media (CNN, AP, Reuters, etc) or at the very least, a notable supreme court watcher (Professor Berman, SCOTUSBLOG, FAMM, etc) would have picked up on it.

I feel pretty confident in calling this myth busted (to borrow a phrase)

the media was not to be contacted until it was filed..the initial filing was to be in August but there was a problem with the appendix and so they corrected it and sent it, Time magazine is aware of it and i believe it is supposed to have an article about it coming up.. the supreme court has verified receiving it because i got a call saying that all the guys got their mailing from the court with a copy of the appeal.

i am not going to go in circles with this, yes the appeal is a long shot, and even many involved are pessimistic, but all i can do is hope.. and all they can do is hope... regardless, if you read over it, congress screwed up when they passed the Title 18, constitutionally it was illegally passed, there are guidelines and congress did not do it, do i believe the government will step up and take responsibility, i doubt it being as i don't trust our justice system, but do i hope they will actually go by the constitution

the media was not to be contacted until it was filed..the initial filing was to be in August but there was a problem with the appendix and so they corrected it and sent it, Time magazine is aware of it and i believe it is supposed to have an article about it coming up.. the supreme court has verified receiving it because i got a call saying that all the guys got their mailing from the court with a copy of the appeal.


I'm unclear, the media was not to be notified, but yet Time Magazine is aware of it and is going to do a story. I'm glad you got a phone call from someone saying it had been filed, but there again, nothing from any SCOTUS website, or SCOTUS watch site corroborates this. Certainly something as big as title 18 being thrown out would have attracted SOMEONE'S attention.

Also interesting is that the website you keep referring people was created in July by Yorie Von Kahl, one of the petitioners.

The petition filed also does not address any of the prior court rulings that are on point. Cases such as US vs. Risquet, US v. Lawrence, Jones v. Unknown Warden, and Tafflin v Levett to name just a few that I found with about 15 minutes of research.

I put this in the same category as inmates suing because they can't get lucky charms for breakfast. I would be suprised if the Supreme Court does not deny the petition (if filed) out of hand.

As I said, all this tends to raise some blips on the radar that this might not be the most serious of petitions.

I offered to go to the media in July and August and was told that the press release would be available to me when they are ready for me to try to contact the media. I don't know all the details about time magazine, i dont have contact with yorie so i might have misunderstood

regardless, i will make calls and ask about this as far as the scotus stuff, it was only filed on monday so i don't know if it takes time for that stuff to be updated, i have no idea, i am only trying to get people aware of this appeal, i was asked to do that and i am doing it. that's all...

I offered to go to the media in July and August and was told that the press release would be available to me when they are ready for me to try to contact the media. I don't know all the details about time magazine, i dont have contact with yorie so i might have misunderstood

regardless, i will make calls and ask about this as far as the scotus stuff, it was only filed on monday so i don't know if it takes time for that stuff to be updated, i have no idea, i am only trying to get people aware of this appeal, i was asked to do that and i am doing it. that's all...

Please dont be put off by our scrutiny. Alot of us here have been through many of these types of cases and have become not only hardened but rather well informed on the proccess and possible outcomes. Please continue to keep us informed on this case and we thank you for your efforts.

thank you outraged..i am not upset with you guys, i just can't be deterred from hope, i mean it is a long shot but i have to have hope.. i am very jaded by the system myself, so i don't trust it as it is.

i did get a call tonight that there is supposed to be a docket number assigned and that there is a date of Oct 18th. I don't know where to find this stuff, he told me to see if i can find it online.

oh and i was wrong about the mailing, they got the mailing from the printer, i thought he said it came from the court.

It is on scotus...i just checked.

Docket number 07-414. It says it was filed 9/26 and the site says it was entered on 9/27. So that makes sense why people didn't believe me. I personally felt it was likely just delayed in being filed, just like with pacer, pacer is usually a few days behind.

this is from the supreme court site:

No. 07-414
Title: In Re Yorie Von Kahl, et al., Petitioners v.
Docketed:September 26, 2007
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sep 21 2007 Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed.

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioners:

James W. Parkman 505 N. 20th St. Suite 825

Birmingham, AL 35203
Party name:

Not a scam, the REAL deal. Case no. 70-414 on the U.S. Supreme Court docket. This is not the petition found at the intlegalservices site and the brief is NOT copyrighted. Besides, once filed with a court it's public domain. The NoCriminalCode.us site also offers Word files of the petition. The point? So that others can file behind this petition. NoCriminalCode.us is the site managed by the legal team with input from the petitioners.

Not a scam, the REAL deal. Case no. 70-414 on the U.S. Supreme Court docket. This is not the petition found at the intlegalservices site and the brief is NOT copyrighted. Besides, once filed with a court it's public domain. The NoCriminalCode.us site also offers Word files of the petition. The point? So that others can file behind this petition. NoCriminalCode.us is the site managed by the legal team with input from the petitioners.

thank you!! I've been trying to say that!

Besides, no one has responded since i have proven it's real with the docket number.

DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 26, 2007.

This number 07-414 is NOT on the Supreme Court docket -- it is a request to be on the docket from "Yorie" who has filed the same requested every year since 2001. The guy is trying hard to make his case, but .... nothing to get all excited about.

This number 07-414 is NOT on the Supreme Court docket -- it is a request to be on the docket from "Yorie" who has filed the same requested every year since 2001. The guy is trying hard to make his case, but .... nothing to get all excited about.

it's sad to me that people (not you specifically, i am saying people in general) have to be so negative, for some people this is all the hope they have.. i have said before, i know this is a long shot but it's still something we can hope for.

and um...i dont know if you are just saying that yorie files this "same request" every year because you saw other dockets from him, but this is the first time this SPECIFIC topic was brought up in supreme court, it's been worked on for at least a couple years.. I don't know him personally but i know of him and i've seen him before in the visiting room, he is extremely intelligent in the law and does a lot of help with guys' legal work in the prison. 'jail house lawyer' as people like to call people like him...

of course he files a lot of appeals, because he knows the law and knows what to file... i appreciate who he is because he has specifically helped my friend in there with his legal work, he has a lot of love and respect for all that yorie did for him legally...

i don't trust nor like the justice system one bit, but to shoot down legal things when it's all those loved ones on that appeal have left is sad...people need encouragement not pessimism around every corner.. when i deal with people regarding this appeal i say "yes, it's a long shot, i am not holding my breath, but i have HOPE. that's all that i can have" without hope, there's nothing.

It's a scam and the guy has been arrested.



Ex-convict appeals to inmates' hopes for freedom

Company says cases can be won on a legal technicality

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/cnishared/newsworthy/images/click-to-listen.gifClick-2-Listen (http://statesman.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Ex-convict+appeals+to+inmates%27+hopes+for+freedom&expire=&urlID=24642171&fb=Y&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.statesman.com%2Fnews%2Fconten t%2Fnews%2Fstories%2Flocal%2F10%2F28%2F1028tony.#)
By Chuck Lindell
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/28/1028tony.html (http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/28/1028tony.html)
A small Austin company, International Legal Services, advertises that it can free just about any federal prison inmate on appeal, even those who pleaded guilty or confessed — a dubious claim that even the most prestigious law firms would never make.
The key is supposed to be a legal argument, developed by employee Tony Davis, that claims the federal criminal code is invalid because Congress botched key legislation during the Truman administration.
As a result, most criminal convictions obtained in the past 59 years should be tossed out, Davis argues.
Davis, however, is not a lawyer. He's a former accountant who served almost 51/2 years in prison for fraud and money laundering — details International Legal Services fails to disclose to its clients, including about 160 inmates who paid up to $17,500 each for the company's services, potentially generating fees topping $1 million.
Nor does the company, which Davis said is owned by his wife, disclose that its ballyhooed legal argument has yet to free one inmate since Davis first used it to challenge his own 1998 conviction.
In fact,two courts have sanctioned Davis for filing frivolous lawsuits by repeatedly submitting the argument as part of an avalanche of appeals, briefs and motions attacking his conviction — including a lawsuit naming President Bush.
The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also scoffed at the argument, which was used by an International Legal Services client serving time in Illinois.
"This case is unbelievably frivolous," reads the one-sentence Sept. 24 ruling.
In addition, the Austin Police Department is investigating complaints that Davis has been practicing law without a license, a Class A misdemeanor. Such complaints also can be handled as a civil matter. The Texas Supreme Court defines the practice of law to include drafting legal documents and accepting clients for legal work, activities Davis admitted performing for International Legal Services in interviews with the Austin American-Statesman.
Despite the setbacks, Davis remains optimistic about eventual success, this time in the grandest legal arena of all. Petitions making the argument, filed in the past four weeks, are pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.
"We expect to win," said Davis, 58.
International Legal Services has told potential clients that its Supreme Court challenge is their ticket out of prison — "Petitioners should be home in about 3-4 months after the petition is filed," a December newsletter stated — but legal experts warn against predicting success, especially at the Supreme Court, which accepts fewer than 1 percent of cases submitted for its review.
"Any promise of success in a criminal case is highly dubious," said Jordan Steiker, a University of Texas law professor who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. "It's just a wild misrepresentation of the prospects for relief, and it's an obvious play on the desperate circumstances of people incarcerated in federal prison, and their families."
Justices could announce as early as Monday whether they will accept the International Legal Services petition.
Opting not to wait, at least three of the company's clients have demanded their money back.
Nazanzo Hill, an inmate in the U.S. prison in Beaumont, sued Davis in August to recover $3,300 in payments, plus $96,700 in punitive damages. Davis, the lawsuit states, "is a con artist with a prior record" who engaged in legal malpractice by guaranteeing Hill would be freed from prison.
Davis countersued, alleging that Hill breached his $15,000 contract.
Two other clients, Mississippi women who hired International Legal Services on behalf of incarcerated sons, demanded refunds last summer after belatedly learning that Davis is a convicted felon and not, as they believed, a lawyer. Davis responded by suing both women, Ruby Sanders and Lucy Dotson, alleging defamation and breach of contract.
"He promised me that my child would not die in prison," said Dotson, who paid $11,600 to International Legal Services and still owes $900. "These are the words Tony told me: 'Your son will be out in a couple weeks.' If someone told me I had won a million dollars, I don't think I could be that happy."
Davis denied making verbal guarantees.
"I told them that according to the legal people involved in the team, we expected to win or should win," he said. "I told them it was probably the best bet they had, for a lot of these people, in terms of getting them out of prison."
But legal experts see little likelihood that the Supreme Court will be won over by International Legal Services' argument, which is based on a highly technical but rarely successful "jurisdictional" challenge to a court's authority.
The court has declined to overturn convictions based on jurisdictional mistakes unless the error affects the fairness and integrity of the trial — and that's a high bar to meet, said Terrence Kirk, a 25-year lawyer and one of Austin's leading criminal appeals attorneys.
Fraud conviction
In the booming economy of the early 1990s, 15 companies eager for quick loans turned to Davis' Austin firm, Forum Financial. Despite collecting advance fees of $25,000 to $400,000, however, Davis never made the loans, according to an opinion from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
During his 1998 trial, Davis insisted that his financing dried up when a certificate of deposit, backed by 3,500 metric tons of gold from the estate of former Philippines ruler Ferdinand Marcos, was removed from his account at a London bank. (In court appeals, he would later accuse the CIA and U.S. government of taking the certificate of deposit to fund illegal covert operations around the globe.)
Found guilty of conspiracy, wire fraud, money laundering and the travel and transportation of securities for fraudulent purposes, Davis was sent to the Seagoville federal prison near Dallas and ordered to pay $3.6 million in restitution. He is paying $600 a month, according to court records.
While in prison, Davis said, he received training as a paralegal and came across indications that Title 18, the section of the U.S. Code detailing every federal crime, was improperly enacted by Congress in 1948.
Davis returned to Austin in 2004 and began working as a paralegal for Austin lawyer Engin Derkunt, a business relationship that continues today. Derkunt said he also helped Davis research the Title 18 arguments, and he argued their merits before the 7th Circuit Court, which later delivered the "unbelievably frivolous" ruling.
After his release, Davis said, he also received a job offer from James Taylor, a prison acquaintance who is stillserving time for counterfeiting. Taylor had incorporated International Legal Resources in Nevada and asked Davis to sign on to develop his Title 18 argument and similar claims.
"I told him I'd start working on it if he could provide the arguments, help with the research," Davis said.
Taylor and Davis would eventually part ways, but Davis continued with the company, joining with his wife, Gaylan Davis, to incorporate in Texas as ILS Services in 2005 while continuing to use the International Legal Services name.
A year later, the couple took out a $629,900 loan on a house in Pemberton Heights, county records show. In August, they bought another home, in Lost Creek, with a $512,050 loan and an undisclosed down payment, the records show.
Today, Davis said, he is merely an employee of the company, which is run by his wife, Gaylan Davis.
Still, Tony Davis said he takes an active role — dealing with clients, researching potential cases, negotiating fees and writing briefs. He said he has help from another paralegal and a former lawyer who served time in prison.
To date, International Legal Services has based its business on the Title 18 argument, which Tony Davis has registered with the U.S. Copyright Office to discourage inmates from sharing his work for free. The company advertises by mailing newsletters to inmates who were identified using the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Web site, Tony Davis said.
Newsletters typically discuss aspects of the Title 18 argument and urge inmates or their families to call for more information or to sign up as clients. Several newsletters included optimistic assessments of the company's chances:
"We will get you into court and get you relief," the April 2006 newsletters says.
The March 2007 newsletter mentions that a "smoking gun" has been unearthed proving that the law creating Title 18 was never enacted. "Now, without doubt, no set of facts exists which makes the statute constitutional," the issue says.
"The courts have given us a direct path into the Supreme Court for relief, not just for one client, but for all clients. We can continue to add people for a limited window of time. Relief should come within a very short period of time," the July 2007 issue says.
In U.S. district courts, Title 18 challenges are filed in the inmate's name, and clients are given several options. They can file the brief themselves, or International Legal Services will file it for them. "And sometimes they need an attorney, and we bring Engin (Derkunt) in on it, or one from their area," Tony Davis said.
International Legal Services' name does not appear on the briefs. The scope of the company's business, however, became apparent when it listed 178 clients in its brief filed with the Supreme Court in mid-October.
Davis said that about 20 names were "freebies," people who had contacted the company but declined to hire it. One name on the list was Davis himself. The rest, he said, are clients.
At the Supreme Court
For Davis, the Supreme Court brief is the crowning achievement of five years of often tedious research — and proof that International Legal Services has followed through on its commitment to clients.
"Related to whether it got into (the Supreme) Court like we said it would? Yes, it did. Whether it was docketed or not? Yes, it was. Whether we put together the legal team to argue it for these people? Yes, we did," Davis said.
That legal team includes two lawyers whose names appear on the Supreme Court brief — James Parkman of Alabama and Barry Bachrach of Massachusetts — but Davis said the document was largely written by an inmate in an Indiana federal prison, Yorie Von Kahl.
Von Kahl is serving a life sentence in the 1983 shooting deaths of two U.S. marshals during a traffic stop targeting his tax-protester father in North Dakota. Von Kahl learned about the Title 18 argument from a 2006 International Legal Services newsletter and directed his lawyer, Bachrach, to contact ILS, Davis said.
"(Bachrach) said Yorie is probably one of top legal writers in the country, which he is, and he said, 'we would like to work with you to perfect the research,' " Davis said.
Davis agreed. The collaboration resulted in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed Sept. 23 and naming Von Kahl and 23 of his friends and acquaintances, plus two International Legal Services clients, Davis said. International Legal Services followed two weeks later with a duplicate filing that included its clients.
Bachrach said Friday that he is withdrawing from the case and will be replaced by an Ohio lawyer, but he stands behind the argument. Parkman did not return a phone call Friday.
The petition argues that Public Law 80-772, which established Title 18 of the U.S. Code, is invalid because Congress violated procedures established by Article I of the Constitution when:
The House voted to approve amendments added to the bill but not the bill "as amended."
The Senate did not resubmit the bill to the House for its required approval after a 1947 adjournment.
The House speaker and Senate president signed the bill and sent it to President Truman during an adjournment, violating requirements that business be conducted only when Congress is in session and a quorum is present.
If the Supreme Court voids the 1948 law, DerKunt said, it could lead to freedom for the roughly 200,200 inmates held in federal prison, plus clean records for many thousands more who have completed their sentences.
Von Kahl, however, estimates that 60,000 prisoners could be affected because the pre-1948 laws would be in force, Davis said.
If the Supreme Court petition falls through, Davis said, he's ready to go another round.
"Then we go back to court with our clients with some of the other arguments we've developed," he said. "We've got six more jurisdictional arguments. And we have a couple arguments that should win in the state (courts)."
clindell@..., 912-2569

Courts react to Tony Davis
Two courts have sanctioned Tony Davis for filing repeated motions, lawsuits and briefs challenging his 1998 conviction for fraud, money laundering and conspiracy.

1.U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks, Austin: After Davis files a lawsuit against President Bush and others in his administration, Sparks issues a $500 fine, noting that Davis once again submitted arguments that had already been denied. 'Clearly, his conduct constitutes a misuse and abuse of the legal system,' Sparks' Aug. 24 order states. Five weeks later, Davis appeals the sanction to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals — again including the previously denied arguments criticized by Sparks.

2.5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, New Orleans: The appeals court bans Davis from filing legal documents without advance permission from an appellate judge. All U.S. district courts in the district — Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi — are barred from accepting Davis' appeals or complaints without permission. 'Davis's abuse of the judicial system warrants the imposition of a sanction,' the court's Oct. 15 order states.

Wow, I'm just shocked. I can't believe that the whole criminal code actually is constitutional.

Terrible that someone can not only take money from the families of these people that have and are suffering so much hardship, but also get there hopes up. They don't need this emotional rollercoaster.

the people on the supreme court docket were not at all the guys involved in the above story. they filed on their own

it was denied anyways, so oh well.

davis is not even mentioned in the supreme court appeal. it specifically says:

~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioners:

James W. Parkman 505 N. 20th St. Suite 825

Birmingham, AL 35203
Party name:

so that's not davis, nor does it say anything about international legal services, nor does it even say it's located in texas.

it doesn't matter anyways, it was denied.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/10/30/1030tony.html?cxntlid=inform

U.S. Supreme Court rejects ex-convict's legal argument
Austin company argued most inmates must be freed on technicality
Listen to this article or download audio file.Click-2-Listen

By Chuck Lindell
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Tuesday, October 30, 2007

The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to accept arguments alleging that the federal criminal code is invalid — dealing a blow to International Legal Services, an Austin company that advertised that the argument could win freedom for federal inmates nationwide.

Justices gave no reason for denying the petition.

In Sunday's editions, the Austin American-Statesman examined dubious claims by International Legal Services that the argument, developed by ex-convict Tony Davis, could free just about any federal inmate, even those who had pleaded guilty or confessed.

About 160 inmates and their families hired the Austin company — paying up to $17,500 each for the right to use Davis' argument, which claims that Congress botched legislation creating the criminal code in 1948, invalidating most criminal convictions obtained over the past six decades.

Other courts have already dismissed the argument, including the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Chicago, which recently dubbed it "unbelievably frivolous."

Despite the latest setback, Davis remained optimistic that the Supreme Court would address his argument because he said the petition denied Monday was flawed. That petition for a writ of habeas corpus, developed by federal inmate Yorie Von Kahl using research provided by Davis, included exhibits in violation of court rules, Davis said.

After consulting with Supreme Court clerks, International Legal Services on Monday filed an identical petition on behalf of its clients, but with the exhibits removed, he said.

"We think we will be given a docket number this week and we'll be taken to conference" for consideration by justices, said Davis, who in 1998 was convicted of fraud and money laundering for collecting advance fees for loans he did not make, court records show.

If the court rejects the argument again — a strong likelihood, given Monday's denial and the court's extreme reluctance to grant such claims — Davis said he is prepared to flood U.S. district courts with copies of the argument on behalf of International Legal Services' clients.

"Either way, we plan on getting the issue heard," he said.

clindell@statesman.com; 912-2569

I believe that Mr. Davis, and ILS, should he follow through with his threat to "flood U.S. district courts with copies of the argument on behalf of International Legal Services' clients" will soon be barred from making any filings in a federal court.

the argument has been rejected every time it has been presented, and the topic is moot.

Amen. It appears Mr. Davis will try to keep filing as long as he can convince some poor soul to pay him to try. Perhaps the spickett (how do you spell that?) will shut off now that these articles have been published.

Most people have missed the point. What did you expect the government to do, lie down? Or the government press? 07-414 had procedural defects in it. The issues were never addressed by the Supreme Court. Our clients were filed under two different petitions, 07-579, and 07-580, and were both accepted and docketed on November 1, 2007 and are scheduled for conference on November 20, 2007. So they are in the Supreme Court. As far as other courts rejecting the argument, not exactly true. No court has addressed the argument on the merits, only created dodges to avoid it. After we were docketed, the Seventh Circuit cancelled oral arguments in U.S. v. Collins. And a ruling by a district court has no precedent value at all. Of course the courts do not want to address the arguments on the merits, but they will be required to. The facts speak for themselves. The bill was never Constitutionally passed. And what does the Constitution have to do with whether a Republican or Democrat is in power. And what about the 33,000 foreign nationals who are in US prisons without authority? Is that the standard of a democracy? Anyone can call me at anytime. You want evidence about the system? Removed per PTO Policy if you want the facts.

Edit: Never Mind, not worth the time to deal with it

I understand that there was to be a hearing on the docket on 11/20/07. Does anyone know what the responds was?

I understand that there was to be a hearing on the docket on 11/20/07. Does anyone know what the responds was?

denied

There may be some benefit to what the court may say on this, but it's technical in nature and will only serve to clarify legislative procedure. If the court did indeed decide that the law creating Title 18 was invalid, I have no doubt that the current legislature would act immediately to fix the problem. They do make these laws, after all.

Does Anybody Know If Any Of Tony's Clients Won A Case And Walked And Was Freed?????? It Just Happened Recently And One My Friends Asked Him Who It Was He Couldn't Say B/c Of Pricay Issues???? My Friend Believes Him But I Dont After He Made That Statement. Has This Guy Won Anything Yet???? Please Help.

How Did U Know Itwas Denied B/c I Didnt Even See It On The Supreme Court Docket Listed On Its Website?

He couldn't say the name of a prisoner who won a court case and was freed??? That's complete B.S. All court cases are public record and the offender's name would be public record.

Everyone has a right to believe what they want but, as I said before, people need to really do their homework before parting with their money - unless they have a lot to burn.

Does Anybody Know If Any Of Tony's Clients Won A Case And Walked And Was Freed?????? It Just Happened Recently And One My Friends Asked Him Who It Was He Couldn't Say B/c Of Pricay Issues???? My Friend Believes Him But I Dont After He Made That Statement. Has This Guy Won Anything Yet???? Please Help.

please see my previous comment. both supreme court cases were denied. it was a lie (unless of course he is referring to a completely different case)

How Did U Know Itwas Denied B/c I Didnt Even See It On The Supreme Court Docket Listed On Its Website?
yes it is...not sure where you looked:

No. 07-579
Title: In Re Harry Edwin Miles, et al., Petitioners v.
Docketed:November 1, 2007
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Oct 11 2007 Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed. Nov 5 2007 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 20, 2007. Nov 26 2007 Petition DENIED.

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioners:

James W. Parkman 505 N. 20th Street(205) 244-1115
Suite 825

Birmingham, AL 35203
Party name:



No. 07-580
Title: In Re Joseph Moderski, et al., Petitioners v.
Docketed:November 1, 2007
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Oct 25 2007 Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed. Nov 5 2007 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 20, 2007. Nov 26 2007 Petition DENIED.

~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~ Attorneys for Petitioners:

James W. Parkman 505 N. 20th Street(205) 244-1115
Suite 825

Birmingham, AL 35203
Party name:




***both directly from the supreme court website

Everyone has a right to believe what they want but, as I said before, people need to really do their homework before parting with their money - unless they have a lot to burn.

at least the guys in terre haute (the first filed of these appeals) didn't dish out money...i am pretty sure yorie probably paid some towards his lawyers, but he wrote most (or all of it) up...luckily the terre haute guys didn't lose anything other than their hope of a win :(

Well, I do believe that he can tell me the name of the person who was freed but when I asked him he said that that when his clients get relief, he cannot accept credit for it until it has been official in the court system....he also mentioned that he iS NOT an attny so that is not his place to bust out and say "hey I freed my clients" Of course he told me that but he wouldn't mention the name b/c of "privacy issues" that can get him in trouble on technical terms. I hear all this bad stuff about him, but what is trhrowing me off is that he is a sincere guy who returns all my phone calls and messages. He provides me copies of documents that is verifiable with the Supreme Court... I already called the Supreme court.....So im still going to hold onto him.....what do you guys think about this????

Are there any other questions that I need to ask him????

Oh and Who is Yorie,,, Is he one of the petitioners on the last 2 petitions that were recently denied?

Yorie is the original first filer back on Oct 1st. it is the person in this original news story (please see first post in this thread)

of course he wants to return calls..returning calls doesn't make anyone good or bad...

as someone said before, if anyone ACTUALLY won an appeal through him it would be public information...all court documents are public information, anyone can obtain them..so he's lieing, if he really had a "win" you could easily be able to look it up...and if he TRULY has a win, don't you think he'd WANT people to know the real names? it becomes case law if it is a win..case law helps other people in similar appeals... honestly, i am not putting you down, but you really should step back and listen to what you're saying and what he's saying... maybe it's because i am from outside looking in, but everything you have said of his responses put red flags up and sound fishy... i wouldn't give him a single cent if i were you.

Are there any other questions that I need to ask him????

Ask him for the name, phone number and Bar number of the attorney who he's not willing to "bust out" in front of to brag. Then call the attorney and talk to him and see what he has to say. Get the name from him. Also, call the State Bar and see if there are any complaints about this attorney and if he is, in fact, an attorney in good standing with the Bar and what his area of law expertise is. Call other lawyers in that town and see if they know him. Research, research, research and don't hand over any money until you do.