|
Knights In Dirty Armour
II
07 December,
2005
State of Oklahoma v.
Gilda Marie Schoonover CF-99-00271B
Drew Edmondson,
Attorney General:
There seems to be a “Catch
22” in the summary order (enclosed copy) by Judge Post dated
11-14-2005. It was
filed past the time allotted by the brief filed by Kevin Adams on
which this “order” is based.
It is not out of time of the Pro-se filed 10-14-2005 but
there is no mention of the Pro-se in the summary order.
It is necessary to file
notice of intent to appeal within ten days. However, this order dated
11-14-2005 does not have any argument to traverse, and thus it is
necessary to file the notice to appeal blind to any argument. To wait fifteen days for any
argument would necessitate filing Notice of Intent to Appeal out of
time. Notice of Intent
was filed 11-18-2005.
Enclosed is a photocopy of
an envelope containing material tantamount to the case. Note it has not been opened
but refused and returned.
This is simply stating, “My mind is made up; don’t confuse me
with facts.” Further, I
was under the impression that “conclusions of law” are the
responsibility of the judge, not her prosecuting attorney.
The gravamen of the appeal
will be the Post Conviction Relief filed by Kevin Adams and the
Pro-se Supplement filed by Marie Schoonover.
The Pro-se is rather large
as the issues are rather extensive. It is fact that the court
did rule that nothing would cure the omission of cross examination
of witnesses which should in and of itself be sufficient for a
favourable ruling for the petitioner, Gilda Marie Schoonover.
1
However, as it is apparent
that the judicial system in Mayes County is well trained at
straining gnats and swallowing camels and making up the law sua
sponte as they go along, I feel it is absolutely necessary to cover
ALL issues paramount to seeking Justice. Dirty laundry should be
washed; not hidden under a gnat.
We do not need incompetent
prejudicial judges or dishonest prosecutors in our State.
The Appeal of the Post
Conviction Relief (by Kevin Adams) and Pro-se Supplement denial
dated 11-14-2005 by Judge Post is being prepared to be filed within
the thirty day time limit Pro-se as the Petitioner is indigent and
no attorney for representation has been appointed, though you are
listed as “Attorney for Defendant” on Judge Post’s overruling
document Nov 14, and baring some serious unforeseeable ‘accident’ or
illness no time extension will be requested.
I will include the
question: Why did not the lead investigator, George Klatt, testify
at any of the hearings/trials?
As George Klatt is the primary accuser, with his Probable
Cause Affidavit, why were we never allowed to cross examine
him? Had George Klatt
been called to testify to the exculpatory evidence on the probable
cause affidavit that vindicates Gilda Marie there can be no doubt
the jury could not have ignored this fact, but acquit Gilda
Marie. It was
additional “Ineffective Assistance of Counsel” for Kevin Adams to
neglect to mention this in his brief concerning denial of our right
to cross examine this key State witness for the defendant.
It was ineffective
assistance of trial counsel
to neglect to subpoena George Klatt as a defense witness and
request to rule him as a hostile witness. Douglas V. Alabama /
Pointer v. Texas. Especially in light of
the fact that had such an examination been allowed it would have
shown the jury and the public in open court that the entire State’s
case was constructed on the shallow foundation of a lie.
2
To support the
aforementioned statements, the “Mere fact that counsel does not
raise every nonfrivolous error
on appeal is not necessarily evidence of ineffectiveness; however, failure to raise
issue warranting reversal, modification of sentence, or remand for
resentencing may prove counsel was ineffective. Banks v. State,
Okla. Crim.App., 810 P.2d
1286
Respectfully,
John Schoonover
RR 1 Box
67 Cleveland Oklahoma
74020
for Gilda Marie Schoonover,
Petitioner
inc: photocopy of envelope
containing titanic evidence addressed to Judge Post prior to ruling
which is postmarked and marked by Judge Post, “Refused, Return To
Sender**.”
Cc: Gene Haynes, Mayes
County
Attorney
knightsindirtyarmour.com
**(This
could be interpreted as, “I’m not interested in the
truth.”)
3
Back / Next
/ Home
| 
