Amended Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus With Appendix

Filing # 112016692 E-Filed 08/18/2020 06:15:36 PM
IN THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA
RECEIVED, 08/18/2020 06:16:32 PM, Clerk, Fifth District Court of Appeal
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE,
Petitioner,
v. CASE NO.: 5D20-1632
STATE OF FLORIDA,
BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE
TONIA WERNER, MD,
Respondents.
___________________________/
AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
Submitted August 18, 2020 by:
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

Nonlawyer Petitioner Pro Se
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, Florida 34481
Tel. (352) 854-7807
Email: neilgillespie@mfi.net
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS........................................................................
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES..................................................................
RECORDINGS OF HEARINGS...........................................................
INTRODUCTION................................................................................... 1.
JURISDICTION ..................................................................................... 2.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE .............................................................. 3.
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS ........................................................... 9.
GROUNDS FOR HABEAS CORPUS RELIEF ................................... 9.
I. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED 9.

BY APPOINTED COUNSEL IN CASE 2019-CF-4193
Petitioner did not request appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193

Petitioner does not want appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
Petitioner is not entitled to appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
Appointed Counsel was ineffective in representing the Petitioner

in 2019-CF-4193 on July 9, 2020 during a hearing on the State’s
motion to revoke bond; as a result the Petitioner’s bond was revoked
and he was remanded to jail until further order of the court.
II. THE PETITINER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED 18.

UNDER THREAT OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAM OR
JAIL IN CASE 2019-CF-4193 AND CASE 2020-CF-2417.

in 2019-CF-4193 on March 13, 2020 when counsel lied to the
Petitioner about a review of disability, and then filed Motion
To Determine Defendant’s Competency To Stand Trial.
III. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY 22.

CIRCUIT JUDGE ANTHONY TATTI PRESIDING IN CASE
2019-CF-4193 AND IN CASE 2020-CF-2417 WHEN JUDGE
TATTI FAILED TO RECUSE AS REQUIRED BY LAW
The Petitioner filed two meritorious pro se motions to disqualify
Circuit Judge Anthony Tatti on June 22, 2020, one in case 2019-CF-
4193, and one on June 22, 2020 in case 2020-CF-2417. Thirty (30)
days passed without a ruling on the motions by Judge Tatti. Therefore
the motions are deemed granted under Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j).
The Petitioner filed two motions for an order to reassign the cases, as
required by Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j), directing the clerk to
reassign the cases, whereupon Judge Tatti belatedly denied the pro se
motion to disqualify him in Case No. 2020-CF-2417. Judge Tatti then
denied the Petitioner’s motion for an order to reassign the case.
Judge Tatti belatedly struck my pro se motion to disqualify him in

Case No. 2019-CF-4193. Judge Tatti then struck my pro se motion for
an order to reassign the case.
IV. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY 29.

$4,000 MONEY BAIL BOND IN CASE 2019-CF-4193 AND
$5,000 MONEY BAIL BOND IN CASE 2020-CF-2417.
The Petitioner is age 64, has never been convicted of a crime, has
resided in Marion County for over 15 years, is a former business
owner, and educated with degrees in business and psychology.
Pursuant to Rule 3.131(b)(1), Fla. R. Crim. P., “there is a presumption
in favor of release on nonmonetary conditions for any person who is
granted pretrial release.”
CONCLUSION AND RELIEF SOUGHT ................................................ 32.

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
Page
FEDERAL COSTITUTION AND CASES
U.S. Const. Amend IV, V and XIV ........................................................19
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975)............................................ 15
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)..................................... 16
STATE CASES
Jones v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 48 So. 3d 704 (Fla. 2010)................... 2
Floyd v. Parole and Probation Comm’n, 509 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 1987) ..... 2
Allen v. Cochran, 128 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1961) .......................................... 2
Logan v. State, 846 So.2d 472 (Fla. 2003)................................................ 13
Salser v. State, 582 So.2d 12 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)................................... 13
Crooms v. Schad, 51 Fla. 168, 40 So. 497 (1906) ................................... 20
STATE CONSTITUTION, STATUTES AND RULES

Art. I, § 13, Fla. Const. ................................................................................ 2
Art. V, § 4(b)(3), Fla. Const. ....................................................................... 2
Art. I, §§ 2, 9 and 12, Fla. Const. ................................................................ 19
Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(3) .......................................................................... 2

Fla. R. App. P. 9.100 ................................................................................... 2
Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(c)........................................................................22
Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j)........................................................................ 22
Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516 .......................................................................... 24
Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.525........................................................................... 24
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.080 ................................................................................... 24
Fla. Stat. § 27.52 ......................................................................................... 9
The Public Defender (Fla. Stat. sec. 27.51)................................................. 9
Office of Criminal Counsel and Civil Regional Counsel (27.511) ............ 9
Private court-appointed counsel (Fla. Stat. sec. 27.40(2)(a)) ..................... 9
Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3) ....................................................................15
Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5) ................................................................... 15
Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.131(b)(1)..................................................................... 5
Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1a Interception of Oral Communication ....................... 3

Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1c Disclosure of Communication .................................. 3
Fla. Stat. sec. 784.03.1A1 Battery ............................................................... 4
Fla. Stat. sec. 812.131.2b Robbery Sudden Snatching w/o Deadly Weapon 4
RECORDINGS OF HEARINGS
1. STATE OF FLORIDA v NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

CASE NO. 2019-CF-4193 A-Z
Marion County Circuit Judge Anthony Michael Tatti presiding.
Due to COVID-19 the hearing was being conducted remotely with “Zoom”.
ZOOM hearing held July 9, 2020 at 8:30 AM on MOTION TO REVOKE

BOND, filed by the State Attorney on June 15, 2020 (DOC-077).
Appearance by appointed counsel Zachary Glenn Phipps, Office of Criminal

Counsel and Civil Regional Counsel for the 5th D.C.A. (“OCCCRC”)
I was not able to log into the Zoom hearing, or testify on my behalf.
HEARING RESULTS: Bond revoked, the Sheriff shall take the Defendant
into custody and detain said Defendant at the County Jail, pending further
order of this Court.
2. STATE OF FLORIDA v NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

CASE NO. 2020-CF-2417 A-Z
Marion County Circuit Judge Anthony Michael Tatti presiding.
Arraignment held July 28, 2020 at 09:00 AM in courtroom 4A of the Marion

County Judicial Center, 110 NW 1st Ave., Ocala, FL.
I appeared pro se, testified on my behalf, and waived my right to a lawyer,

see DOC-048 date 07-28-2020, WAIVER OF RIGHT TO LAWYER
During the proceeding Judge Tatti found “the above-named defendant is

alert and intelligent and executed the above Waiver of Right to Lawyer
freely and voluntarily for the purposes therein expressed.”
HEARING RESULTS: COURT SETS ASIDE ORDER REVOKING

BOND; Bond Revocation Recalled Unserved.
3. Recordings of hearings provided to the Clerk in lieu of transcripts, see

attached. “There was not sufficient time or money to make transcripts...”
INTRODUCTION
My name is Neil Joseph Gillespie, a nonlawyer appearing pro se, a
person with disabilities, henceforth in the first person. I am age 64, with no
prior criminal record. Before moving to Florida in 1993 I owned and
operated several businesses in Pennsylvania. I am educated with degrees in
business (Wharton/UPenn) and psychology (The Evergreen State College). I
am single, never married, and do not have children.
In 2005 moved to Ocala Florida and cared for my Mother who later
died of Alzheimer’s disease in 2009. I have lived at the same address since
2005, my Florida residential homestead, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala,
Marion County, Florida 34481.
In 2006 I contacted the Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) to no
avail about financial fraud by Bank of America and my sister and a scheme
that wrongly encumbered Mom’s home with a $40,000 mortgage. (Exhibit A)
In 2008 I replaced that loan and consolidated other debts with a Home
Equity Conversion Mortgage, also called a HECM reverse mortgage,
currently in litigation. During this time I have become a target of the MCSO,
the Marion County Bar Association, The Florida Bar, the Courts, and State
Attorney Brad King, and have been denied rights under color of law.
1
JURISDICTION
“The writ of habeas corpus shall be grantable of right, freely and
without cost.” Art. I, § 13, Fla. Const. The writ is an original proceeding in
this Court, Art. V, § 4(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(3), and is
governed by Fla. R. App. P. 9.100, and Chapter 79 of the Florida Statutes.
This Court's Order dated July 29, 2020, states:
Upon consideration that the Notice of Appeal transferred from

the Florida Supreme Court should be properly treated as a
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in this Court, it is
ORDERED that Petitioner shall file, within ten days of the date
hereof, an Amended Petition.
On August 7, 2020 I moved to enlarge time to file to August 17, 2020.
The writ of habeas corpus addresses the legality of the restraint.
In Jones v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 48 So. 3d 704 (Fla. 2010), the Florida
Supreme Court found that habeas corpus was the proper remedy to
determine the validity of a restraint under which a person is held. For this
reason, the petitioner must actually demonstrate that he or she is in custody
or that the petitioner is being restrained in some manner by the respondent.
In other words, habeas corpus is only an appropriate remedy if the petitioner
is actually being detained. See Floyd v. Parole and Probation Comm’n, 509
So. 2d 919 (Fla. 1987) and Allen v. Cochran, 128 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 1961).
2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
I was arrested on November 10, 2019 in STATE OF FLORIDA VS
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, Marion County Circuit Criminal Court, Case
No. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z, and charged with two crimes:
Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1a Interception of Oral Communication;

Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1c Disclosure of Communication
My arrest was politically motivated by Marion Co. Sheriff Billy Woods, see,
AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL J. GILLESPIE Re: Marion Senior Services, Inc.

Filing # 109909167 E-Filed 07/07/2020 06:50:44 PM
Sheriff Woods was vice president of Marion Senior Services, Inc.
The complainant, Chonnie Phillips, is a temp employee of Marion
Senior Services, Inc. where Sheriff Billy Woods is vice president.
I did not intercept oral communication with Ms. Phillips while she
was employed by Marion Senior Services, Inc. Instead, I was a party to the
telephone call with Phillips who answered the phone when I called.
Attorney Samantha Shealy Rauba, FL Bar #59503, serves on the
Board of Directors of Marion Senior Services, Inc. A web page for Attorney
Shealy Rauba states:
Mrs. Shealy Rauba is highly active in the Marion County legal and
professional community. She serves on the board of Marion Senior
Services...She has been married to her husband, Erik, since 2010 and
they have two daughters.
https://www.smrmlaw.com/samantha-shealy-rauba/
3
Mrs. Shealy Rauba was president and registered agent for the Marion
County Bar Association, Inc. when she refused to provide me the charter as
required by F.S. § 617.1623. The Florida Bar responded to my complaint
October 22, 2019 and determined this is a civil dispute best resolved through
the civil system, see Samantha Shealy Rauba, RFA No. 20-5317.
The Marion County Bar Association, Inc. is housed in the State
Attorney’s Office, 110 NW 1st Ave. Ste 5000, Ocala, FL 34475-6614.
Mrs. Shealy Rauba is married to Erik John Rauba, FL Bar # 59429.
Mr. Rauba is employed by the State Attorney for the Fifth Judicial Circuit,
110 NW 1st Ave. Ste 5000, Ocala, FL 34475-6614, Email: erauba@sao5.org
The Petitioner was arrested on June 7, 2020 in STATE OF FLORIDA
VS NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, Marion County Circuit Criminal Court,
Case No. 2020-CF-2417, and charged with two crimes:
Fla. Stat. sec. 784.03.1A1 Battery

Fla. Stat. sec. 812.131.2b Robbery by Sudden Snatching Without
Deadly Weapon
The alleged victim, Sarah May Thompson, is a convicted felon who
served time in Florida prison, who is also addicted to heroin and other drugs.
Ms. Thompson is a 35 year-old unremarried widow, a homeless thief and
4
commercial sex worker, who trolls CR 484 from Summerfied Florida to
Dunellon Florida in search of drugs, money for drugs, and sex.
The State’s Discovery Exhibit in Case No. 2020-CF-002417-A-Z, Filing #
110167557 E-Filed 07/13/2020 05:00:59 PM, provided Brady Evidence, the
Victim's Criminal History, which includes: (Exhibit 20)
Pasco County, Case No. 2018-CF-5131, LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND

DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE, 2X FRAUD IMPERSON W/O CONSENT
11/21/2018 Court: Adjudicated Guilty
817.568.2a / FRAUD-IMPERSON USE POSS ID OF ANOTHER

PERSON WO CONSENT : F1
817.568.2a / FRAUD-IMPERSON USE POSS ID OF ANOTHER
PERSON WO CONSENT : F1
812.014.3a / LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE
Pasco County, Case No. 2018-MM-0025, LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND

DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE 06/20/2018 Court: Adjudicated Guilty
812.014.3a / LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE
Marion County, Case 42-2014-CF-2361, RETAIL PETIT THEFT,

EVIDENCE TAMPERING, RWOV, DEALING IN STOLEN
PROPERTY 08/13/2014 Court: Adjudicated Guilty
918.13 / EVIDENCE TAMPERING (Adjudicated Guilty)

812.014 / RETAIL PETIT THEFT (Adjudicated Guilty)
843.02 / RESIST OR OBSTRUCT OFFICER WITHOUT
VIOLENCE (Adjudicated Guilty)
812.019.1 / DEALING IN STOLEN PROPERTY (dropped)
A Violation Report in Case 42-2014-CF-2361, DOC-131, March 6,

2015, DC NO: U51563, shows Ms. Thompson tested positive for
drugs, and she signed an admission statement for use of marijuana,
opiates, and benzodiazepines; while pregnant with her daughter.
5
Ms. Thompson relinquished her daughter at birth in 2015.
On February 6, 2020 Ms. Thompson was arrested in Marion County,
Case 42-2020-CF-0516, and charged but later dropped:
893.13.6A / POSSESSION OF METHAMPHETAMINE

893.13.6A / POSSESSION OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
893.13.6B / POSSESSION OF CANNABIS LESS THAN 20 GRAMS
893.147.1 / POSSESSION OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
On March 3, 2020 the state filed ANNOUNCEMENT OF NO
INFORMATION, presumably to use Ms. Thompson as a way to get to me.
On July 14, 2020 I emailed ASA Jared Gainey about the State’s
Discovery Exhibit: (Exhibit 20)
Mr. Gainey:
Thank you for the State’s Discovery Exhibit. Regarding the Brady
Evidence for Ms. Thompson, I believe Thompson was convicted of
domestic violence against Carlton Robert Norwood (died Dec-31-
2011), her former common law husband. This information was
provided to me in January 2020 by her mother, Patricia Thompson.
The crime was committed in the state of Maine, either in Augusta
Maine or Vassalboro Maine, which I believe are located in Kennebec
County, Maine
https://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/findacourt/kennebec_superior.shtml
I believe Thompson’s crime/conviction involving Mr. Norwood

occurred about 15 years ago, and apparently resulted in Thompson
loosing her student aid and ending her college enrollment. This is
what Thompson’s mother told me while I was visiting her brother
Andrew Coutu after his drug overdose while he was in intensive care
at AdventHealth Ocala, 1500 Southwest 1st Avenue, Ocala, FL
34471.
6
Unfortunately court records in Maine are not provided online. Earlier
today I called the number for Michele Lumbert, (207) 213-2800,
Clerk of the Maine District Court - Augusta, and was referred to the
records center at 207-753-2901. Searching and obtaining records is
laborious and costly, see attached the attached form with pricing.
https://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/findacourt/waterville_district.shtml
I also believe Brady Evidence should include her arrest February 6,

2020 (felony drugs) where your office failed to file an information;
theft and vandalism shown in MCSO19OFF028747; theft of my new
HP laptop computer recovered by Dunnellon Police Officer E.J.
Raines (an example of police I love); and Thompson’s damage and
theft during her home invasion (812.135) June 7, 2020.
Separately, Ms. Thompson is a self-employed Ocala prostitute, f.k.a.

Dolly Style, n.k.a. Roxy, who advertises "i love fetishes bdsm" and
"S&M" which I believe accounts for the bruising of her legs a week
after the incident shown in the arrest warrant. Personally I know
Thompson enjoys physical fighting with men from our conversations.
ttps://www.eroticmonkey.ch/roxy-escort-ocala-608178 ,
https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/dolly-style-escort-ocala-608178
Thompson also advertises as "Sadie" in Dunnellon, Services: Escort, S
& M https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/sadie-escort-dunnellon-868163
and Thompson advertises as "Dolly Stylz" in Dunnellon, Services:
Escort, S & M https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/dolly-stylz-escort-
dunnellon-852990
Regarding NICHOLAS AUSTIN (B), Marion County Sheriff Dept.,

on January 30, 2020 I made a Federal Civil Rights Complaint against
him, see attached. Tellingly, rather than defend my right to know the
pharmacist working at the Walmart Pharmacy, Austin and then Lt.
Welch collaborated to have me trespassed from Walmart. Welch also
had me trespassed from his office for leaving Sarah’s perishables
outside the SW Substation in an ice cooler for her to get, see attached.
I was compelled to make an ethics complaint against Welsh for his
refusal to accept US mail from me. Seriously, what is wrong with
Deputy Austin, Lt. Welch and certain other MCSO people?
7
Mr. Gainey, in my view this prosecution (and the wiretapping case) is
an example of vengeance by a bad law enforcement agency, the
MCSO, against a senior citizen who speaks truth to power.
Sincerely,
Neil J. Gillespie
From time to time I gave Ms. Thomspon occasional safe harbor when
she had no where to go, before I realized the extent of her problems.
On July 17, 2020, where I appear pro se in 2020-CF-2417 I filed:
MOTION TO DROP ALL CHARGES AND RELEASE DEFENDANT

Filing # 110432892 E-Filed 07/17/2020 05:00:03 PM (Exhibit 22)
My motion states at paragraph 4:
4. The ARREST AFFIDAVIT in this case is a work of fiction. First,

Sarah May Thompson was not a lawful resident of 8092 SW 115th
Loop Ocala on June 7, 2020. Ms. Thompson vacated the property on
May 16, 2020 because I refused to drive her to buy drugs. Second, I
did not take Ms. Thompson’s smart phone from her by sudden
snatching. The phone was unattended and charging at an electrical
outlet under the fuse box in the garage. Thompson was 8 feet away
when I confiscated the phone for theft of electricity and violation of
house rules. Thompson was armed with a metal T-ball bat she earlier
took from my vehicle. Thompson screamed for her phone when I
unplugged it from the electrical outlet, not taken from her person as
claimed.
On June 18, 2020 in Case No. 2020-CF-2417, I filed, (Exhibit 21)
DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF CLAIM OF IMMUNITY UNDER

SECTION 776.032 FLORIDA STATUTES
Filing # 109043203 E-Filed 06/18/2020 10:37:13 AM
8
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
The facts relevant to my claims for habeas corpus relief are set forth
below in connection with the individual claims.
GROUNDS FOR HABEAS CORPUS RELIEF
I. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED

BY APPOINTED COUNSEL IN CASE 2019-CF-4193
Petitioner did not request appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193

Petitioner does not want appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
Petitioner is not entitled to appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193

in 2019-CF-4193 on July 9, 2020 during a hearing on the State’s
motion to revoke bond; as a result the Petitioner’s bond was revoked
and he was remanded to jail until further order of the court.
In Florida court-appointed counsel is governed by Chapter 27, Florida
Statutes, Part III, Public Defenders and Other Court-Appointed Counsel (ss.
27.40 - 27.61) and consists of:
A. The Public Defender (Fla. Stat. sec. 27.51)

B. Office of Criminal Counsel and Civil Regional Counsel (27.511)
C. Private court-appointed counsel (Fla. Stat. sec. 27.40(2)(a))
On November 10, 2019 I refused to sign an application for criminal
indigent status presented to me at the Marion County Jail because it wrongly
stated I was homeless, and it wrongly stated “I am seeking the appointment
of the public defender”. (Exhibit 1). I am not homeless. I have lived at the
9
same address in Marion Co. since 2005. Also, I knew I had a conflict with
the Public Defender. I did not want the Public Defender to represent me.
I was released on bond prior to the First Appearance (Rule 3.130), and
in any event I was not timely informed of it, so I did not attend First
Appearance. The so-called First Appearance Findings and Orders by Judge
McCune (Exhibit 2) does not bear my signature.
On December 10, 2019 I attended an Arraignment (Rule 3.160) where
Judge Herndon provisionally appointed the Public Defender/private Conflict
Counsel to represent me because my affidavit of indigent status was
incomplete. (Exhibit 3). I knew I had a conflict with the Public Defender
(PD). I knew I had a conflict with the OCCCRC. But the Court discouraged
Defendants from speaking during Arraignment, so I did not say anything.
On December 16, 2019 the Public Defender filed a Notice of
Appearance by and through Kristina Belanger, FL Bar #1012137, Asst.
Public Defender. On January 7, 2020 the Public Defender/Ms. Belanger
moved to withdrawal as counsel citing conflict.
On Wednesday, June 19, 2019, I had emailed Susan D. Bailey,
Assistant Public Defender, about her former client, Sarah May Thompson:
Last week Ms. Thompson moved into my home as a live-in home

health provider, see attached. On June 16, 2019 Sarah admitted to
10
taking prescription medication from my room. Sarah apologized and
promised not to take my pills again.
I don’t know what to do. I have no faith in the Marion County

Sheriff’s Office, over issues related to my home foreclosure (2013-
CA-00115). I have no faith in the UDEST or DCF. I do not want to
report Sarah to L.E. (I support legalizing drugs). But I may not be the
best person to help Sarah. I am aware she placed a newborn for
adoption in 2015. She arrived at my door the result of mistaken
identity through a website.
Initially Sarah seemed nice, and she needed a place to stay. I felt
compassion for a homeless, unremarried widow. And it is difficult for
a single man age 63 with health issues and limited income to find
competent help. Previously two other providers did not work out, one
age 40 (drugs) and one age 43 (drinking/smoking).
Currently Sarah has a broken tooth that needs extraction, but she
refuses medical treatment I found, see
https://www.truecaredentistocala.com/emergency-dentist.html
I don’t want to throw Sarah out into the street. I believe she needs
stability, but the people in her life may not be stable. I would
appreciate any suggestions you may have. Thank you.
Ms. Bailey did not respond then, or to subsequent contacts related to
this case. A week or so later Ms. Thompson met a man online, Matthew
Smith, and soon moved into his home in Dunnellon Florida. Ms. Thompson
was seldom here after that, and was completely gone from my home by July
15, 2019. I next saw her again on January 1, 2020 when she claimed
domestic violence by Mr. Smith and needed a temporary place to stay.
11
On January 13, 2020 Judge Tatti entered ORDER SUBSTITUTING
COUNSEL (CONFLICT), that appointed the Office of Criminal Counsel
and Civil Regional Counsel for the 5th D.C.A. (“OCCCRC”) to represent
me, without following the safeguards established by 27.5303(1)(a).
On January 16, 2020 Zachary Glenn Phipps of the OCCCRC for 5th
D.C.A. filed a notice of appearance to represent me in this case, and other
such. I still had not completed and executed an application for criminal
indigent status under § 27.52 required for appointment of counsel. I was not
found indigent under § 27.52. The appointment of the Public Defender and
the OCCCRC is without legal basis. The representation by Zachary Glenn
Phipps and the OCCCRC has been a complete and utter abomination.
I fired Mr. Phipps on March 27, 2020, but he failed to recuse himself.
On July 2, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 I filed DEFENDANT'S
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO A LAWYER WITH TWO ATTESTING
WITNESSES, RULE 3.111(d)(4), see Filing # 109766038 E-Filed
07/02/2020 11:48:43 PM at Exhibit 4.
On July 7, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 I filed DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE COUNSEL ZACHARY
GLENN PHIPPS AND THE OCCCRC FOR 5th D.C.A., see Filing #
109909167 E-Filed 07/07/2020 06:50:44 PM.
12
On July 15, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 I filed DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR HEARING ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO
DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE COUNSEL ZACHARY GLENN PHIPPS
AND THE OCCCRC FOR 5th D.C.A., see Filing # 110282277 E-Filed
07/15/2020 02:00:57 PM.
On July 22, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 I filed notice with the
Court see Exhibit 5, DEFENDANT NOT INDIGENT PER F.S. § 27.52
FOR APPOINTED COUNSEL, COURT MUST REVOKE
APPOINTMENT OF MR PHIPPS AND OCCCRC Filing # 110659309 E-
Filed 07/22/2020 10:32:54 PM.
On July 31, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 Judge Tatti struck 9 of
my pro se motions, see Exhibit 6, and,
ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT’S PRO SE MOTIONS

Filing # 111102506 E-Filed 07/31/2020 12:55:49 PM
Judge Tatti wrote,
Because the Defendant is represented by counsel, his pro se motions

are unauthorized. Logan v. State, 846 So.2d 472 (Fla. 2003) (holding
a Defendant is not entitled to represent himself and have the assistance
of counsel); Salser v. State, 582 So.2d 12 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
(Defendant does not have the right to a “hybrid" representation).
Judge Tatti’s reliance on the above caselaw is misplaced. To reiterate:

I did not request appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
I do not want appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
I am not entitled to appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193
13
Judge Tatti’s Order struck the following in Case No. 2019-CF-4193:
1. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for a hearing on State’s Motion to

Revoke Bond filed on June 19, 2020;
2. Defendant's Pro Se Verified Motion to Disqualify Circuit Judge
Anthony Tatti filed on June 22, 2020;
3. Defendant's Pro Se Request for Disability Accommodation filed
on July 2, 2020
4. Defendant's Pro Se Motion to Dismiss all Charges in Case No.:
2019-CF-4193 filed on July 7, 2020;
5. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for Recognizance Bond filed on
July 7, 2020;
6. Defendant's Request for Disability Accommodation filed on
July 9, 2020;
7. Defendant's Motion for Transcript and Video of Zoom Hearing
July 9, 2020 filed on July 22, 2020.
8. Defendant's Motion for Rule 3.133 Pretrial Probable Cause
Determinations and Adversary Preliminary Hearings filed on
July 24, 2020; and
9. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for Order to Reassign Case Motion
for Rehearing Order to Revoke Bond filed on July 27,2020
On August 6, 2020 Case No. 2019-CF-4193 Mr. Phipps filed
MOTION TO WITHDRAW (as counsel), see Exhibit 7, Filing # 111365309
E-Filed 08/06/2020 09:07:28 AM.
Phipps’ motion was accompanied by a Certification of Conflict By
Office Of Regional Criminal and Civil Counsel Conflict 5th District, see
Exhibit 8, Filing # 111365309 E-Filed 08/06/2020 09:07:28 AM.
In response, on Aug-06-2020 Judge Tatti entered Order Allowing The
Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel To Withdrawal, see
14
Exhibit 9. The Order also appoints Brenda H. Smith, Esquire, to represent
me. Judge Tatti’s appointment of counsel is misplaced. To reiterate:

On August 7, 2020, I filed in Case No. 2019-CF-4193, (Exhibit 10)
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REFUSE COUNSEL AND APPEAR PRO SE

Motion to Strike Order Appointing Expert for Competency Evaluation
Filing # 111470516 E-Filed 08/07/2020 03:14:33 PM
My motion contained the following 7 paragraphs,
1. This Court granted a motion by attorney Zachary Phipps and the

Office Of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel
(OCCCRC) to withdraw as counsel in this case on August 6, 2020.
The Order appoints BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE to represent
the Defendant in this cause.
2. I hereby assert my right to refuse counsel, and appear pro se, as

provided by Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), and Fla. R.
of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3).
3. I reject representation by Brenda H. Smith at this time. Rule

3.111(d)(5).
4. In Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), the Supreme Court of

the United States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional
right to refuse counsel and represent themselves in state criminal
proceedings.
5. Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3) states:
(3) Regardless of the defendant's legal skills or the complexity of the

case, the court shall not deny a defendant's unequivocal request to
represent himself or herself, if the court makes a determination of
15
record that the defendant has made a knowing and intelligent waiver
of the right to counsel, and does not suffer from severe mental illness
to the point where the defendant is not competent to conduct trial
proceedings by himself or herself.
6. The Defendant in this case was found competent to waive the right
to a lawyer and represent himself during two (2) Faretta hearings in
2020-CF-2417, by Judge Tatti on July 28, 2020 (arraignment) and
by Judge Craggs on June 14, 2020 (first appearance).
7. I also move to strike Order Appointing Expert for Competency

Evaluation. On March 13, 2020 attorney Zachary Phipps filed a
groundless Motion To Determine Defendant’s Competency To
Stand Trial. During a telephone call with me last week Phipps
agreed to withdrawal the motion; Mr. Phipps agreed I am
competent to stand trial. However before he filed the motion, Mr.
Phipps moved to withdrawal from the case. During our
conversation Mr. Phipps also said the prosecution in 2020-CF-2417
was an “abuse of discretion”
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel

Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984).
Appointed Counsel Mr. Phipps / OCCCRC was ineffective in
representing me in 2019-CF-4193 on July 9, 2020 during a hearing on the
State’s motion to revoke bond. Due to COVID-19 the hearing was
conducted remotely with “Zoom”. I was not able to log into the Zoom
hearing, or testify on my behalf, because, inter alia, the hearing was over by
the time I got Mr. Phipps’ email with the login password.
HEARING RESULTS: Bond revoked, the Sheriff shall take the

Defendant into custody and detain said Defendant at the County Jail,
pending further order of this Court. (Exhibit 11).
16
On July 28, 2020 I appeared pro se for an arraignment in Case No.
2020-CF-2417. I prepared for the hearing by filing a request for disability
accommodation, with Appendix A, COVID-19 complaint to the Florida
Surgeon General and Florida Department of Health.
BOND; Bond Revocation Recalled Unserved. (Exhibit 12).
In Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), the appropriate
standard for ineffective assistance of counsel requires both that the defense
attorney was objectively deficient and that there was a reasonable
probability that a competent attorney would have led to a different outcome.
Mr. Phipps was objectively deficient during the hearing, which lacked
preparation by Phipps, and where he failed to zealously represent me with a
compelling argument. Also, the Zoom hearing was over by the time I got
Mr. Phipps’ email with the login password.
HEARING RESULTS: Bond revoked, the Sheriff shall take the

Defendant into custody and detain said Defendant at the County Jail,
pending further order of this Court. (Exhibit 11).
Compare my competent representation which led to a different outcome:
BOND; Bond Revocation Recalled Unserved. (Exhibit 12).
17
II. THE PETITINER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED

UNDER THREAT OF A PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAM OR
JAIL IN CASE 2019-CF-4193 AND CASE 2020-CF-2417.

in 2019-CF-4193 on March 13, 2020 when counsel lied to the
Petitioner about a review of disability, and then filed Motion
To Determine Defendant’s Competency To Stand Trial.
On March 13, 2020 attorney Zachary Phipps filed a groundless Motion To
Determine Defendant’s Competency To Stand Trial. Phipps lied to me during the
arraignment in 2019-CF-4193 when he asked me, at the last moment, to agree to a
review of disability. Phipps did not get my informed consent. Phipps did not seek a
review of disability; instead, he sought to determine my competency to stand trial.
During a telephone call with me on July 30, 2020 at 12:26 PM, Mr. Phipps
agreed to withdrawal his Motion To Determine Defendant’s Competency To Stand
Trial. Mr. Phipps said I am competent to stand trial. However before he filed the
motion to withdrawal his Motion To Determine Defendant’s Competency To Stand
Trial, Mr. Phipps moved to withdrawal from the case. During our conversation Mr.
Phipps also said the prosecution in 2020-CF-2417 was an “abuse of discretion”.
Mr. Phipps said he refers all clients with prior traumatic brain injury for a
competency hearing. Mr. Phipps said he was initially concerned that I was not
18
focused enough, but he changed his mind when he saw the prosecution in 2020-
CF-2417 was an “abuse of discretion”.
I was found competent to waive the right to a lawyer twice in 2020-CF-
2417, by Judge Tatti on July 28, 2020 (arraignment) (Exhibit 13) and by Judge
Craggs on June 14, 2020 (first appearance) (Exhibit 14).
I have never been adjudicated incompetent or mentally deficient. I am
presumed by law to be competent. I have the inalienable right to freedom and
liberty. Amendments IV, V and XIV, Constitution of the United States; Article I,
Sections 2, 9 and 12, Constitution of the State of Florida.
I am a person age 64 with disabilities, including type 2 diabetes, diabetic
neuropathy, hearing loss, and obstructive breathing/sleep apnea. I am at increased
risk of being infected with COVID-19. If I get infected, I am at an increased risk of
death. My hearing loss is due to congenital defects including eustachian tube defect
(L), and retracted eardrum (L). Exhibit 15.
A person with disabilities does not mean they are incompetent. A vulnerable
adult under 415.102(28) does not mean the person is incompetent. By way of
example, former President Franklin D. Roosevelt was disabled with paralytic
illness, and a vulnerable adult paralyzed from the waist down, but not incompetent.
19
On March 17, 2020 Judge Tatti entered Order Appointing Expert For
Competency Evaluation. I voiced concern with Dr. Krop over his public discipline
by the Medical Board; Krop withdrew from consideration by letter to Judge Tatti.
On July 31, 2020 Judge Tatti entered Order Appointing Expert For
Competency Evaluation. The Order appoints TONIA WERNER, MD, Meridian
Behavioral Healthcare, 4300 SW 13th Street, Gainesville, FL 32608. (Exhibit 16).
On July 28, 2020 during an arraignment in Case No. 2020-CF-2417, Judge
Tatti suggested I “cooperate” in the Competency Evaluation in Case No. 2019-CF-
4173, suggesting my liberty was at risk.
Mr. Phipps agreed to withdrawal his Motion To Determine Defendant’s
Competency To Stand Trial. Mr. Phipps said I am competent to stand trial. But
before he filed the motion to withdrawal his Motion To Determine Defendant’s
Competency To Stand Trial, Mr. Phipps withdrew from the case.
The writ of habeas corpus is so important in connection with constitutional
liberty that a motion to dismiss it or quash it is not permitted. See Crooms v.
Schad, 51 Fla. 168, 40 So. 497 (1906). As Trawick states:
. . . The respondent cannot move to quash the order

or to dismiss the petition. . . . This is the only civil
proceeding in which the legal sufficiency of a
pleading cannot be directly attacked or in which the
parties are not limited to the issues raised in the
pleadings.
20
Trawick, Fla. Prac. & Proc., Sect. 36-6 (2003).
No one in the case has suggested I am not competent to stand trial. Therefore
A writ of habeas corpus is sought discharging me from a competency evaluation.
21
III. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY

CIRCUIT JUDGE ANTHONY TATTI PRESIDING IN CASE
2019-CF-4193 AND IN CASE 2020-CF-2417 WHEN JUDGE
TATTI FAILED TO RECUSE AS REQUIRED BY LAW
The Petitioner filed two meritorious pro se motions to disqualify

Circuit Judge Anthony Tatti on June 22, 2020, one in case 2019-CF-
4193, and one on June 22, 2020 in case 2020-CF-2417. Thirty (30)
days passed without a ruling on the motions by Judge Tatti. Therefore
the motions are deemed granted under Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j).
The Petitioner filed two motions for an order to reassign the cases, as
required by Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j), directing the clerk to
reassign the cases, whereupon Judge Tatti belatedly denied the pro se
motion to disqualify him in Case No. 2020-CF-2417. Judge Tatti then
denied the Petitioner’s motion for an order to reassign the case.
Judge Tatti belatedly struck my pro se motion to disqualify him in

Case No. 2019-CF-4193. Judge Tatti then struck my pro se motion for
an order to reassign the case.
On July 27, 2020 I filed in Case No. 2020-CF-2417 DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE... Filing # 110867275 E-
Filed 07/27/2020 05:58:22 PM
1. VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY CIRCUIT JUDGE

ANTHONY TATTI was served on the Portal in case 2020-CF-2417
on June 22, 2020 at 3:28 PM, see, VERIFIED MOTION TO
DISQUALIFY CIRCUIT JUDGE ANTHONY TATTI
Filing # 109217029 E-Filed 06/22/2020 03:28:46 PM
22
Disqualification and Disclosure, Florida Judicial College, pages 6-7.
"If the Judge fails to rule on the motion to disqualify within 30 days after
service of the motion, the motion is deemed granted..."
Thirty (30) days have passed without a ruling; the motion is deemed
granted, see Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j), time for determination:
(j) Time for Determination. The judge shall rule on a motion to

disqualify immediately, but no later than 30 days after the service of
the motion as set forth in subdivision (c). If not ruled on within 30
days of service, the motion shall be deemed granted and the moving
party may seek an order from the court directing the clerk to reassign
the case.
On July 31, 2020 in Case No. 2020-CF-2417, Judge Tatti entered
Order Denying Defendant’s Motion To Disqualify. (Exhibit 18). Because
more than 30 days have passed, attempts to refute the motion by Judge Tatti
are moot, so there is no need to address those misplaced responses. The only
thing that matters, was the motion served pursuant to Rule 2.330(c)?
The relevant part of Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(c) states,
In addition to filing with the clerk, the movant shall immediately serve
a copy of the motion on the subject judge as set forth in Florida Rule
of Civil Procedure 1.080.
My Certificate of Service states, I HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing
was served June 22, 2020 on the portal to Judge Tatti and to the names on
the Notice of Service of Court Documents. Judge Tatti was automatically
23
served in 2020-CF-2417 on the Portal. I served the Clerk on the Portal.
Thus, the motion was served to the Judge and the Clerk on June 22, 2020.
Service was made according to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080.
Judge Tatti’s email address shown by The Florida Bar is: atatti@circuit5.org
Rule 1.080 SERVICE AND FILING OF PLEADINGS, ORDERS,

AND DOCUMENTS (relevant portion)
(a) Service. Every pleading subsequent to the initial pleading, all

orders, and every other document filed in the action must be served in
conformity with the requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial
Administration 2.516.
(b) Filing. All documents shall be filed in conformity with the

requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525.
RULE 2.516. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTS

(b) Service; How Made. When service is required or permitted to be
made upon a party represented by an attorney, service must be made
upon the attorney unless service upon the party is ordered by the
court.
(1) Service by Electronic Mail (“e-mail”). All documents required
or permitted to be served on another party must be served by e-mail,
unless the parties otherwise stipulate or this rule otherwise provides.
A filer of an electronic document has complied with this subdivision
if the Florida Courts e-filing Portal (“Portal”) or other authorized
electronic filing system with a supreme court approved electronic
service system (“e-Service system”) served the document by e-mail or
provided a link by e-mail to the document on a website maintained by
a clerk (“e-Service”).
RULE 2.525. ELECTRONIC FILING

(a) Definition. “Electronic transmission of documents” means the
sending of information by electronic signals to, by or from a court or
clerk, which when received can be transformed and stored or
transmitted on paper, microfilm, magnetic storage device, optical
24
imaging system, CD-ROM, flash drive, other electronic data storage
system, server, case maintenance system (“CM”), electronic court
filing (“ECF”) system, statewide or local electronic portal (“e-
portal”), or other electronic record keeping system authorized by the
supreme court in a format sufficient to communicate the information
on the original document in a readable format. Electronic transmission
of documents includes electronic mail (“e-mail”) and any internet-
based transmission procedure, and may include procedures allowing
for documents to be signed or verified by electronic means.
(c) Documents Affected.
(1) All documents that are court records, as defined in rule
2.430(a)(1), must be filed by electronic transmission...
On July 27, 2020 I filed in Case No. 2019-CF-4193 DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR ORDER TO REASSIGN CASE... Filing # 110871408 E-
Filed 07/27/2020 10:01:40 PM.
1. VERIFIED MOTION TO DISQUALIFY CIRCUIT JUDGE

ANTHONY TATTI was served on the Portal in case 2019-CF-4193
on June 22, 2020 at 3:32 PM, see, VERIFIED MOTION TO
DISQUALIFY CIRCUIT JUDGE ANTHONY TATTI Filing #
109217455 E-Filed 06/22/2020 03:32:06 PM
Disqualification and Disclosure, Florida Judicial College, pages 6-7.
"If the Judge fails to rule on the motion to disqualify within 30 days after
service of the motion, the motion is deemed granted..."
Thirty (30) days have passed without a ruling; the motion is deemed
granted, see Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j), time for determination:
(j) Time for Determination. The judge shall rule on a motion to

disqualify immediately, but no later than 30 days after the service of
the motion as set forth in subdivision (c). If not ruled on within 30
days of service, the motion shall be deemed granted and the moving
25
party may seek an order from the court directing the clerk to reassign
the case.
On July 31, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193, Judge Tatti struck 9 of
my pro se motions, see Exhibit 6, and,
ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT’S PRO SE MOTIONS

Filing # 111102506 E-Filed 07/31/2020 12:55:49 PM
Judge Tatti wrote,
Because the Defendant is represented by counsel, his pro se motions

are unauthorized. Logan v. State, 846 So.2d 472 (Fla. 2003) (holding
a Defendant is not entitled to represent himself and have the assistance
of counsel); Salser v. State, 582 So.2d 12 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
(Defendant does not have the right to a “hybrid" representation).
Judge Tatti’s reliance on the above caselaw is misplaced. To reiterate:

Judge Tatti’s Order struck the following in Case No. 2019-CF-4193:
1. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for a hearing on State’s Motion to

Revoke Bond filed on June 19, 2020;
2. Defendant's Pro Se Verified Motion to Disqualify Circuit Judge
Anthony Tatti filed on June 22, 2020;
3. Defendant's Pro Se Request for Disability Accommodation filed
on July 2, 2020
4. Defendant's Pro Se Motion to Dismiss all Charges in Case No.:
2019-CF-4193 filed on July 7, 2020;
5. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for Recognizance Bond filed on
July 7, 2020;
6. Defendant's Request for Disability Accommodation filed on
July 9, 2020;
7. Defendant's Motion for Transcript and Video of Zoom Hearing
26
July 9, 2020 filed on July 22, 2020.
8. Defendant's Motion for Rule 3.133 Pretrial Probable Cause
Determinations and Adversary Preliminary Hearings filed on
July 24, 2020; and
9. Defendant's Pro Se Motion for Order to Reassign Case Motion
for Rehearing Order to Revoke Bond filed on July 27,2020
Because more than 30 days have passed, there is no need to address
anything else. The only thing that matters, was the motion to disqualify
served pursuant to Rule 2.330(c)?
The relevant part of Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(c) states,
In addition to filing with the clerk, the movant shall immediately serve
a copy of the motion on the subject judge as set forth in Florida Rule
of Civil Procedure 1.080.
My Certificate of Service states, I HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing
was served June 22, 2020 on the portal to Judge Tatti and to the names on
the Notice of Service of Court Documents. Judge Tatti was automatically
served in 2019-CF-4193 on the Portal. I served the Clerk on the Portal.
Thus, the motion was served to the Judge and the Clerk on June 22, 2020.
Service was made according to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080.
Judge Tatti’s email address shown by The Florida Bar is: atatti@circuit5.org
Rule 1.080 SERVICE AND FILING OF PLEADINGS, ORDERS,

AND DOCUMENTS (relevant portion)
(a) Service. Every pleading subsequent to the initial pleading, all

orders, and every other document filed in the action must be served in
27
conformity with the requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial
Administration 2.516.
(b) Filing. All documents shall be filed in conformity with the

requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.525.
RULE 2.516. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTS

(b) Service; How Made. When service is required or permitted to be
made upon a party represented by an attorney, service must be made
upon the attorney unless service upon the party is ordered by the
court.
(1) Service by Electronic Mail (“e-mail”). All documents required
or permitted to be served on another party must be served by e-mail,
unless the parties otherwise stipulate or this rule otherwise provides.
A filer of an electronic document has complied with this subdivision
if the Florida Courts e-filing Portal (“Portal”) or other authorized
electronic filing system with a supreme court approved electronic
service system (“e-Service system”) served the document by e-mail or
provided a link by e-mail to the document on a website maintained by
a clerk (“e-Service”).
RULE 2.525. ELECTRONIC FILING

(a) Definition. “Electronic transmission of documents” means the
sending of information by electronic signals to, by or from a court or
clerk, which when received can be transformed and stored or
transmitted on paper, microfilm, magnetic storage device, optical
imaging system, CD-ROM, flash drive, other electronic data storage
system, server, case maintenance system (“CM”), electronic court
filing (“ECF”) system, statewide or local electronic portal (“e-
portal”), or other electronic record keeping system authorized by the
supreme court in a format sufficient to communicate the information
on the original document in a readable format. Electronic transmission
of documents includes electronic mail (“e-mail”) and any internet-
based transmission procedure, and may include procedures allowing
for documents to be signed or verified by electronic means.
(c) Documents Affected.
(1) All documents that are court records, as defined in rule
2.430(a)(1), must be filed by electronic transmission...
28
IV. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY $4,000

MONEY BAIL BOND IN CASE 2019-CF-4193 AND $5,000 MONEY
BAIL BOND IN CASE 2020-CF-2417.
The Petitioner is age 64, has never been convicted of a crime, has resided in
Marion County for over 15 years, is a former business owner, and educated
with degrees in business and psychology. Pursuant to Rule 3.131(b)(1), Fla.
R. Crim. P., “there is a presumption in favor of release on nonmonetary
conditions for any person who is granted pretrial release.”
On July 7, 2020 in Case No. 2019-CF-4193, I filed DEFENDANT’S
MOTION FOR RECOGNIZANCE BOND, see Exhibit 19, and Filing #
109909167 E-Filed 07/07/2020 06:50:44 PM.
Pursuant to Rule 3.131(b)(1), Fla. R. Crim. P., “there is a presumption in
favor of release on nonmonetary conditions for any person who is granted pretrial
release.”
On November 10, 2019, I was arrested and and released on a $4,000 bond
total in case no. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z. My arrest was politically
motivated, see Affidavit of Neil J. Gillespie and Marion Senior Services, Inc.
The arrest warrant signed by Judge S. Sue Robbins on November 7, 2019
authorizes modification of bail by the judge presiding at first appearance.
At the time of my arrest on November 10, 2019 I was eligible for
Recognizance Bond based upon the following facts:
A. I had no criminal record.
29
B. I had a valid Florida driver’s license in good standing.
C. I lived at my Florida residential homestead property, 8092 SW 115th
Loop, Ocala, 34481, Marion Co., Florida, continuously and uninterruptedly
since February 5, 2005.
D. I was age 63 and suffering the infirmaries of aging, including type 2
diabetes.
E. My income was limited to Social Security disability payments.
F. I am educated, with undergraduate degrees in business and psychology.
On March 9, 2020 at 3:50 PM I emailed my appointed counsel, Zachary
Glenn Phipps of the OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., and requested, “can you move for
an order for release on my own recognizance? (and end the bail bond).” Mr. Phipps
failed to seek ROR on my behalf in March 2019. Mr. Phipps failed to respond to
my request for a recognizance bond.
Bail reduction is a legitimate function of defense counsel and zealous
representation. The foregoing example is evidence that Mr. Phipps and the
OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A has not provided zealous advocacy on my behalf.
On July 28, 2020, I made a spoken motion during the arraignment in Case
No. 2020-CF-2417 to be released on a recognizance bond. The money bail bond in
that case is $5,000. Judge Tatti denied my spoken motion, even though I appeared
as required, and both charges were downgraded.
The writ of habeas corpus is so important in connection with constitutional
liberty that a motion to dismiss it or quash it is not permitted. See Crooms v.
30
Schad, 51 Fla. 168, 40 So. 497 (1906). Presently I am restrained by $9,000 total in
money bail bonds. I am age 64 and have never been convicted of a crime.
31
CONCLUSION AND RELIEF SOUGHT
For all of the foregoing reasons, I respectfully request that this Court
grant habeas corpus relief, in the following particulars:
I. Release me from the restraint of appointed counsel in Case No.
2019-CF-4193. I reject representation by Brenda H. Smith. Rule 3.111(d)(5).

I hereby assert my right to refuse counsel, and appear pro se, as
provided by Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), and Fla. R. of Crim.
P. 3.111(d)(3). In Faretta, the Supreme Court of the United States held that
criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and
represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.
II. Release me from the restraint of a competency evaluation in
Case No. 2019-CF-4193. No one in the case has suggested I am not
competent to stand trial. I was found competent to waive the right to a
lawyer twice in 2020-CF-2417, by Judge Tatti on July 28, 2020
(arraignment) and by Judge Craggs on June 14, 2020. (first appearance).
III. Release me from the restraint of a biased judge in Cases 2019-
CF-4193 and 2020-CF-2417. Judge Tatti failed to rule on the motions to
disqualify within 30 days after service, the motions are deemed granted.
32
IV. Release me from the restraint of $9,000 in money bail bonds.
Pursuant to Rule 3.131(b)(1), Fla. R. Crim. P., “there is a presumption in
favor of release on nonmonetary conditions for any person who is granted
pretrial release.” I am age 64 and never convicted of a crime. I pray for a
grant of habeas corpus relief to be released on recognizance. (ROR)
33
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing

was filed on the Fla. Portal and furnished August 18, 2020 by e-service to
the names below. Two audio files will be provided by email.
WESLEY HEIDT BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE

Assistant Attorney General 871 S Central Ave. Ste A
444 Seabreeze Boulevard, Suite 500 Umatilla, FL 32784-9290
Daytona Beach, Florida 32118 Office: 352-669-4667
(386) 238-4990/ (386) 238-4997 (fax) Cell: 352-636-2573
Wesley.Heidt@myfloridalegal.com smith.brenda.atty@gmail.com
crimappdab@myfloridalegal.com
TONIA WERNER, MD
Meridian Behavioral Healthcare
4300 SW 13th Street
Gainesville, FL 32608
(352) 374-5600; (800) 330-5615
tonia_werner@mbhci.org
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that this document was computer-generated

using Microsoft Word, in Times New Roman 14-point font, and is in
compliance with the font requirements of Florida Rule of Appellate
Procedure 9.100(l).
Respectfully submitted and served, August 18, 2020

8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. (352) 854-7807
Filing # 112016692 E-Filed 08/18/2020 06:15:36 PM
IN THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA
Petitioner,
RECEIVED, 08/18/2020 06:16:33 PM, Clerk, Fifth District Court of Appeal
v. CASE NO.: 5D20-1632
STATE OF FLORIDA,
BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE
TONIA WERNER, MD,
Respondents.
___________________________/
APPENDIX A
Fla. R. App. P. 9.220(c)
Submitted August 18, 2020 by:

8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. (352) 854-7807
1
INDEX TO APPENDIX A, Fla. R. App. P. 9.220(c)
Exhibit A Letter Feb-15-2006 to Sheriff Ed Dean, request investigation of

exploitation of Penelope Gillespie re Bank of America mortgage
Exhibit 1 Application for Criminal Indigent Status 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 2 First Appearance Findings and Orders 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 3 Provisional Order Appoint PD/Conflict Counsel 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 4 WAIVER OF RIGHT TO A LAWYER WITH WITNESSES 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 5 DEFENDANT NOT INDIGENT PER F.S. § 27.52 2019-CF-4193

Exhibit 6 Order Striking Defendant’s Pro Se Motions 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 7 Motion to Withdrawal by Zachary Phipps Esq. 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 8 Certification of Conflict by OCCCRC 5th 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 9 Order Allowing Withdrawal OCCCRC 5th 2019-CF-4193
Appointment of Brenda H. Smith, Esq. Substitute Counsel
Exhibit 10 D’s Motion To Refuse Counsel, Appear Pro Se 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 11 Order To Revoke Bond 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 12 Bond Revocation Recall (Not Served) 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 13 Waiver of Right To A Lawyer (Judge Tatti) 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 14 Waiver of Right To A Lawyer (Judge Craggs) 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 15 REQUEST FOR DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 16 Order Appoint Expert Competency Evaluation 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 17 Disqualification and Disclosure Florida Judicial College
Exhibit 18 Order Denying Defendant’s Motion Disqualify 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 19 D’S MOTION FOR RECOGNIZANCE BOND 2019-CF-4193
Exhibit 20 Email ASA Gainey re State’s Discovery Exhibit 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 21 D’S NOTICE OF CLAIM OF IMMUNITY §776.032 2020-CF-2417
Exhibit 22 Motion Drop All Charges and Release Defendant 2020-CF-2417
2
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing

was filed on the Fla. Portal and furnished August 18, 2020 by e-service to:
WESLEY HEIDT BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE

Assistant Attorney General 871 S Central Ave. Ste A
444 Seabreeze Boulevard, Suite 500 Umatilla, FL 32784-9290
Daytona Beach, Florida 32118 Office: 352-669-4667
(386) 238-4990/ (386) 238-4997 (fax) Cell: 352-636-2573
Wesley.Heidt@myfloridalegal.com smith.brenda.atty@gmail.com
crimappdab@myfloridalegal.com
TONIA WERNER, MD
Meridian Behavioral Healthcare
4300 SW 13th Street
Gainesville, FL 32608
(352) 374-5600; (800) 330-5615
tonia_werner@mbhci.org
Respectfully submitted and served, August 18, 2020

8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. (352) 854-7807
3
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115 th Loop
Telephone: (352) 854-7807
A
VIA US CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
ARTICLE NO. 7005 2570 0000 4274 0515
February 15, 2006
Sheriff Ed Dean
Marion County Sheriff
692 NW 3Oth Avenue
Dear Sheriff Dean,
This is a request for an investigation into the exploitation of an elderly person,

Penelope M. Gillespie, my mother. With your background as an attorney, and with your
law enforcement and FBI training, I trust you can competently evaluate this complaint.
Victim: Penelope M. Gillespie, age 75, date of birth, October 29, 1930.
Perpetrators:
1. Bank of America, 7975 SW SR 200, Ocala, FL 34476, telephone: (352) 861-2807,
Penelope D. Kinsey, Branch Manager, and Candice Methvin, Loan Specialist.
2. Elizabeth Bauerle, 6356 SW 106th PI., Ocala, FL 34476-4893, (352) 216-3934.
Synopsis of Exploitation:
Bank of America (BOA) breached its fiduciary duty to Penelope M. Gillespie, a depositor
and customer, when it failed to adequately secure Ms. Gillespie's interest in three
mortgage transactions. Then BOA created false loan documents to facilitate business
financing to Elizabeth Bauerle, Ms. Gillespie's daughter and co-applicant. BOA falsely
labeled the business loan as a home improvement loan in order to avoid the required
business loan documentation. As a result, BOA granted the loan, and Elizabeth Bauerle
promptly lost the $40,000.00 proceeds when the business failed. When she was not able
to make the loan payments, Elizabeth Bauerle sold her house securing the loan and took
$15,559.83 from the settlement rightfully belonging to Penelope Gillespie.
4
Sheriff Ed Dean
o Page -2
Marion County Sheriff February 15, 2006
Chronology of Events:
1. On February 7,2000, Cornelius and Penelope Gillespie borrowed $42,800.00

from Bank of America, secured by a mortgage on their home at 8092 SW 115 th Loop,
Ocala. (loan #1, mortgage no. 6167244307). This money was used to purchase a home
for their daughter, Elizabeth Bauerle (nee Gillespie), at 10836 SW 85 th Terrace, Ocala,
because Ms. Bauerle could not get a loan herself. Ms. Bauerle agreed make the monthly
mortgage payments of $325.32 for 30 years. This loan was refinanced on November 19,
2001, and Ms. Bauerle agreed to make the montWy mortgage a payments of $379.57 for
15 years. (loan #2, mortgage no. ?Q.11579906).
2. Regarding loans #1 and #2 above, Cornelius and Penelope Gillespie failed to

require Ms. Bauerle to sign a note, or encumber the property at 10836 SW 85 th Terrace to
secure their interest. This was due to their lack of financial sophistication, and by a
failure of the Bank of America to perform its fiduciary duty. This situation allowed
Ms. Bauerle to subsequently borrow on the property, and jeopardize my parents security.
3. On or about May 20, 2004, Elizabeth Bauerle convinced Penelope Gillespie l to

jointly obtain a mortgage on her house at 10836 SW 85 th Terrace for $40,883.92. (loan
#3, mortgage no. 7022788272). The stated purpose of this loan was honle improvement,
roof, siding, etc. The actual purpose of this loan was to purchase a share of the
Crossroads Restaurant and Lounge, 9900 SW State Road 200. This investment was for a
partial share of the business only, and not real estate. It was a highly speculative business
venture with Jinuny O'Neil Francis and Vicki S. Francis. However the Bank of America
disbursement document falsely states that the primary purpose of the loan was for home
improvement, roof, siding, etc. (Exhibit 1). The document falsely states that the specific
purpose of this loan is H/I (home improvement) roof, siding, etc.
4. The payment for this mortgage was $490.13. (Exhibit 2). When added to the
$379.57 mortgage payment that Elizabeth Bauerle owed on Penelope Gillespie's house,
the combined payment was $869.70. When I asked Ms. Bauerle how she expected to pay
$869.70 a month, she said the money would come from the profits of the restaurant.
Ms. Bauerle's salary in her usual occupations, call center worker, lawn care, and pizza
delivery, could not support this payment. As such, how could the bank justify this loan?
5. Elizabeth Bauerle recklessly involved Penelope Gillespie in a scam to finance a

restaurant with a loan falsely designated for home improvement. This scam allowed
Elizabeth Bauerle to invest in a business without the usual documentation such as a
business plan, balance sheet, income statement, tax returns, etc. Because the business
could not justify this loan, the loan would have ordinarily been rightfully denied.
The Bank of America breached its fiduciary duty to Penelope Gillespie, because the
bankers knew that this loan was not, in fact, for the purpose of home improvement, but
1 Cornelius Gillespie died on September 17, 2002, age 73
5
Sheriff Ed Dean
o
Page -3
Marion County Sheriff February 15, 2006
was for the purpose of investing in a higWy speculative business. Bank of America
participated in this sham solely to collect the associated fees, and with no regard for
Penelope Gillespie.
6. Elizabeth Bauerle neglected to conduct due diligence regarding this highly

speculative investment and soon lost all the money. She filed a lawsuit against her
former business partners, Jimmy O'Neil Francis and Vicki S. Francis. (Exhibit 3).
7. When the business failed and the money was gone, Ms. Bauerle could not make
the monthly payments of $869.70, and was forced to sell her home at 10836 SW 85 th
Terrace. The house sold on December 8, 2004 for $63,000.00, leaving $15,559.83 at
settlement, after loan #3 was paid. (Exhibit 4). This money rightfully belongs to
Penelope Gillespie, and should have been applied to the mortgage on her home at 8092
SW 115 th Loop, loan #2. But Ms. Bauerle kept the $15,559.83 for herself, and deposited
the money in her bank account. (Exhibit 5). Currently Penelope Gillespie has a mortgage
on her home in the amount of$35,325.55, loan #2. Ms. Bauerle should have paid
Penelope Gillespie $15,559.83, reducing the balance of loan #2 to $19,765.72.
My brother Mark Gillespie (Penelope Gillespie's other son) can collaborate the
information that I have provided. This is his contact information:
Mark J. Gillespie
7504 Summer Meadows Drive
Fort Worth, Texas 76123-1979
Telephone: (817) 361-6721
Thank you for considering this complaint.
cc: Mark J. Gillespie
enclosures
6
1
7
2
8
3
9
Filing # 109766038 E-Filed 07/02/2020 11:48:43 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY
THE STATE OF FLORIDA,
vs. CASE NO. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -/
DEFENDANT'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO A LAWYER
WITH TWO ATTESTING WITNESSES, RULE 3.111(d)(4) 4
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, an indigent nonlawyer appearing pro se, here in
the first person, files Defendant'S Waiver ofRight To A Lawyer, and states:
1. I am the Defendant in this case. I am indigent but waive my right to a lawyer in this case.
This is an unequivocal request to represent myself. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(4) states,
(d) Waiver of Counsel.

(4) A waiver of counsel made in court shall be of record; a waiver made out of court shall
be in writing with not less than 2 attesting witnesses. The witnesses shall attest the
voluntary execution thereof.
2. The Court appointed substitute counsel Zachary Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A.,
on January 13, 2020 to replace the Office of the Public Defender. Separately I will file,
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE COUNSEL

ZACHARY GLENN PHIPPS AND THE OCCCRC FOR 5th D.C.A.
3. During a Faretta Hearing June 14, 2020 before Judge Ann Melinda Craggs in another
case, Florida v. Neil Joseph Gillespie, Case No. 2020-CF-2417, Judge Craggs accepted my
Waiver ofRight to Lawyer. My Waiver is attached as Exhibit 1, and is signed by Judge Craggs,
who found "the above-named defendant is alert and intelligent and executed the above Waiver of
Right to Lawyer freely and voluntarily for the purposes therein expressed."
4. This is an unequivocal request to represent myself. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3) states:

10
DEFENDANT'S WAIVER OF RIGHT TO A LAWYER CASE NO. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z
WITH TWO ATTESTING WITNESSES, RULE 3.111(d)(4)
(3) Regardless of the defendant's legal skills or the complexity of the case, the court shall
not deny a defendant's unequivocal request to represent himself or herself, if the court
makes a determination of record that the defendant has made a knowing and intelligent
waiver of the right to counsel, and does not suffer from severe mental illness to the point
where the defendant is not competent to conduct trial proceedings by himself or herself.
5. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5) states:

(5) If a waiver is accepted at any stage of the proceedings, the offer of assistance of
counsel shall be renewed by the court at each subsequent stage of the proceedings at
which the defendant appears without counsel.
6. Pursuant to Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516, my email addressis:neilgillespie@mfi.net
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED July 2, 2020
Tel. 352-854-7807
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MARION
~
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this 'i' day of July, 2020,
by Neil J. Gillespie, who is personally known to me, or who has produced r L / h L as
identification and states that he is the person who made this affidavit . ontents are
truthful to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
(SEAL) Shamira A. Rodriguez
I>•
,
My Commission Expires:
NOTARY PUBLIC
::!STATE OF FLORIDA
• Comm# GG098397
Expires 5/1812021
~ . \-0 · "Lo? \
NOTARY PUBLIC
0~,~ \La~l-" ~~Q--z...-

Print Name of Notary Public
WITNESSES: The witnesses attest to the voluntary execution of this waiver. Rule 3.111(d)(4)
11
July 2,2020
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing has been furnished
to Zachary Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St., Ocala, FL 34475-6638 at
RCCMarion@rc5state.com; and to the State Attorney's Office, 110 North West 1st Avenue,
Suite 5000 (Eservicemarion@Sao5.0rg), Ocala, FL 34475, bye-service on July 2, 2020.
Tel. 352-854-7807
12
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF T'HE FIFTH JUD~CI.AL CIRCUIT,
IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY, FLORIDA
CRIMINAL DIVISION
COURT PROCEEDING Q8!S
~st Appearance
_ _Arraignment
_ _Plea
_ _Trial
STATE OF FLORIDA
V5.
GJi\\e5r~.Q. ~.L.\
FINDING BY THE COURT

The under$igned Judge finds that the above-named defendant Is alert and Intelligent and executed the above
Waiver of Right to Lawyer freely and voruntarUv for the purposes therein expres ed.
Date
MCCC ,.. CASE INTAKE

McdM~ ~mrAKE
. JUa~ '15 '20 AM9: 12 ~".,
13
AMSCOT FINANCIAL SERVICES
191 SOUTH OCALA
OCALA, FL 34481
Window - J1
('352)282-4660
07/02/2020 12:06 PM
Transaction 273712
Amount Fee
NOTARY 10.00
1D PRESENTED: FL DL G421630560990
Subtotal 10100
Tendered 20.00
Change (currency) 10.00
We do not disclose your non~public

personal information to any~ne
except as requ1red by law. The full
version of our privacy policy' 'fs'
available upon request or at
www.amscot.com/pr1vacy. For
ions or concerns please call
Amscot Customer Care line at
(800)333-6130.
*Rece;pt stub required for Money
Order stop payments & copy requests*
AMSCOT - You're OK with Us!
14
Filing # 110659309 E-Filed 07/22/2020 10:32:54 PM

vs. CASE NO. 2019-CF-4193

__________________________________/
5
DEFENDANT NOT INDIGENT PER F.S. § 27.52 FOR APPOINTED COUNSEL
COURT MUST REVOKE APPOINTMENT OF MR PHIPPS AND OCCCRC
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, a nonlawyer appearing pro se, in the first person,
files Defendant Not Indigent Per F.S. § 27.52 For Appointed Counsel, Court Must Revoke
Appointment of Mr. Phipps and OCCCRC, and states:
1. F.S. § 27.52 Determination of indigent status, governs appointment of counsel in criminal
cases. Today my Application For Criminal Indigent Status was DENIED. (Exhibit 1). I am not
indigent under F.S. § 27.52. I am not eligible for appointment of counsel under F.S. § 27.52.
2. Previously this Court appointed Zachary Glenn Phipps and the OCCRC For the 5th DCA
as substitute counsel to represent me, based on an incomplete application under F.S. § 27.52.
Now that I am found not indigent, the appointment of counsel must be immediately revoked.
3. On July 2, 2020 I filed a pleading to waive my right to a lawyer, see

Filing # 109766038 E-Filed 07/02/2020 11:48:43 PM
4. Henceforth it is my unequivocal request to represent myself.
WHEREFORE, because I am not indigent per F.S. § 27.52, and I want to represent
myself, this Court’s appointment of Mr. Phipps and the OCCRC must be immediately revoked.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing was
furnished July 22, 2020 to Zachary Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St.,
15
DEFENDANT NOT INDIGENT PER F.S. § 27.52 FOR APPOINTED COUNSEL
COURT MUST REVOKE APPOINTMENT OF MR PHIPPS AND OCCCRC
Ocala, FL 34475-6638 at RCCMarion@rc5state.com, and the State Attorney’s Office, 110 North
West 1st Avenue, Suite 5000 (Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org), Ocala, FL 34475, by e-service.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED July 22, 2020.
Neil J. Gillespie, Defendant

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
2
16
1
17
Filing # 109766038 E-Filed 07/02/2020 11:48:43 PM

vs. CASE NO. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -/
2
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, an indigent nonlawyer appearing pro se, here in
the first person, files Defendant'S Waiver ofRight To A Lawyer, and states:
1. I am the Defendant in this case. I am indigent but waive my right to a lawyer in this case.
This is an unequivocal request to represent myself. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(4) states,

(4) A waiver of counsel made in court shall be of record; a waiver made out of court shall
be in writing with not less than 2 attesting witnesses. The witnesses shall attest the
voluntary execution thereof.
2. The Court appointed substitute counsel Zachary Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A.,
on January 13, 2020 to replace the Office of the Public Defender. Separately I will file,
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY AND REMOVE COUNSEL

ZACHARY GLENN PHIPPS AND THE OCCCRC FOR 5th D.C.A.
3. During a Faretta Hearing June 14, 2020 before Judge Ann Melinda Craggs in another
case, Florida v. Neil Joseph Gillespie, Case No. 2020-CF-2417, Judge Craggs accepted my
Waiver ofRight to Lawyer. My Waiver is attached as Exhibit 1, and is signed by Judge Craggs,
who found "the above-named defendant is alert and intelligent and executed the above Waiver of
Right to Lawyer freely and voluntarily for the purposes therein expressed."
4. This is an unequivocal request to represent myself. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3) states:

18
(3) Regardless of the defendant's legal skills or the complexity of the case, the court shall
not deny a defendant's unequivocal request to represent himself or herself, if the court
makes a determination of record that the defendant has made a knowing and intelligent
waiver of the right to counsel, and does not suffer from severe mental illness to the point
where the defendant is not competent to conduct trial proceedings by himself or herself.
5. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.111(d)(5) states:

(5) If a waiver is accepted at any stage of the proceedings, the offer of assistance of
counsel shall be renewed by the court at each subsequent stage of the proceedings at
which the defendant appears without counsel.
6. Pursuant to Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516, my email addressis:neilgillespie@mfi.net
Tel. 352-854-7807
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF MARION
~
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, this 'i' day of July, 2020,
by Neil J. Gillespie, who is personally known to me, or who has produced r L / h L as
identification and states that he is the person who made this affidavit . ontents are
truthful to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
(SEAL) Shamira A. Rodriguez
I>•
,
My Commission Expires:
NOTARY PUBLIC
::!STATE OF FLORIDA
• Comm# GG098397
Expires 5/1812021
~ . \-0 · "Lo? \
NOTARY PUBLIC
0~,~ \La~l-" ~~Q--z...-

Print Name of Notary Public
WITNESSES: The witnesses attest to the voluntary execution of this waiver. Rule 3.111(d)(4)
19
July 2,2020
to Zachary Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St., Ocala, FL 34475-6638 at
RCCMarion@rc5state.com; and to the State Attorney's Office, 110 North West 1st Avenue,
Suite 5000 (Eservicemarion@Sao5.0rg), Ocala, FL 34475, bye-service on July 2, 2020.
Tel. 352-854-7807
20
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF T'HE FIFTH JUD~CI.AL CIRCUIT,
CRIMINAL DIVISION
COURT PROCEEDING Q8!S
~st Appearance
_ _Arraignment
_ _Plea
_ _Trial
STATE OF FLORIDA
V5.
GJi\\e5r~.Q. ~.L.\
FINDING BY THE COURT

The under$igned Judge finds that the above-named defendant Is alert and Intelligent and executed the above
Waiver of Right to Lawyer freely and voruntarUv for the purposes therein expres ed.
Date
MCCC ,.. CASE INTAKE

McdM~ ~mrAKE
. JUa~ '15 '20 AM9: 12 ~".,
21
AMSCOT FINANCIAL SERVICES
191 SOUTH OCALA
OCALA, FL 34481
Window - J1
('352)282-4660
07/02/2020 12:06 PM
Transaction 273712
Amount Fee
NOTARY 10.00
1D PRESENTED: FL DL G421630560990
Subtotal 10100
Tendered 20.00
Change (currency) 10.00
We do not disclose your non~public

personal information to any~ne
except as requ1red by law. The full
version of our privacy policy' 'fs'
available upon request or at
www.amscot.com/pr1vacy. For
ions or concerns please call
Amscot Customer Care line at
(800)333-6130.
*Rece;pt stub required for Money
Order stop payments & copy requests*
AMSCOT - You're OK with Us!
22
6
23
24
Filing # 111365309 E-Filed 08/06/2020 09:07:28 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT
FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
STATE OF FLORIDA, CASE NO.: 2019-CF-4193-A

Plaintiff,
Vs.

Defendant.
_______________________________/
7
MOTION TO WITHDRAW
COMES NOW, the undersigned counsel and moves this Court to enter an Order
permitting undersigned counsel to withdraw from representation of the Defendant, NEIL
JOSEPH GILLESPIE and files this Motion to Withdraw, and alleges the following in support
thereof:
1. That undersigned counsel was appointed to represent the Defendant in the

above-styled matter.
2. The Regional Counsel's Office has determined and is certifying that a conflict of
interest exists that prohibits The Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional
Counsel, 5th District from representing the Defendant.
WHEREFORE, the Defendant by and through undersigned counsel respectfully

requests that this Honorable Court grant this motion and appoint another conflict attorney to
represent the Defendant.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document has been furnished to: Office of the
State Attorney, eservicemarion@sao5.org, 110 NW 1st Ave., Ocala, FL 34475, by email, the
Defendant, 8092 SW 115th Loop, OCALA, FL 34481, by mail, this 5 day of August, 2020.
/S/ Zachary G. Phipps___________

Zachary G. Phipps Esq.
Assistant Regional Counsel
Florida Bar No.: 065936
Office of Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional
Counsel, 5th District
Rccmarion@rc5state.com
307 N.W. 3rd Street
Phone No. 352-732-1230
Fax No. 352-732-1228
25
Filing # 111365309 E-Filed 08/06/2020 09:07:28 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MARION
COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No: 2019-CF-4193-A
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Plaintiff,
vs.

8
Defendant.
________________________________/
CERTIFICATION OF CONFLICT BY OFFICE OF REGIONAL CRIMINAL AND CIVIL

CONFLICT, 5TH DISTRICT
The Office of Regional Criminal Conflict and Civil Counsel hereby certifies that a conflict does
in fact exist based upon one or more of the following and therefore withdrawal of this office from this
case is appropriate:
____ 1. Conflict of interest involving codefendants.
____ 2. This office previously represented a witness involved in the current case.
____ 3. The attorney assigned to this case previously represented a codefendant or material
witness in this case.
____ 4. This office has material and irreconcilable differences with the client.
 5. Other reasons requiring withdrawal. Specifically: The Regional Counsel's Office has
determined and is certifying that a conflict of interest exists that prohibits the Office of
Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, 5th District from representing the
Defendant.
____ 6. The office cannot act on behalf of one client without materially affecting the
representation of another client, Thomas v State 785 So 2d 626 (FLA 2d DCA, 2001).
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that the foregoing document has been furnished to: The Marion County
Clerk of Court, this 5 day of August, 2020.
/S/ Zachary G. Phipps___________
Zachary G. Phipps Esq.
Assistant Regional Counsel
Florida Bar No.: 065936
Office of Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional
Counsel, 5th District
Rccmarion@rc5state.com
307 N.W. 3rd Street
Px: 352-732-1230 Fx: 352-732-1228
26
9
27
28
Filing # 111470516 E-Filed 08/07/2020 03:14:33 PM

IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Plaintiff,
Vs. CASE NO. 2019-CF-4193

Defendant.
10
________________________________/
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REFUSE COUNSEL AND APPEAR PRO SE

Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, a nonlawyer appearing pro se, here in the
first person, files Defendant’s Motion to Refuse Counsel and Appear Pro Se, and Motion
to Strike Order Appointing Expert for Competency Evaluation, and states,
1. This Court granted a motion by attorney Zachary Phipps and the Office Of
Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel (OCCCRC) to withdraw as counsel in this
case on August 6, 2020. The Order appoints BRENDA H. SMITH, ESQUIRE to
represent the Defendant in this cause.
2. I hereby assert my right to refuse counsel, and appear pro se, as provided by
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), and Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3).
3. I reject representation by Brenda H. Smith at this time. Rule 3.111(d)(5).
4. In Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975), the Supreme Court of the United
States held that criminal defendants have a constitutional right to refuse counsel and
represent themselves in state criminal proceedings.
5. Fla. R. of Crim. P. 3.111(d)(3) states:
(3) Regardless of the defendant's legal skills or the complexity of the case, the
court shall not deny a defendant's unequivocal request to represent himself or
herself, if the court makes a determination of record that the defendant has made a
knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel, and does not suffer from
29
DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO REFUSE COUNSEL AND APPEAR PRO SE Case #2019-CA-4193
severe mental illness to the point where the defendant is not competent to conduct
trial proceedings by himself or herself.
6. The Defendant in this case was found competent to waive the right to a lawyer
and represent himself during two (2) Faretta hearings in 2020-CF-2417, by Judge Tatti on
July 28, 2020 (arraignment) and by Judge Craggs on June 14, 2020 (first appearance).
7. I also move to strike Order Appointing Expert for Competency Evaluation. On
March 13, 2020 attorney Zachary Phipps filed a groundless Motion To Determine
Defendant’s Competency To Stand Trial. During a telephone call with me last week
Phipps agreed to withdrawal the motion; Mr. Phipps agreed I am competent to stand trial.
However before he filed the motion, Mr. Phipps moved to withdrawal from the case.
During our conversation Mr. Phipps also said the prosecution in 2020-CF-2417 was an
“abuse of discretion”
WHEREFORE, I respectfully move this Court to GRANT Defendant’s Motion to
Refuse Counsel and Appear Pro Se, and GRANT Motion to Strike Order Appointing
Expert for Competency Evaluation.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED August 7, 2020.

/s/
Neil J. Gillespie, PETITIONER PRO SE, a nonlawyer
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. (352) 854-7807
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE:
I HEREBY CERTIFY the foregoing was filed August 7, 2020 on the Florida
Portal and served to the names on the Portal Notice of Service of Court Documents.
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie
2
30
Filing # 109989605 E-Filed 07/09/2020 10:38:34 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,

STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 2019-CF-004193-Z

AGENCY NO: S1928054
VS CHARGES:
Unlawful Interception Of Oral
Communication (F3)
Unlawful Interception Of Oral
Communication (F3)
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE(A)
Defendant.
________________________________/
ORDER TO REVOKE BOND

11
THIS CAUSE coming to be heard before me this day upon the foregoing Motion to
Revoke Bond, filed herein by the State of Florida and dated June 15, 2020, and the Court being
fully advised in the premises, it is therefore,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant's bond be revoked and that the Sheriff
of Marion County shall take said Defendant (NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE(A), W/M,
DOB:3/19/1956, SSN:160525117, LAST KNOWN ADDRESS:8092 SW 115TH LOOP,
OCALA, FL 34481-3567) into custody and detain said Defendant at the County Jail, pending
further order of this Court as this Court finds probable cause to believe Defendant committed a
new crime while on pretrial release in the above styled cause.
IT IS FURTHER ORDER AND ADJUDGED that the Defendant be held on a NO
BOND status until further Order of this Court.
DONE AND ORDERED at Ocala, Marion County, Florida, this 9 day of July, 2020.
________________________________
ANTHONY M TATTI
CIRCUIT JUDGE
31
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the above has been furnished to Zachary G Phipps,
Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel, 307 NW 3rd Street, Ocala, FL 34475, and Office of
State Attorney, 110 NW 1 Ave, Suite 5000, Ocala, FL 34475, eservicemarion@sao5.org, by
hand or mail delivery or electronic service, this 9 day of July, 2020.
________________________________
32
12
33
34
35
13
36
14
37
Filing # 110873226 E-Filed 07/28/2020 05:58:53 AM


__________________________________/
15
DEFENDANT’S REQUEST FOR DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION 2020-CF-2417
I HEREBY WAIVE CONFIDENTIALITY
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, an nonlawyer appearing pro se, in the first
person, files Defendant’s Request For Disability Accommodation, and states:
1. I am a person age 64 with disabilities, including type 2 diabetes, diabetic neuropathy,
BMI >40, hearing loss, and obstructive breathing/sleep apnea. I am at increased risk of being
infected with COVID-19. If I get infected, I am at an increased risk of death.
2. The Florida Supreme Court, and all inferior Florida courts, are subject to compliance
with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), as amended:
• 42 U.S.C Chapter 126 - Equal Opportunities For Individuals With Disabilities

• ADA Amendments Act of 2008, PUBLIC LAW 110–325—SEPT. 25, 2008
The Fifth Judicial Circuit Florida, and all its judges, are subject to the ADA. The ADA is unique in that
wrongdoing courts and judges cannot hide behind immunity. Section 12202. State immunity,
A State shall not be immune under the eleventh amendment to the Constitution of the
United States from an action in?[1] Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction for a
violation of this chapter. In any action against a State for a violation of the requirements
of this chapter, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for
such a violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in
an action against any public or private entity other than a State.
Also see F.S. § 768.28 Waiver of sovereign immunity in tort actions; s. 13, Art. X, Fla Const.
3. Previously Judge Tatti denied, violated or ignored, disability accommodation requests:
DEFENDANT’S REQUEST FOR DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION (2019-CF-4193)
38
Filing # 109766038 E-Filed 07/02/2020 11:48:43 PM
8. I fired Mr. Phipps as counsel on March 27, 2020. His continued presence as
counsel in my case is a severe stressor to my disability of PTSD.
9. I request Mr. Phipps and the OCCCRC be removed as counsel from my case as
an disability accommodation.
10. I also need accommodation to understand beforehand “ZOOM” and how it
works.
DEFENDANT’S AMENDED REQUEST FOR DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION

Filing # 109977402 E-Filed 07/09/2020 08:07:17 AM (2019-CF-4193)
9. I fired Mr. Phipps as counsel on March 27, 2020. His continued presence as
counsel in my case is a severe stressor to my disability of PTSD.
10. I request Mr. Phipps and the OCCCRC be removed as counsel from my case
as an disability accommodation.
11. I also need additional disability accommodation to understand beforehand
“ZOOM” and how it works. Currently Zoom is not working for me, and less than
30 minutes remain until the hearing is scheduled to begin using Zoom. My
microphone is not working, so I cannot be heard.
4. The Department of Health is responsible for the state’s public health system which shall
be designed to promote, protect, and improve the health of all people in the state. (Fla. Stat. §
381.001). The Duties and powers of the Department of Health are found in Fla. Stat. § 381.0011.
The Department of Health declared coronavirus is a disease or condition to be reported, see FAC
64D-3.029 Diseases or Conditions to be Reported.
4. The Department of Health has enforcement authority (381.0012) of the Governor’s
COVID-19 Executive Orders governing this communicable disease (381.003). Under 381.0012
See, COVID-19 COMPLAINT TO DEPT OF HEALTH RE MARION COUNTY FLORIDA,

https://www.scribd.com/document/470460699/COVID-19-Complaint-to-Dept-of-Health
5. The Court demands my personal appearance July 28, 2020 at 9:00 AM in Courtroom 4A
of Judicial Center 110 NW 1st Ave., Ocala, FL. This in-court hearing is against the most recent
COVID-19 Administrative Order of the Florida Supreme Court, No. AOSC20-23 Amendment 5:
D. Essential and Critical Trial Court Proceedings. Essential and critical trial court
proceedings should continue to be conducted remotely or, if necessary, in person.
2
39
(1) All circuit and county courts shall continue to perform essential court proceedings,
including but not limited to: first appearance; criminal arraignments;...
https://www.floridasupremecourt.org/ezs3download/download/639134/7265622
6. During my incarceration in the Marion County Jail Jun-13-2020 and Jun-14-2020:
• I was denied use of my diabetic footwear worn to the jail. Instead I was forced to wear
plastic slippers with ridges in the sole, “torture shoes” for a person with diabetic neuropathy.
• I was denied use of a CPAP machine for obstructive breathing/sleep apnea.
• On June 14, 2020, while held in the Marion County Jail, MCSO Jailer Gonzalez claimed
COVID-19 is a "fake virus" and refused to follow COVID-19 rules. I made a complaint on
the Inmate Request Form, see attached. However I was released from jail prior to time
permitted for submission of the Inmate Request Form.
• A "nurse" at the jail refused to wear gloves while performing glucose tests on inmates. This
alleged "nurse" instructed inmates to pass the glucose test meter from one to the next, none of
the inmates wore gloves or even washed hands. While I am type 2 diabetic, I skipped that risk.
• I was forced to suffer conditions that denied me the precautions and protections necessary to
mitigate the severe threat of COVID-19, including:
I did not have access to my usual dietary supplements

Shared public toilets were not sanitized between each use.
I did not have a safe way to dry his hands;
I must sleep within three feet of other inmates;
High touch surfaces within the jail pod are sanitized rarely;
I was not been provided a mask
Temperature checks were not being performed;
Social distance is not being observed/enforced.
• During a visit to the jail in 2019 I became hypoglycemic when my glucose number reached
41. I knew I was becoming increasingly ill, when Jailer Miller demanded I take a “stick” of
insulin. I refused, and saved my life, because taking a “stick” of insulin while hypoglycemic
@41 would likely result in death. I needed food, and ate a piece of bread.
• Upon release, with no money or access to transportation, I was expected to walk home, 15
miles. In 2019 I was released at 3:00 AM on a cold November night in a t-shirt and pants.
The foregoing violates the state constitution. (I have never been convicted of a crime in 64 years)
• COVID-19 Presents a Lethal Threat of Harm to me in Violation of Article I, Section 17 of

the Florida Constitution
• The Florida Constitution states that “cruel and unusual punishment” is forbidden.
3
40
• After release, Timothy T. McCourt, General Counsel, Marion County Sheriff’s Office
refused to provide COVID-19 information, and blocked Sgt. Paul Bloom, Director of the
Public Information Office, from providing me Coronavirus or COVID-19 information:
This is a request for the number of Coronavirus or COVID-19 cases among the
following:
1. Inmates incarcerated at the Marion County Jail
2. Employees working at the Marion County Jail
3. Sworn Officers of the Marion County Sheriff’s Department.
On July 10, 2020, Ocala.com reported “More Ocala jail inmates test positive for COVID-19”.
https://www.ocala.com/news/20200710/more-ocala-jail-inmates-test-positive-for-covid-19
“The number has gone from 44 to 49 to the current 74. Fifteen jail workers also have tested
positive.” Mr. McCourt is hiding an outbreak of COVID-19 in the Marion County Jail.
6. My hearing loss is due to congenital defects including eustachian tube defect (L), and
retracted eardrum (L). On April 24, 2020 I visited the Beltone hearing care center located at
9590 SW SR200, Suite 12, Ocala, FL 34481. Doug Ressler, tester, said I have moderate hearing
loss, and suggested a Beltone Amaze 9.63 DEW ($5,200) a Rechargeable Directional Wireless
Remote Hearing Aid. During my visit, I tired a Beltone Amaze hearing aid and was amazed with
the difference it made to my ability to hear. I would have bought one but could not afford to.
7. My hearing loss was previously brought to the attention of Judge Tatti, and, Zachary
Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St, Ocala, FL 34475-6638
8. I HEREBY WAIVE CONFIDENTIALITY

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
4
41
July 28, 2020
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 28, 2020 a copy of the foregoing has been furnished
by filing on the Portal to the following names by e-service:
State Attorney’s Office, 110 North West 1st Avenue, Suite 5000 (Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org),
Ocala, FL 34475.
Wesley Heidt, State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, to:

wesley.heidt@myfloridalegal.com, crimappdab@myfloridalegal.com, and to
tanya.murraylanthripp@myfloridalegal.com.
Chief Judge Daniel B. Merritt, Jr., Fifth Judicial Circuit, (dmerritt@circuit5.org)
Jonathan Lin, Trial Court Administrator, Marion County Judicial Center, 110 N.W. 1st Avenue,
Ocala, FL 34475 (jlin@circuit5.org)
Kristina Valdez, Disability Coordinator, Marion County Judicial Center, 110 N.W. 1st
Avenue, Ocala, FL 34475 (kvaldez@circuit5.org)

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
5
42
Filing # 110450463 E-Filed 07/20/2020 08:23:52 AM
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, . Case Number: 20CF002417AX
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL. CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY FLORIDA
STATE OF FLORIDA,
vs. Case Number: 20CF002417AX

8092 SW l 15TH LOOP
OCALA FL3448 l 0000
Charges:.
SEQ# CNT# CHARGE LVLDGR
1 2 784.03 BATTERY Misdemeanor
2 1 812.131.2B ROBBERY BY SUDDEN SNATCHING Felony

WITHOUT DEADLY WEAPON
NOTICE TO APPEAR
TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S):

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the above-styled case has been scheduled for:
ARRAIGNMENT .
This is your NOTICE TO APPEAR ON 07/28/2020 at 09:00 AM before the Honorable
ANTHONY MICHAEL TATTI in courtroom COURTROOM 4A of JUDICIAL CENTER 110
NW 1ST AVE, OCALA, FL.
Notice: A warrant will be issued and bail bond forfeited as provided by and in compliance
with the statutes and laws of Florida, for any person who fails to appear.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of this Notice was furnished to the above addressee, by
U.S. Mail/hand delivery on 07 /20/2020
David R Ellspermann
Clerk oft · "t Court and Comptroller
Notice to Appear Criminal Marion.doc I 20CF002417AX I Page 1 of2
43
NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, Case Number: 20CF002417AX
IMPORTANT NOTICES
Prior to your court event please contact your . For all those attending
attorney or visit ·www .marioncountyclerk.org to confirm court, face coverings
the status of your hearing.
that cover the nose and
Pursuant to F.S. 316.193(8), you are hereby notified
that the driving privileges of any person convicted of DUI or mouth are required.
DUBAL will be suspended or revoked and that such person
should make arrangements for transportation at any court DEFENDANT'S
proceedings at which the Court may take such action. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The undersigned Defendant
If you are a per~on with a disability who
does hereby acknowledge
needs any accommodation in order to participate receipt of a copy of the
in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to . foregoing Order on the below
you, to the provision of certain assistance. Please date.
contact the ADA Coordinator at the Office of the
Trial Court Administrator, Marion County XMO:\~ -6 dQ_~~ '.
Signature
Judicial Center, 110 NW First Avenue, Ocala,
Florida 34475, Telephone (352)401-6710, at least --bo°tJ.- ~ llSlruf
7 days before your scheduled court appearance, Mailing Address
or immediately upon receiving this notification if
the time before the scheduled appearance is less (j~ 1El 'btf4."S'
;
than 7 days; if you are hearing or voice impaired, City State, Zip Code
'
call 711.
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Order has been furnished to the following parties
in the manner and on the date(s) indicated below.
DAVID R. ELLSPERMANN, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Comptroller,

Marion County, Florida (352) 671-5544
DATE COPY FURNISHED TO HAND DEL U.S. ELECTRONIC BY
MAIL SERVICE
~
DEFENDANT
1~\1Y'CP
STATE ATTORNEY
\0 ®-
1/?P~eiv ~ (Q ...
DEFENSE ATTORNEY
BAIL BONDSMAN
1 \'l-P~ 'l.P ~( ~ l~ ('}1 n:e--e. y @ ..
OTHER ,,
OTHER
Notice to Appear Criminal Marion.doc j 20CF002417AX I Page 2 of2
44
•• • • • • • • •
081922
II]
•
SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Marion County
Inmate Request Form
TO:
FOOD SERVICES D CANTEEN/INMATE ACCOUNTS D
LAW LIBRARY D CLASSIFICATIONS D
PROGRAMS D PUBLIC DEFENDER D
PROPERTY D DISCIPLINARY REPORT APPEALS D
CHAPLAIN D OTHER D
(Pin Number)
(Date) t f (Pod/Section/Cell #)
(Received from inmate by Officer Signature and 10 #) (Oaterrime)
REQUEST/COMPLAINT:
-:5A;""~ GoN2A(e~
RESPONSE:
(Response to inmate by Officer Signature and 10 #) (Daterrime)

45
White Copy - Classification once the response is compiled.
16
46
47
48
49
~
-,
DISQUALIFICATION
I
&
DISCLOSURE"
I
17
.. - .: .. ,
FII,.;,/c tlJMt'J ~ • PM.II.IfIN~-'1-161_ 2007

; . _." I. ~
I. '.;'
lJ"/~ f"f,,.;,t.
"'.
I(
I
I
I i
I
!
.
I
f Lisa Davidson
Circuit Court Judge
I
Eighteenth Judicial Circuit
f·······
. • Written Materials prepared with the assistance of E. Ashley Hardee, Esq.,
Senior Trial Court Slaff Attorney in th~ Eighteenth judicial Circuit - Outline updated through January 12,2007 •
50
.1
.1
DISQUALIFICATION & DISCLOSURE I

I I~ DISQUALIFICATION ON A JUDGE'S OWN MOTION
I A. CANON 3E(1), FLA. CODE OF JUD. CONDUct
Canon 3E(I), Florida Code of ludicial Conduct, .requires a judge to disqualify

I herself or himself when the judge's impartiality might -reasonably be
questioned including. but not limited to when:
I 1. the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's

lawyer, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning
the proceeding; or
I 2. the judge served as a lawyer or was the lower court judge in the matter in
controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law
I served during such association as a lawyer concerning the malter, or the
judge has been a material witness concerning it; or
f 3. the judge knows he or she (or his or her spouse, parent, child, or other
member of the judge's household) has an economic interestin the subject
I( matter in controversy or is a party or has more than a de minimis interest
-flhat could be substantially affected by the pr~ceeding; or
4. the judge or judge's spouse, or a person within the third degree of

relationship of them, or that person's spouse:
a) is a party to the proceeding or an officer, director or trustee of a
party;
b) is acting as a lawyer in the case;
c) is known by the judge to have more than a de minimis interest that
could be substantially affected by the proceeding;
d) is to the judge's knowledge. likely to be a material witness in the
proceeding.
5. The judge's spouse or a person within the third degree of the relationship
to the judge participated as a lower court judge in a decision to be
reviewed by the judge.
6. The judge. while a judge or a candidate for judicial office has made a
public statement that commits or appears to commit the judge with respect
( - - - I This outline has been adopted and modified from the Outline entitled DISCLOSURE, DISQUALIFICATION.
, AND EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, prepared by the Honorable Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley, United States
District Court for the Southern District of Florida and the Honorable Judge John Antoon II, United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida.
30f47
51
I
to parties or classes of parties in the pro~eeding; an issue in the

I
proceeding; or the controversy in the proceeding:
B. DUTY TO DISCLOSE VS. DUTY TO DISQUALIFY

I
The duty to disclose is broader than the duty to disqualify..

disclosure should always be on the record or in writing.)
(Note- I
1. The commentary to Canon 3E(1) states. ifajudge makes

D2.l necessarily a basis for disqualification.
8 disclosure, it is I
2. In the past there was a presumption that] if a matter was important enough
to require disclosure, it would constitute a sufficient factual basis to
I
support a motion to disqualify under rule 2.330 (former 2.160), Florida
Rules of Judicial Administration. I
3. The Code was amended by the Supreme Court in In re Code of Judicial
Conduct, 659 So. 2d 692 (Fla 1995), and now the judge who makes a
disclosure is not autornaticaUy subject to disqualification. JEAC Ope 03
I
22. The issue should be addressed on a case·by·case basis. W., W.I. v.
~. 696 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (Judge not required to
disqualify upon disclosure that she had a friendship with juvenile's
I
caseworker).
The commentary to 3E(l) states that a judge should disclose on the record
I
information that the judge believes the parties or their lawyers might
consider relevant to the question of disqualification, even if the judge
believes there is no a real basis for disqualification.
I
If a lawyer or party has previously filed a complaint against the judge with
the JQe. that fact does not automatically require disqualification of the
I
4.
judge. Fla.. Code Jud.. Conduct, Canon 3E(I) Commentary.
If the Judge offers to the parties to recuse himself/herself, then the judge
I
must fulfill the offer ifone of the parties accepts it. Deloach Va State, 911
So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). I
c. PLAIN LANGUAGE OF CANON 3E IS NOT EXCLUSIVE
I
The plain language of Canon 3E is not exclusive. For example, Fla.. JEAC Ope 99
"
13 states that a judge currently represented by an attorney must automatically

recuse himself or herself whenever the attorney or members of his finn appear
before the judge even if th-e matter is an uncontested matter such as a default
c-
mortgage foreclosure or uncontested dissolution of marriage.
4of47
,
I
52
I:
1.1
\ D. REMITTAL - CANON 3F, FLA. CODE OF JUD. CONDUCT
r REMITf AL: A judge disqualified by the tenns of Canon JE may disclose on the
record the basis of the judge's disqualification and may ask the parties and their
lawyers to consider. out of the presence of the judge. whether to waive
Ii disqualification. If following disclosure of any basis for disqualification other
than personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, the parties and lawyers,
without participation by the judge. all agree the judge should not be disqualified.
Ii and the judge is then willing to participate. the judge may participate in the
proceeding. The agreement shall be incorporated in the record of the proceeding.
Fla. Code Jud. Conduct, Canon 3F.
Ii As a practical matter a judge may wish to have all parties and their lawyers sign
the remittal agreement although the commentary indicates that parties may act
II through counsel if counsel represents on the record that the party has been
consulted and consents. Fla. Code Jud. Conduct, Canon 3F, Commentary.
II II. DISQUALIFICATION UPON MOTION OF COUNSELl LITIGANT
II Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330 (Note: Although mle 2.330 is entitled "Disqualification
I
of Tna)' Judges," it alsO applies to a trial judge sitting as a circuit appellate judge.)
See Smith v. Santa Rosa Island Auth., 729 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
i (
I
i A. RULE 2.330(d), FLA. R. JUD. ADMIN. (former 2.160)
Rule 2.330ldl sets forth the following bases for a disqualification motion:
1. the party fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because
of specifically described prejudice or bias of the judge;
2. the judge before whom the case is pending. or some person related to said
judgc by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree, is a party
thereto or is interestcd in the result thcreof;
3. the judge is related to an attorney or counselor of record in the cause by
consanguinity or affinity within the third degree; or
4. the judge is 8 material witness for or against one of the parties to the
cause.
B. SECTION 38.10, FLORIDA STATUTES (2006)
I. Whenever a party makes and files an affidavit stating fear that the party
will not receive a fair trial on account of prejudice of the judge, the judge
shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated.
2. Every affidavit shall state the facts and the reasons for the belief that any
such bias or prejudice exists and shall be accompanied by a certificate of
counsel of record that such affidavit and application are made in good
faith. .
3. ~equirements consistent with Rule 2.330, Florida Rules of Judicial
Administration.
50f47
53
I
4. When a judge has disqualified hirnselflherself, second judge is not

I
· (
disqualified on account of- alleged prejudice against the party making the
suggestion in the first instance, or in favor of the adverse party, unless
such judge admits and holds that it is then a fact that he or she does not
I
stand fair and impartial between the parties.
Note: Section 38.10, Florida Statutes, does not apply to appellatejudges.

I
In re Estate of carlton. 378 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 1979). An appellate judge must
detenninc for hlmselflherself both the legal sufficiency of a motion to disqualify
the judge arid the propriety of withdrawing in any partioular circumstance. Id.;
I
~11m Adams v. Smith, 884 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).
c. HOW TO HANDLE A MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION

I
1. STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN THE CASE AND RULE ON
THE MOTION. In addition to filing with the cleik. the movant shall
I
immediately send a copy of the motion to the subject judge for "immediate
ruling." Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(c), (e). A judge is "faced" with a
motion for clisqualification when the motion is filed with the clerk. "A
I
judge faced with a motion for disquaiification should first resolve that
motion before making any other rulings in a case." Loevjngq v.
Northrup, 624 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). ~ also Valdes-FauJi v.
I
Valdes-fauli, 903 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Hoffman v. Crosb..l:,
908 So. 2d i 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Berkowitz v. Rieser. 625 So. 2d
971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Airborne Cable Television. Inc. v. Storer Cable
I
TV of Florida. Inc., 596 So. 2d 117 (Fla 2d DCA 1992). IT IS ERROR
TO TAKE ANY OTHER ACTION IN THE CASE·BEFORE RULING
ON THE MOTION TO DISQUALIFY. Shah v. Harding, 839 So. 2d 765
I
(Fla. 3d DCA 2003) (granting a new trial because trial judge failed to
follow the proper procedure in consideration of a disqualification motion,
by ruling on the motion after deciding the merits of the case); Brown v.
I
State, 863 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. Ist DCA 2004) (once motion to disqualify is
filed, "no further action can be taken, even if the trial court is not aware of I
the pending motion"). While a motion to disqualify is pending, the trial
court is not ·authorized to rule on other pending motions and all such
motions that the trial court does rule upon during this period must be I
vacated. Gomez v, State, 900 So. 2d 760, 761 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)~
Blegelt v. Halbert, 890 So. 2d 1272. 1274 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
I
2. DISQUALIFICATION MOTION MUST BE RULED ON
IMMEDIATELY BUT NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS FOLLOWfNG ITS
PRESENTATION TO THE COURT. Fla R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(j); I
Tableau Fine Art Group, Inc. v. Jacoboni. 853 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 2(03).
C···
Rule2.330(c), Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, requires a party to

file the motion to disqualifY with the Clerk's Office in addition to I
"immediately serv[ing] a copy of the motion on the subject judge" by mail
I
6 of47
I
54
I
~ to the judge's chambers. Jobkin v. State, 889 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 4th DCA
2004).
I IF THE JUDGE FAILS TO RULE ON THE MOTION TO

DISQUALIFY WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER SERVICE OF THE
I MOTION, THE MOTION IS DEEMED GRANTED AND THE

MOVING PARTY MAY SEEK AN ORDER OF THE COURT
DIRECTING THE CLERK TO REASSIGN THE MOTION. Fla. R.
-I Jud. Admin. 2.330(j); Gomez v. Stat~ 900 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA
2005).
I However, note an exception to this rule - If the movant fails to serve a

copy of the motion to disqualify on the judge as required by rule 2.330(c)
and as a result, 30 days passes without the judge making a ruling, then rule
I 2.300(j) is not implicated. Harrison v. Johnson. 934 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2006).
I 3. . A motion to disqualify a judge must be decided by the judge to whom the

motion is directed. RoY v. Tomlinson, 639 So; 2d 1112 (Fla. 1st DCA
1994).
I 4. SAY NOTHING AND TAKE THE MOTION TO CHAMBERS.
THREE RuLES:
I( DO NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY
DO NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY
DO NOT TAKE IT PERSONALLY
I a. Expressing displeasure with attorney for bringing motion to disqualify

may be considered intimidation. See Mard v. Freeman. 688 So. 2d 455
I (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). After receiving an oral motion to disqualify, the
judge aJJegedly ordered the attorney into chambers and advised him that
he (the judge) "had 8 very strong dislike for anyone who demonstrated
I such unprofessional behaviof and challenged his (the judge's) authority
and that attorneys in his courtroom paid a price fOf such behavior." The
judge latcr denied a motion to disqualify containing these allegations.
I Pinnaclc Ins. Co. v. Freeman, 687 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). See
also Martin v. State. 820 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (Judge's
~minent to· defense attorney that the attorney's initial motion for judge's
I disqualification "was filled with defense counsel's personal convictions"
required judge's disqualification because it created an "intolerable.
adversary atmosphere.")
I b. DO NOT HOLD A HEARING. Ruling on a motion for disqualification
I ( a
"does not require a hearing, oral argument, the presentation of evidence, or
review of prior court proceedings. The legal sufficiency of the motion
and affidavits is purely a question of law." Larimer v. State, 50 Fla.
I Supp.2d 13 (Fla. 5th Cir. Ct 199J).
70f47
I
55
I
. { I
The danger· of holding a hearing is illustrated by Clark Auto l.,easing &
Rentals, Inc. v. Luoo,547 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 4~th DCA 1989), where the
trial judge denied the motion and thetlt at the request of plaintifr s counsel,
I
administered an oath to permit counsel to address and refute the factual
allegations in the motion and affidavits. The appellate court ruled,
uAJthough the trial judge stressed that her ruling was based upon the legal
I
sufficiency of the motion and affidavits, the transcript reveals that she
indirectly took an active role in addressing the truthfulness of the
allegations." Therefore, the writ of prohibition was granted. Another
I
example is Cave v. State" 660 So. 2d 70S (Fla. 1995), in which the- court
called witnesses to rebut the defendant's allegations contained in his
motion to disquaJify. Notwithstanding the fact that the motion may have
I
been deficient, the murder conviction was reversed.
In Nathanson v. Nathanson, 693 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 4th DCA 1.997), the
I
trial judge was disqualified for improperly allowing the guardian ad litem
to respond regarding the truthfulness of the allegations in the motion to
disqualify. •
IF you do hold I bearing (strongly diseouraged), you mllst assume
tbat the facts in the motion are true aDd you should limit argument to •
the issue ofwbether the Itated groualls are legally sufficient to require
disqualification. .If you dilpute the facts in the motion, th.t alone will
require you to dlsqoalify younelf. See Randolph v. State, 626 So. 2d •
1006 (FJa. 2d DCA 1993) (The trial- judge conducted a hearing on the
motion to disqualify an~ asked if the prosecutor wished to be beard. The
•
•
prosecutor made comments which were inappropriate because they went
beyond the question of .the legal sufficiency of the motion. Nonethelesst
the appellate court ruled that Uthe prosecutor's comments.•• should not be
•
attributed to the trial judge." The trial court's denial of the motion was
affirmed because the judge ruled on the motion without -disputing the
facts.); Niebla v. State, 832 So. 2d 887, 888 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
•
(Although it is impermissible for a trial judge to refute the charges in a
motion to disqualify, a court is pennitted to state the status of the record.
Held: Trial judge .could state that he imposed consecutive life sentences
•
after defendant's trial.); Shuler v. Green Mounlain Ventures, Inc., 791 So.
. 2d 1213, 1215 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (explaining that while a trial judge
may not pass on the facts of the truth alleged, the judge may explain the
•
status of the record).
..
I
D. DETERMINE PROCEDURAL REGULARITY
J. ·Procedural requirements for motion to disqualify pursuant to Rule 2.330,

. FI<?rida Rules of Judicial Administration. Motion must:
•
i)
ii)
.be made by a party;
be in writing;
80f47 •
III
56
18
57
58
59
Filing # 109909167 E-Filed 07/07/2020 06:50:44 PM


__________________________________/
19
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECOGNIZANCE BOND
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, an indigent nonlawyer appearing pro se, in the
first person, files Defendant’s Motion For Recognizance Bond, and states:
1. Pursuant to Rule 3.131(b)(1), Fla. R. Crim. P., “there is a presumption in favor of release
on nonmonetary conditions for any person who is granted pretrial release.”
2. On November 10, 2019, I was arrested and charged with two non-violent felony crimes,
and released on a $4,000 bond total in case no. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z. My arrest was politically
motivated, see Affidavit of Neil J. Gillespie and Marion Senior Services, Inc.
Fla. Stat. sec. 934.03.1a Interception of Oral Communication; ($2,000 surety bond)
Fla. Stat. sec. 934.03.1c Disclosure of Communication ($2,000 surety bond)
3. The arrest warrant signed by Judge S. Sue Robbins on November 7, 2019 authorizes
modification of bail by the judge presiding at first appearance.
4. At the time of my arrest on November 10, 2019 I was eligible for Recognizance Bond
based upon the following facts:
A. I had no criminal record.

B. I had a valid Florida driver’s license in good standing.
C. I lived at my Florida residential homestead property, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala,
34481, Marion Co., Florida, continuously and uninterruptedly since February 5, 2005.
D. I was age 63 and suffering the infirmaries of aging, including type 2 diabetes.
E. My income was limited to Social Security disability payments.
F. I am educated, with undergraduate degrees in business and psychology.
60
DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECOGNIZANCE BOND CASE NO. 2019-CF-4193
5. On March 9, 2020 at 3:50 PM I emailed my appointed counsel, Zachary Glenn Phipps of
the OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., and requested, “can you move for an order for release on my own
recognizance? (and end the bail bond).” Mr. Phipps failed to seek ROR on my behalf in March
2019. Mr. Phipps failed to respond to my request for a recognizance bond.
6. It appears Mr. Phipps did not want me released on a recognizance bond at that time.
7. Bail reduction is a legitimate function of defense counsel and zealous representation.
8. The foregoing example is evidence that Mr. Phipps and the OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A has
not provided zealous advocacy on my behalf.
WHEREFORE, I respectfully move the Court for a recognizance bond.

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
July 7, 2020 to Zachary Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St., Ocala, FL
34475-6638 at RCCMarion@rc5state.com, and the State Attorney’s Office, 110 North West 1st
Avenue, Suite 5000 (Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org), Ocala, FL 34475, by e-service July 7, 2020.

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
2
61
Page 1 of 2
Neil Gillespie
From: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>

To: <Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org>; <bking@sao5.org>; <jgainey@sao5.org>; <asmith@sao5.org>
Cc: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2020 3:35 PM
Attach: CFS 2005190590 2020 05 19 LAPTOP GONE Bowman, Bryan (5973P) COMPOSITE.pdf; Civil
Rights and ADA Disability Complaint.pdf; Ethics Complaint to Sheriff Woods re Returned US Mail
Addressed to Lt. C.T. Welch.pdf; MCSO19OFF028747.pdf; NOTICE WALMART AND MCSO
VIOLATION AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA).pdf; Trespass Warning - Walmart.pdf;
Thompson's perishable food left with Lt. Welch.pdf; 2020, 05-23-20, EMAIL LT WELCH TRESSPASS
VENDETTA TO NJG.pdf; request-records-search.pdf
Subject: STATE'S DISCOVERY EXHIBIT
Jared Gainey
Assistant State Attorney
Fla. Bar # 1010232
110 NW 1 AVE, SUITE 5000
OCALA, FL 34475
(352) 671-5800 20
RE: STATE'S DISCOVERY EXHIBIT
Mr. Gainey:
Thank you for the State’s Discovery Exhibit. Regarding the Brady Evidence for Ms. Thompson, I
believe Thompson was convicted of domestic violence against Carlton Robert Norwood (died Dec-31-
2011), her former common law husband. This information was provided to me in January 2020 by her
mother, Patricia Thompson. The crime was committed in the state of Maine, either in Augusta Maine or
Vassalboro Maine, which I believe are located in Kennebec County, Maine
https://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/findacourt/kennebec_superior.shtml
I believe Thompson’s crime/conviction involving Mr. Norwood occurred about 15 years ago, and
apparently resulted in Thompson loosing her student aid and ending her college enrollment. This is what
Thompson’s mother told me while I was visiting her brother Andrew Coutu after his drug overdose
while he was in intensive care at AdventHealth Ocala, 1500 Southwest 1st Avenue, Ocala, FL 34471.
Unfortunately court records in Maine are not provided online. Earlier today I called the number for
Michele Lumbert, (207) 213-2800, Clerk of the Maine District Court - Augusta, and was referred to the
records center at 207-753-2901. Searching and obtaining records is laborious and costly, see attached the
attached form with pricing.
https://www.courts.maine.gov/maine_courts/findacourt/waterville_district.shtml
I also believe Brady Evidence should include her arrest February 6, 2020 (felony drugs) where your
office failed to file an information; theft and vandalism shown in MCSO19OFF028747; theft of my new
HP laptop computer recovered by Dunnellon Police Officer E.J. Raines (an example of police I love);
and Thompson’s damage and theft during her home invasion (812.135) June 7, 2020.
Separately, Ms. Thompson is a self-employed Ocala prostitute, f.k.a. Dolly Style, n.k.a. Roxy, who
advertises "i love fetishes bdsm" and "S&M" which I believe accounts for the bruising of her legs a
week after the incident shown in the arrest warrant. Personally I know Thompson enjoys physical
fighting with men from our conversations. https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/roxy-escort-ocala-608178 ,
https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/dolly-style-escort-ocala-608178 Thompson also advertises as "Sadie" in
62
8/18/2020
Page 2 of 2
Dunnellon, Services: Escort, S & M https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/sadie-escort-dunnellon-868163 and

Thompson advertises as "Dolly Stylz" in Dunnellon, Services: Escort, S & M
https://www.eroticmonkey.ch/dolly-stylz-escort-dunnellon-852990
Regarding NICHOLAS AUSTIN (B), Marion County Sheriff Dept., on January 30, 2020 I made a
Federal Civil Rights Complaint against him, see attached. Tellingly, rather than defend my right to know
the pharmacist working at the Walmart Pharmacy, Austin and then Lt. Welch collaborated to have me
trespassed from Walmart. Welch also had me trespassed from his office for leaving Sarah’s perishables
outside the SW Substation in an ice cooler for her to get, see attached. I was compelled to make an
ethics complaint against Welsh for his refusal to accept US mail from me. Seriously, what is wrong with
Deputy Austin, Lt. Welch and certain other MCSO people?
Mr. Gainey, in my view this prosecution (and the wiretapping case) is an example of vengeance by a bad
law enforcement agency, the MCSO, against a senior citizen who speaks truth to power.
Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
63
8/18/2020
Filing # 110167557 E-Filed 07/13/2020 05:00:59 PM
STATE OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 2020-CF-002417-A-Z

VS.
/
STATE'S DISCOVERY EXHIBIT
COMES NOW the State of Florida, by and through its undersigned Assistant State Attorney,
pursuant to Rule 3.220(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and in response to the Notice of
Discovery filed herein by the Defendant and discloses the following information and/or material
within the State's possession or control:
The names and addresses of all persons known to the undersigned Assistant State Attorney
to have information which may be relevant to any offense charged, or any defense thereto. The
letter in parentheses following the name of each witness indicates the category witness of that
individual pursuant to Rule 3.220(b):
NAMES AND ADDRESSES
MARION COUNTY FIRE RESCUE (C) NICHOLAS AUSTIN (B)

Custodian Of Records Marion County Sheriff Dept
2631 SE 3rd St PO Box 1987
Ocala, FL 34471-9101 Ocala, FL 34478
CHRISEAN BOLLERS (A) MATTHEW T BOWERS (A)

Marion County Sheriff Dept Marion County Sheriff Dept
PO Box 1987 PO Box 1987
Ocala, FL 34478 Ocala, FL 34478
KARLA CHARTIER (A) LINSEY CURBELO (B)

ADIAN DAUGHERTY (B) PATRICK J DOODY (A)

KENNETH FAIRMAN (A) WHITTNI FOSTER (B)

M-2020-25844
64
Page 2
DR EXHIBIT
2020-CF-002417-A-Z
JOHN GERNERT (A) AMBER GRIGGS (A)

DANIEL JONES JR (B) AUSTIN KNIPE (A)

Marion County Sheriff Dept Marion County Fire Service
PO Box 1987 2631 SE 3 St
NICOLE LOVELY (A) ROBERT MCCLURE (A)

SIERRA OLIVER (B) NEIL R ROSACI (A)

SHYKEITHA MYCHELLETT SHEFFIELD (B) JAKE STUART (A)

Marion County Sheriff Dept Marion County Fire Service
PO Box 1987 2631 SE 3 St
SARAH MAY THOMPSON (A) STEPHANIE ANN TISKIERLL (A)

C/O State Attorney's Office 8088 SW 115th Loop
110 NW 1 Ave, Suite 5000 Ocala, FL 34481-3567
Ocala, FL 34475
DANIEL J TRAMMELL (A) CHRISTINE N WELLS (B)

JASON WILLIAMS (A) VENETA WILLIAMS (B)

M-2020-25844
65
Page 3
DR EXHIBIT
2020-CF-002417-A-Z
PAUL YOUMANS (A)

Marion County Sheriff Dept
PO Box 1987
Ocala, FL 34478
"YES" is indicated below for each subparagraph identifying information and/or material
that is presently in the State's possession or control. The said information and/or material is
available for inspection and copying upon reasonable notice to the undersigned. "NONE" is
indicated below for each subparagraph identifying information and/or material that is not presently
in the State's possession or control. The name(s) of confidential informant(s) will only be disclosed
when the State intends to use same as witness(es) at the trial or when required by Order of Court.
YES NONE
a. Written, recorded and/or summarized statements of

X
persons listed in paragraph "1." above
b. Written, recorded and/or oral statements of the X
defendant (substance of oral statements below)
c. Written, recorded and/or oral statements of X

co-defendant(s) (substance of oral statements below)
d. Recorded Grand Jury testimony of defendant X
e. Tangible papers or objects obtained from or X

belonging to the defendant
f. Material or information provided by confidential X

informant(s)
g. Electronic surveillance of premises of defendant or X

conversations to which defendant was a party
(Documents relating thereto) X
h. Search and/or seizure X
(Documents relating thereto) X
i. Reports or statements of experts X
j. Tangible papers or objects not obtained from or X

belonging to defendant which the State intends to use
at hearing or trial
M-2020-25844
66
Page 4
DR EXHIBIT
2020-CF-002417-A-Z
k. BRADY EVIDENCE: Material or information that X

tends to negate the guilt of the defendant as to any
offense charged
l. Any tangible paper, objects or substances in the X

possession of law enforcement that could be tested
for DNA
m. Material or Information provided by an Informant Witness X

BRADY EVIDENCE
Victim's Criminal History includes:
Pasco County-
LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE, 2X FRAUD IMPERSON W/O
CONSENT 11/21/2018 Court:Adjudicated Guilty
LARC-PETIT THEFT 2ND DEGREE 1ST OFFENSE 06/20/2018 Court:Adjudicated
Guilty
RETAIL PETIT THEFT, EVIDENCE TAMPERING, RWOV, DEALING IN STOLEN
PROPERTY 08/13/2014 Court:Adjudicated Guilty
DEFENDANT STATEMENTS
Defendant stated the victim pulled the door handle off of the door and stated he was trapped
in the house. Defendant stated the victim keeps shutting off his power and that he cannot do his legal
paperwork in the dark. When officers arrived later that date, defendant stated post Miranda that he
hid the phone, but denied taking it. On June 13, 2020, during the execution of the search warrant,
Defendant stated he injured his hand approximately a week prior. For further disclosure of defendant
statements, see all reports and media provided in discovery.
CO-DEFENDANT STATEMENTS
NONE
TANGIBLE EVIDENCE
N. ROSACI - NEIL.PDF*
N. ROSACI - NEIL.M4A*
K. FAIRMAN BODY CAM VIDEOS (2)*
N. AUSTIN BODY CAM VIDEOS (2)*
K. CHARTIER BODY CAM VIDEO*
*A/V ON EVIDENCE.COM
MCSO CASE #: 20011411:

- P. DOODY BODY CAM VIDEOS (2)*
- P. DOODY - IN-CAR VIDEO*
- A. GRIGGS BODY CAM VIDEOS (2)*
- M. SCHREINDER BODY CAM VIDEO*
M-2020-25844
67
Page 5
DR EXHIBIT
2020-CF-002417-A-Z
- M - SCHREINDER - IN-CAR VIDEO*

*A/V ON EVIDENCE.COM
911 CALLS (5)*

*A/V ON X DRIVE
911 CALL LOG - 23 PGS.
NOTE: Photographs, video and audio recording supplied may have suffered degradtion
from the original due to copying.
All tangible objects as provided by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.220(b)(1)(F) and Fla..R.Crim.P.

3.220(b)(1)(K), unless "NONE" is indicated above, may be inspected, copied, tested and/or
photographed upon reasonable notice to the State and/or the custodian of the said objects during the
regular and ordinary business hours at:
1. State Attorney's Office

2. MARION COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT
This document will serve as authorization for the defendant, his/her attorney, or his/her
designated representative to conduct the said discovery of tangible objects, in the above-styled
cause, with reference to the following case numbers:
# 2020-CF-002417-A-Z
# MCSO S2011393
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing State's Discovery Exhibit has been
furnished by U.S. Mail/Hand Delivery/Electronic Service to: Neil Joseph Gillespie, Defendant, Pro
Se, Marion County Jail, 3290 NW 10th St, Ocala, FL 34475-4550 this 13th day of July, 2020.
BRAD KING
STATE ATTORNEY
FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Jared Gainey
Fla. Bar # 1010232
OCALA, FL 34475
(352) 671-5800
ESERVICEMARION@sao5.org
M-2020-25844
68
Filing # 109043203 E-Filed 06/18/2020 10:37:13 AM


CASE NO. 2020-CF-2417
vs. 42-2020-CF-002417-CFAXXX
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE 21
__________________________________/
DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF CLAIM OF IMMUNITY UNDER

SECTION 776.032 FLORIDA STATUTES
COMES NOW the Defendant, NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, an indigent nonlawyer
appearing pro se, in the first person, gives Defendant’s Notice of Claim of Immunity Under
Section 776.032 Florida Statutes, and states:
I hereby give Notice to the State Attorney of my Claim of Immunity in this prosecution
Under Section 776.032 Florida Statutes. A copy of Section 776.032 is attached.
to the State Attorney’s Office, 110 North West 1st Avenue, Suite 5000,
(Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org), Ocala, FL 34475, by e-service this 18th day of June, 2020.
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
69
6/18/2020 Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine
Select Year: 2019 Go
The 2019 Florida Statutes
Title XLVI Chapter 776 View Entire Chapter

CRIMES JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use or threatened use
of force.—
(1) A person who uses or threatens to use force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is
justified in such conduct and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use or threatened
use of such force by the person, personal representative, or heirs of the person against whom the force was
used or threatened, unless the person against whom force was used or threatened is a law enforcement
officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the
officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using or threatening to
use force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in
this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or
prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use or threatened use of
force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using or threatening to use
force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used or threatened was
unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all
expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that
the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
(4) In a criminal prosecution, once a prima facie claim of self-defense immunity from criminal prosecution
has been raised by the defendant at a pretrial immunity hearing, the burden of proof by clear and convincing
evidence is on the party seeking to overcome the immunity from criminal prosecution provided in subsection
(1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27; s. 6, ch. 2014-195; s. 1, ch. 2017-72.
Copyright © 1995-2020 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us
70
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html 1/1
Filing # 110432892 E-Filed 07/17/2020 05:00:03 PM

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 22

CASE NO. 2020-CF-2417
vs.
[RELATED CASE NO. 2019-CF-4193]
__________________________________/
Defendant NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, a nonlawyer appearing pro se, in the first person,
files Motion To Drop All Charges and Release Defendant, and states,
1. Earlier today I notified Assistant State Attorney Jared Gainey to immediately drop the
charges against me, and inform Judge Tatti so he may revoke the arrest warrant for me. My
email and attachments to ASA Gainey appear at Exhibit 1 and state in substance:
Jared Gainey
Fla. Bar # 1010232
OCALA, FL 34475
(352) 671-5800
RE: State of Florida v Neil Joseph Gillespie

2020-CF-2417
Mr. Gainey:
As you know, I waived my right to counsel in 2020-CF-2417 and I appear pro se.
Attached you will find DOC-28 date July 9, 2020 Subpoena Returned Not Served, for the
alleged victim, Sarah May Thompson. The subpoena return of service shows "non
served" and "could not be found in Marion County Florida".
It appears the state no longer has a victim in 2020-CF-2417. Therefore, I request you
immediately drop the charges against me, and inform Judge Tatti so he may revoke the
arrest warrant for me.
Neil J. Gillespie (signature block omitted)
71
2. On July 6, 2020 I filed, with the cooperation of the State Attorney Brad King,
NOTICE: PROPERTY IN STORAGE FOR DEFENDANT THOMPSON

Filing # 109797405 E-Filed 07/06/2020 11:05:39 AM
Notice: Property in Storage For Defendant Thompson appears at Exhibit 2. My pleading shows
at Exhibit 1 email I received from Ms. Thompson June 18, 2020 at 8:09 AM:
Mr. Gillespie,
As I'm sure you know I showed up at ypur house yesterday June 17th in an
attempt to retrieve my personal property from you. I made 1 telephone call and
left a message. Since there is an injunction pending and due to the nature of our
last encounter this will be my last communication with you. If you could put my
stuff in storage unit like you had said and then have the storage people call me
then this matter will be resolved. My cell phone # is 352-356-5666.
Thank you
Sarah Thompson
The operative words of Ms. Thomspon are “If you could put my stuff in storage unit like you had
said and then have the storage people call me then this matter will be resolved.”
3. The alleged victim, Sarah MayThompson, considers this matter resolved because she got
what she wanted: To put her stuff in storage. Apparently in her view the ends justify the means,
even if the means are her corruption of the criminal process. .
4. The ARREST AFFIDAVIT in this case is a work of fiction. First, Sarah May Thompson
was not a lawful resident of 8092 SW 115th Loop Ocala on June 7, 2020. Ms. Thompson vacated
the property on May 16, 2020 because I refused to drive her to buy drugs. Second, I did not take
Ms. Thompson’s smart phone from her by sudden snatching. The phone was unattended and
charging at an electrical outlet under the fuse box in the garage. Thompson was 8 feet away
when I confiscated the phone for theft of electricity and violation of house rules. Thompson was
armed with a metal T-ball bat she earlier took from my vehicle. Thompson screamed for her
phone when I unplugged it from the electrical outlet, not taken from her person as claimed.
2
72
5. Ms. Thompson played the Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) to assist her
deception, and she was able to do so because of prejudice of the MCSO against me.
6. As I informed ASA Gainey by email today,
It appears the state no longer has a victim in 2020-CF-2417. Therefore, I request you
immediately drop the charges against me, and inform Judge Tatti so he may revoke the
arrest warrant for me.
WHEREFORE, I move the Court to drop all charges in 2020-CF-2417 against me, and
release me from the arrest warrant, or from jail if I am incarcerated.
RESPCTFULLY SUBMITTED July 17, 2020.
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July17, 2020 a copy of the foregoing has been furnished to
the following names by e-service:
• State Attorney’s Office, 110 North West 1st Avenue, Suite 5000
(Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org), Ocala, FL 34475.
• Wesley HEIDT, State of Florida, Office of the Attorney General, to:
wesley.heidt@myfloridalegal.com, crimappdab@myfloridalegal.com, and to tanya.murray-
lanthripp@myfloridalegal.com
• Zachary Glenn Phipps, OCCCRC for 5th D.C.A., 307 NW 3rd St.
(RCCMarion@rc5state.com) Ocala, FL 34475-6638.

8092 SW 115th Loop
Ocala, FL 34481
Tel. 352-854-7807
3
73
Page 1 of 1
Neil Gillespie
From: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>

To: <bking@sao5.org>; <jgainey@sao5.org>; <asmith@sao5.org>; <Eservicemarion@Sao5.Org>
Cc: "Courtemanche, Richard" <RCourtemanche@floridabar.org>; "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 10:49 AM
Attach: DOC-028 date 07-09-2020 SUBPOENA RETURNED NOT SERVED.pdf
Subject: State of Florida v Neil Joseph Gillespie, 2020-CF-2417
Jared Gainey
Fla. Bar # 1010232
OCALA, FL 34475
(352) 671-5800 1
RE: State of Florida v Neil Joseph Gillespie
2020-CF-2417
Mr. Gainey:
As you know, I waived my right to counsel in 2020-CF-2417 and I appear pro se. Attached you will find
DOC-28 date July 9, 2020 Subpoena Returned Not Served, for the alleged victim, Sarah May
Thompson. The subpoena return of service shows "non served" and "could not be found in Marion
County Florida".
It appears the state no longer has a victim in 2020-CF-2417. Therefore, I request you immediately drop
the charges against me, and inform Judge Tatti so he may revoke the arrest warrant for me.
Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie
8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
74
7/17/2020
75
76
Filing # 109797405 E-Filed 07/06/2020 11:05:39 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT FLORIDA

IN AND FOR MARION COUNTY
NEIL J. GILLESPIE,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO. 2020-CA-934
SARAH MAY THOMPSON, ET AL

2
Defendants,
_________________________________/
NOTICE: PROPERTY IN STORAGE FOR DEFENDANT THOMPSON
Plaintiff NEIL J. GILLESPIE, an indigent nonlawyer, here in the first person, gives
Notice: Property In Storage For Defendant Thompson, and states,
1. On June 18, 2020, I filed,
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO PROVIDE

SARAH MAY THOMPSON HER BELONGINGS
Filing # 109094207 E-Filed 06/18/2020 11:15:39 PM
2. As of this Notice, the Court has not responded to my Emergency Motion. The Court has
not responded to anything concerning this case, filed June 8, 2020, that I know about.
3. On July 2, 2020 I emailed the Clerk: “Do you know if the Court plans to take any action
in Case No. 2020-CA-934?” The Clerk responded: “This office has no reason or ability to know
in advance what a judge may do.”
4. Therefore too expedite this matter in the interest of justice, Defendant Sarah May
Thompson (“Ms. Thompson”) may retrieve her belongings at the storage facility she designated:
US Storage Center
2853 S. Pine Avenue
Ocala, FL 34471
(352) 274-9798
Storage Unit No. C0195
77
NOTICE: PROPERTY IN STORAGE FOR DEFENDANT THOMPSON CASE NO. 2020-CA-934
5. Storage Unit No. C0195 is available now through July 31, 2020. Ms. Thompson’s
property is inside the storage unit, which is locked. One key to the lock, and the Gate/Access
Code, has been shipped the State Attorney, who has agreed to provide it to Ms. Thompson:
Brad King, State Attorney

Office of the State Attorney
Marion County Judicial Center
110 NW 1 Ave., Suite 5000
Ocala, FL 34475
Tel. (352) 671-5800
VIA UPS No. 1Z64589FP291449894
6. On June 18, 2020 Ms. Thompson emailed me at 8:09 AM: (Exhibit 1)
Mr. Gillespie,
As I'm sure you know I showed up at ypur house yesterday June 17th in an
attempt to retrieve my personal property from you. I made 1 telephone call and
left a message. Since there is an injunction pending and due to the nature of our
last encounter this will be my last communication with you. If you could put my
stuff in storage unit like you had said and then have the storage people call me
then this matter will be resolved. My cell phone # is 352-356-5666.
Thank you
Sarah Thompson
7. While the foregoing statement is not accurate, I want to bring finality to the matter of Ms.
Thompson’s belongings. As requested, her personal property is available to pick up at,
US Storage Center Unit Number C0195

2853 S. Pine Avenue Access Hours: 6:00 A.M. to 10 P.M.
Ocala, FL 34471 Tel. (352) 274-9798
and must be picked-up by July 31, 2020.
8. There is no lien on Ms. Thompson’s property. There are no charges with the storage
center, so long as she vacates Unit No. C0195 and removes her property by July 31, 2020.
9. Ms. Thompson will be provided a key for the lock, and the Gate/Access Code, for
Storage Unit No. C0195 from the State Attorney as shown above.
2
78
NOTICE: PROPERTY IN STORAGE FOR DEFENDANT THOMPSON CASE NO. 2020-CA-934
10. Photos of Ms. Thompson’s property in Storage Unit No. C0195, US Storage Center store,
2853 S. Pine Avenue, Ocala, FL 34471, appear below. (four photos)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE: I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served on the
Portal July 6, 2020 to the names on the Portal Notice of Service of Court Documents.
Neil J. Gillespie, Plaintiff pro se

8092 SW 115th Loop
Tel. 352-854-7807
3
79
Page 1 of 1
Neil Gillespie
From: "sarah mae" <8ada558itch@gmail.com>

To: "Neil Gillespie" <neilgillespie@mfi.net>
Cc: "Cop Ms" <Tmccourt@marionso.com>; "Lt. Charles Welch" <cwelch@marionso.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 8:09 AM
Subject: My property
Mr. Gillespie,
As I'm sure you know I showed up at ypur house yesterday June 17th in an attempt to retrieve my
personal property from you. I made 1 telephone call and left a message. Since there is an injunction
pending and due to the nature of our last encounter this will be my last communication with you. If you
could put my stuff in storage unit like you had said and then have the storage people call me then this
matter will be resolved. My cell phone # is 352-356-5666.
Thank you
Sarah Thompson
1
80
6/22/2020
7/6/2020 Create a Shipment | UPS - United States
UPS Internet Shipping: View /Print Label
1. Ensure there are no other shipping or tracking labels attached to your package. Select the Print button on
the print dialog box that appears. Note: If your brow ser does not support this function select Print from the File menu to
print the label.
2. Fold the printed label at the solid line below . Place the label in a UPS Shipping Pouch. If you do not have a pouch,
affix the folded label using clear plastic shipping tape over the entire label.
3. GETTING YOUR SHIPMENT TO UPS

Custom ers w ith a Daily Pickup
Your driver w ill pickup your shipment(s) as usual.
Custom ers w ithout a Daily Pickup

Take your package to any location of The UPS Store®, UPS Access Point(TM) location, UPS Drop Box, UPS Customer
Center, Staples® or Authorized Shipping Outlet near you. Items sent via UPS Return Services(SM) (including via Ground)
are also accepted at Drop Boxes. To find the location nearest you, please visit the 'Find Locations' Quick link at ups.com.
Schedule a same day or future day Pickup to have a UPS driver pickup all of your Internet Shipping packages.
Hand the package to any UPS driver in your area.
UPS Access Point T M UPS Access Point T M UPS Access Point T M
THE UPS STORE CVS STORE # 5921 ADVANCE AUTO PART STORE 6041
11100 SW 93RD COURT RD 10255 SW 86TH CIR 9580 SW HIGHWAY 200
OCALA ,FL 34481 OCALA ,FL 34481 OCALA ,FL 34481
FOLD HERE
81
https://www.ups.com/uis/create?ActionOriginPair=default___PrintWindowPage&key=labelWindow&type=html&loc=en_US&instr=A&doc=shipment_937553856:la… 1/1
Drop-Of f Package Receipt: 1 of 1
THIS IS NOT A SHIPPING LABEL. PLEASE SAVE FOR YOUR RECORDS.
DROP-OFF LOCATION: DROP-OFF DATE/TIME:
The UPS Store #5520 Man 6 Jul 2020 10:45 AM
11100 SW 93 COURT RD
STE 10 ESTIMATED PICKUP DATE:
UPS Man 6 Jul 2020 1pkg
(352) 402-0099
CUSTOMER:
GILLESPIE
ID Type: Not Provided TOTAL PACKAGES: 1pkg
TRACKING NUMBER CARRIER & SERVICE WEIGHT

1Z64589FP291449894 UPS Ground 0.20 lb
This .. eceip~ is~s each package .. ecei .... ed by The UPS S~o .. e .. sszm and
I
indica~es ~he info .. ma~ion fo .. each package has been ~ .. ansmi~~ed ~o each
da~a sys~em
ca .... ie .. 's This .. eceip~ is no~ confi .. ma~ion ~he ca .... ie .. has
picked up ~he package To .... e .. i f 'I ~he s~a~us of a package. go ~o
h~~p:ll~heupss~o.. e.com. selec~ T .. acking. ~hen en~e .. T .. acking ... I f you
selec~ed a no packaging op~ion fo .. you .... e~u .. ned i~em, ~he T .. acking .. may
no~ p .. o .... ide ~ .. acking .. esul~s Please con~ac~ ~he .... endo .. 's websi~e fo .. mo .. e
info .. ma~ ion on .. e~u .. nl .. efund s~a~us. The UPS S~o .. e does no~ main~ain
.. ei:u .. n/ .. efund si:ai:us for .... endo .. s. You acknowledge ~ha~ ~he shipmen~ se ...... ices
p .. o .... ided by The LIPS S~o .. e .. 55Zm fo .. ~he I isi:ed packages a .. e subJec~ i:o and
go .... e .. ned by each Ca .... ie .. Ag .. eemen~, i f applicable, ~he Ra~es and Se ...... ice
Guide fo .. each ca .... ie .. , and ~he ~a .. i f f in effec~ a~ i:he ~ ime of shipmen~.
Powe .. ed by iShip( .. )
m7/m6/ZmZm m7:45 AM Pacific Time
iI
SEE NOTICE ON REVERSE regarding UPS Terms. and notice of limitation of liability. Where allowed by law. shipper authorizes UPS to act as forwarding agent for export control and
I customs purposes. If exported from the US. shippper certifies that th~ commodillles. technology or software were exported from the US In accordance with the Export Administration
Regulations. Diversion contrary to law Is prohibited. KR0520
82

Amended Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus With Appendix

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Amended Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus With Appendix

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Filing # 112016692 E-Filed 08/18/2020 06:15:36 PM

IN THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE,

AMENDED PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

Submitted August 18, 2020 by:

NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

I. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED 9.

Petitioner did not request appointed counsel in 2019-CF-4193

Appointed Counsel was ineffective in representing the Petitioner

II. THE PETITINER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTRAINED 18.

Appointed Counsel was ineffective in representing the Petitioner

III. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY 22.

Judge Tatti belatedly struck my pro se motion to disqualify him in

IV. THE PETITIONER IS WRONGLY BEING RESTAINED BY 29.

CONCLUSION AND RELIEF SOUGHT ................................................ 32.

STATE CONSTITUTION, STATUTES AND RULES

Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(b)(3) .......................................................................... 2

Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1a Interception of Oral Communication ....................... 3

1. STATE OF FLORIDA v NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

ZOOM hearing held July 9, 2020 at 8:30 AM on MOTION TO REVOKE

Appearance by appointed counsel Zachary Glenn Phipps, Office of Criminal

2. STATE OF FLORIDA v NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE

Arraignment held July 28, 2020 at 09:00 AM in courtroom 4A of the Marion

I appeared pro se, testified on my behalf, and waived my right to a lawyer,

During the proceeding Judge Tatti found “the above-named defendant is

HEARING RESULTS: COURT SETS ASIDE ORDER REVOKING

3. Recordings of hearings provided to the Clerk in lieu of transcripts, see

My name is Neil Joseph Gillespie, a nonlawyer appearing pro se, a

prior criminal record. Before moving to Florida in 1993 I owned and

operated several businesses in Pennsylvania. I am educated with degrees in

business (Wharton/UPenn) and psychology (The Evergreen State College). I

am single, never married, and do not have children.

2005, my Florida residential homestead, 8092 SW 115th Loop, Ocala,

Marion County, Florida 34481.

In 2006 I contacted the Marion County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO) to no

that wrongly encumbered Mom’s home with a $40,000 mortgage. (Exhibit A)

Equity Conversion Mortgage, also called a HECM reverse mortgage,

“The writ of habeas corpus shall be grantable of right, freely and

governed by Fla. R. App. P. 9.100, and Chapter 79 of the Florida Statutes.

This Court's Order dated July 29, 2020, states:

Upon consideration that the Notice of Appeal transferred from

On August 7, 2020 I moved to enlarge time to file to August 17, 2020.

The writ of habeas corpus addresses the legality of the restraint.

reason, the petitioner must actually demonstrate that he or she is in custody

or that the petitioner is being restrained in some manner by the respondent.

In other words, habeas corpus is only an appropriate remedy if the petitioner

I was arrested on November 10, 2019 in STATE OF FLORIDA VS

NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, Marion County Circuit Criminal Court, Case

No. 2019-CF-004193-A-Z, and charged with two crimes:

Fla. Stat. § 934.03.1a Interception of Oral Communication;

AFFIDAVIT OF NEIL J. GILLESPIE Re: Marion Senior Services, Inc.

Sheriff Woods was vice president of Marion Senior Services, Inc.

The complainant, Chonnie Phillips, is a temp employee of Marion

Senior Services, Inc. where Sheriff Billy Woods is vice president.

Attorney Samantha Shealy Rauba, FL Bar #59503, serves on the

Shealy Rauba states:

required by F.S. § 617.1623. The Florida Bar responded to my complaint

The Marion County Bar Association, Inc. is housed in the State

Attorney’s Office, 110 NW 1st Ave. Ste 5000, Ocala, FL 34475-6614.

Mrs. Shealy Rauba is married to Erik John Rauba, FL Bar # 59429.

110 NW 1st Ave. Ste 5000, Ocala, FL 34475-6614, Email: erauba@sao5.org

The Petitioner was arrested on June 7, 2020 in STATE OF FLORIDA

VS NEIL JOSEPH GILLESPIE, Marion County Circuit Criminal Court,