1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Hon. John C. Coughenour

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (INC) Plaintiff (Capacity Bankrupt Legal Fiction) ) ) ) ) ) ) v. ) ) RONALD L. BREKKE, ) Defendant ) (Capacity ENS LEGIS, Legal Fiction) ) ) ______________________________________ ) _ ) Ronald Lee Brekke, ) ) Third Party Plaintiff ) ) (Capacity Administrator / Secured Party) ) ) v. ) ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (INC) ) ) Governor, of State of Washington ) ) CHRISTINE GREGOIRE, ) ) (Capacity Public Official / Trustee) ) ) Governor, State of California ) ) JERRY BROWN ) ) (Capacity Public Official / Trustee) ) ) CASE NO. CR10-328-JCC PETITION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE by AFFIDAVIT of Ronald Lee Brekke

Hon. John C. Coughenour, Judge (Capacity Public Official / Trustee)

September 2, 2011

__________________________________________1____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Third Party Defendants

PETITION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE AS PRESENTED BY AFFIDAVIT OF Ronald Lee Brekke

I, Ronald Lee Brekke, Intervenor, Third Party Plaintiff, Administrator of the RONALD LEE BREKKE ESTATE hereinafter, Petitioner, state that Petitioners presence here is special. All parties whatsoever are estopped henceforth from acting against any of Petitioners rights and property in any manner regarding this matter because Code is "not the law" (In Re Self v Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261) defined by Black's Law Dictionary as prima facie, which is color of law; color is "counterfeit or feigned". (Exhibit A Advisement of Reservation of Rights attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference)

I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein, am over the age of majority, and hereby asseverate understanding the liabilities presented in your Briscoe v LaHue, 460 US 325.

I, Ronald Lee Brekke, IN GOOD FAITH do hereby and herein petition this court for CHANGE OF VENUE to the Central District of California.

__________________________________________2____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Article III, 2, United States Constitution provides the Trial of all Crimes ... shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed.... Under the Sixth Amendment, a defendant has the right to trial by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed. The Supreme Court has stated provision for trial in the vicinity of the crime is a safeguard against the unfairness and hardship involved when an accused is prosecuted in a remote place. Platt v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company, 376 U.S. 240, 245, 84 S.Ct. 769, 772, 11 L.Ed.2d 674 (1964), (quoting United States v. Cores, 356 U.S. 405, 407, 78 S.Ct. 875, 877, 2 L.Ed.2d 873 (1958)). These constitutional venue guarantees are more than procedural technicalities; they touch closely the fair administration of criminal justice and public confidence in it and raise deep issues of public policy. United States v. Muhammad, 502 F.3d 646, 652 (7th Cir.2007). One such policy concern is the protection of a defendant from prosecution in a place far from his home and the support system that is necessary to mount an adequate defense. Id. Rule 18 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides for the practical application of these constitutional guarantees, stating, Unless a statute or these rules permit otherwise, the government must prosecute an offense in a district where the offense was committed. Fed.R.Crim.P. 18. Rule 21 sets forth the standards under which a motion for change of venue is to be evaluated. The decision to change venue is subject to the sound discretion of the trial court. United States v. Bailleaux, 685 F.2d 1105, 1108 (9th Cir.1982); United States v. McDonald, 740 F.Supp. 757, 759 (D.Alaska,1990). The Supreme Court has identified 10 factors that should be considered in determining whether transfer of a proceeding to another District is appropriate: (1) location of witnesses; (2) location of possible witnesses; (3) location of events likely to be in issue; (4) location of documents and records likely to be involved; (5) disruption of defendant's business unless the case is transferred; (6) expense to the parties; (7) location of counsel; (8) relative accessibility of place of trial; (9) docket condition of each district or division involved; and (10) any other special elements which might affect the transfer. Platt v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co., 376 U.S. 240, 243-44, 84 S.Ct. 769, 11 L.Ed.2d 674 (1964). No one of these considerations is dispositive.... It remains for the district court to try to strike a balance and
__________________________________________3____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

determine which factors are of greatest importance. United States v. Morrison, 946 F.2d 484, 490 n. 1 (7th Cir.1991) (citation omitted). To merit a transfer, a defendant must show that the prosecution in the district where the count was properly returned will result in a substantial balance of inconvenience to the defendant. United States v. Hurwitz, 573 F.Supp. 547, 552 (S.D.W.Va.1983) (Haden, C.J.). Moreover, a defendant's residence is only relevant in the presence of other factors. United States v. Quinn, 401 F.Supp.2d 80, 86-87 (D.D.C.2005) (stating that although the defendant's residence is a factor to be considered, it is not the controlling factor, and indeed its significance derives solely from its relationship to the convenience of witnesses, records, and counsel. ) (internal citations omitted); see also United States v. Spy Factory, Inc., 951 F.Supp. 450, 463-65 (S.D.N.Y.1997) (recognizing a general presumption that a criminal prosecution should be retained in the original district. ) (internal citations omitted) (Sotomayor, J.). In essence, [t]he determination of whether a particular case calls for transfer depends upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case. United States v. Posner, 549 F.Supp. 475, 477 (S.D.N.Y.1982). ANALYSIS OF PLATT FACTORS The Supreme Court has identified 10 factors that should be considered in determining whether transfer of a proceeding to another District is appropriate. Petitioner submits the following relating to each of these factors:

(1) location of witnesses Mostly California (2) location of possible witnesses Mostly California (3) location of events likely to be in issue Bellingham, WA, Seattle, WA, Orange County, CA 22
23 (4) location of documents and records likely to be involved mostly Orange County, CA

(5) disruption of defendant's business unless the case is transferred complete disruption (6) expense to the parties All Defendants funds were confiscated for forfeiture rendering him
26 27 28 25

24

indigent and any expense a hardship. Accordingly the major expenses of travel and lodging during
__________________________________________4____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

pretrial and trial would greatly inconvenience Defendant as well as any non-government out of state witnesses. Defendant would not have access to his office, i.e. printers, computers, documents, etc. with which to prepare documents during the speculated 5-7 day time period of the trial, should there be a need

(7) location of counsel The defendant has CJA court appointed counsel whose law offices are located in the greater metropolitan Seattle, WA area. The Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is represented by UNITED STATES DISTRICT ATTORNEYS in the Western District of Washington whose main office is in Seattle, WA. The defendants present court appointed counsel is not a member of the California Bar. Assistance of appointed counsel under the Criminal Justice Act is available for Defendant in California. There are UNITED STATES DISTRICT ATTORNEYS Offices in Orange County, California relative accessibility of place of trial federal courthouses in Seattle and Los Angeles (Santa Ana) are equally accessible to witnesses. docket condition of each district or division involved similar.

(8)
14 15

13

(9) 16

(10) and any other special elements which might affect the transfer Defendants records and residence 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 __________________________________________5____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

are located within a few minutes drive of the court house in Santa Ana, California making it very convenient for him whereas travel and lodging for a 5-7 day trial in Seattle, WA is extremely inconvenient. WHEREFORE the Defendant petitions this Court find that a change of venue to the Central District of California is appropriate and transfer this case should any further proceedings and trial be necessary. I AM not an expert in the law however I do know right from wrong. If there is any human being damaged by any statements herein, if he will inform me by facts I will sincerely make every effort

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

to amend my ways. I hereby and herein reserve the right to amend and make amendment to this document as necessary in order that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined. Reserving ALL Natural God-Given Unalienable Birthrights, Waiving None, Ever.

I declare that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge good faith and belief, and NOT under the jurisdiction of any private corporate codes, regulations, statutes, policies, or the like. Further Affiant sayeth naught. All Rights Reserved, By:_______________________________ Ronald Lee Brekke, Unrepresented Petitioner, Administrator of RONALD L. BREKKE ESTATE GENERAL DELIVERY HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92647-9998 All Rights and Remedies Reserved, Without Prejudice, Without Recourse
"I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract, commercial agreement or bankruptcy that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And furthermore, I do not and will not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement or bankruptcy."

JURAT State of California ) ) ss. Orange County )

SUBSCRIBED AND ATTESTED before me on this ________day of________________, 2011 by Ronald Lee Brekke who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the man who appeared before me ELISEO REYES RESURRECCION, Notary Public, and whose name is subscribed on this Document / Instrument; witnessed by my signature and official stamp.

NS: ________________________
__________________________________________6____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Signature of Notary Public

LEGAL NOTICE

The Certifying/Affirming Custodian Notary is an independent contractor and not a party to this claim. In fact the Certifying/Affirming Custodian Notary is a Federal Witness Pursuant to TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 73, SEC. 1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant. The Certifying/Affirming Custodian Notary also performs the functions of a quasi-Postal Inspector under the Homeland Security Act by being compelled to report any violations of the U.S. Postal regulations as an Officer of the Executive Department. Intimidating a Notary Public under Color of Law is a violation of Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 242, titled Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, which primarily governs police misconduct investigations. This Statute makes it a crime for any person acting under the Color of Law to willfully deprive any individual residing in the United States and/or United States of America those rights protected by the Constitution and U.S. law. Use of a Notary or references to US codes, rules, regulations, statutes and the like does not constitute a granting of jurisdiction, waiving of any rights or an acceptance of any benefits or privileges, real or imagined.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, PETITION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE BY AFFIDAVIT of Ronald Lee Brekke for Case No. CR10-328-JCC in the DISTRICT COURT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE was sent by mail, sufficient postage prepaid, to the following, whose names and addresses are listed below, on this the _____ day of the ______ month in the year of our Lord, two thousand eleven.

_____________________________ ELISEO REYES RESURRECCION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, C/O JENNY DURKAN, US ATTORNEY US DISTRICT COURT 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, RAY LAHOOD, SECRETARY 1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20590 Pursuant to: [46 USC 31321] Filing, recording, and discharge

__________________________________________7____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DOUGLAS H. SHULMAN, IRS COMMISSIONER, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE CRIMINAL DIVISION, BOX 192 COVINGTON, KENTUCKY 41012 ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., DBA US ATTORNEY GENERAL U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20530 J. RUSSELL GEORGE, DBA INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION 1125 - 15TH STREET NW - WASHINGTON DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20005 JERRY BROWN, DBA - GOVERNOR OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA C/O OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, 1300 I ST. SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 CHRISTINE GREGOIRE, DBA - GOVERNOR OF STATE OF WASHINGTON C/O OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, 1125 WASHINGTON ST. SE. PO BOX 40100, OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98504

__________________________________________8____________________________________________ Petition for Change of Venue by Affidavit