Hemphasis.net Sitemap > Ron Kiczenski: right to worship > Kiczenski files Motion > No more documents posted, yet.

Hemphasis Site Directory | email Hemphasis

Kiczenski asks the court to accept his appeal brief even though it ran over a few pages.

More on Kiczenski v Ashcroft

Ron Kiczenski vs
  the US Attorney General, the Drug Enforcement Agency Director, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of Homeland Security, the Secretary of the Interior, and any other Executive Branch administrators of Federal Law regarding cannabis.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Ron Kiczenski
Appellant/Petitioner
 
vs.
 
John Ashcroft et. al.
Defendant's/Appellees/Respondent
CASE No. 06-15709
D.C. No. CV-03-02305-MCE
PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR THE COURT TO ACCEPT PETITIONER'S ORIGINAL OPENING ARGUMENT/ INFORMAL BRIEF
I sincerely apologize to the already overburdened court and to all parties that may have been affected by my failure to understand the 40 page limit on opening argument briefs and the 7 copies for the court rules.
 
I have been wholly stretched to my absolute limit in my spiritual/religious practices, my formal education and my finance abilities in my effort's to do what ever I must to see this case through.
 
My sons and I live on a fixed cash supply of around $550.00 per month and I had to barrow money to make and provide the copies the court requires in effort to remedy this part of the deficiencies at issue concerning my informal brief{please receive the attached copies}.
 
As for the size limit deficiency issue, again I sincerely apologize to the court, yet I truly do not know how I could have possibly solved this on my own behalf even if I had known and understood this rule because of the nature of the "ritual" I must go through to write any and all of the documents I have had to write in this action from the original complaint to the opening argument/informal brief at issue in this motion, including this motion itself.
 
Writing these court documents is not only impossible for me in terms of my reading and thoroughly understanding the official rules of the court (partially due to a level of life long dyslexia) and what knowledge one would require from law school etcetera to do so, but every single document including this one is by the nature of how I am even able to have the "thoughts" and words at all to write such a thing is by definition a religious ritual that is necessary and is prescribed by my faith/knowledge as my only appropriate, moraly ethical choice I have within the boundaries of my own spiritual/religious duties. My words come from directly from my inner "antenna" that is tuned directly to the voice of "god".
 
Every single document that can be found on the record in this action becomes sacred in my religious practices even before the ink is dry so to speak, as they are born directly from my personal link/connection with the great spirit that exists in me and in everything that exists and to which I have translated to the best of my ability in exactly what I am guided to write.
 
The English language is not well constructed to relay the truths of our in common reality as born and exists through the undeniable Natural Law Jurisdiction of the Creator energy/nature and this has made the translation even more impossible.
 
The truth of my very soul is contained in every document of this action because the truth of my soul and of the great spirit and how it is the same truth we all have in common is all I am capable of offering.
 
I have desperately tried over and over to modify or cut to fit the informal brief at issue in this motion in effort to remedy this conflict, yet every time I do I am called by my connection/faith/knowledge to stop, in other words I have been commanded not to cut the words.
 
Further, for me to cut out the words born of translating the sacred truths of not just my existence but all life, runs in direct conflict with my ethical responsibilities according to my religious/spiritual practices at their very nature.
 
I did not intend or plan or foresee this conflict and I would surely remedy this if it was at all within my reach to do so, but at last I cannot and I hope and pray the court can understand the substantial burden the reality of the page limit rule has on my equal ability to represent myself to this court in a manner that would lend to my equal ability to access this court for due process in this matter.
 
I cannot separate myself from the issues I am forced to speak to in the course of writing court documents in the way a lawyer or professional is able to do.
 
I have also been trying to endure my debilitating physical brake down in the after math of the district courts final ruling and in undertaking the ritual of translating what I have to this court in the informal brief at question in this motion and I feel the damage may be permanent.
 
I cannot find an honest way to modify the informal brief from my own ability because it is simply morally and ethically out of my personal reach to do so because the document has emerged from my spiritual/religious ritual that is required of me in this circumstance.
 
I ask the court to consider the fact that this case is unusual to the point of being the only one like it ever in U.S. case law which was clearly one of the problems for the Magistrate Judge in his own description of the this action and the absence of applicable case law.
 
All life is sacred, interconnected and interdependent and in that sense is equally relevant and in that sense works as one, which means not just human life is sacred, but all other animals are equally sacred, and not just this plant or that plant is sacred, but all plants are sacred just like water, air, ground/earth, sun and moon etcetera.
 
This is the natural law above all laws that by the design of the in-common terms of our existence exist is a jurisdiction unreachable by any law that could ever be conceived of by man.
 
Any law that seeks to try to violate and overcome the natural law jurisdiction is bound by its nature to be realistically unenforceable and in the process of attempted implementation is self destructive to all.
 
Government has egregiously violated this foundation of our shared reality in passing the Controlled Substances Act and is continuing to commit crimes against us all every day it remains the "law" of the land.
 
Government has an inherit duty to protect and respect nature as a jurisdiction retained by the people. Therefore government should be protecting/respecting nature as is the intent of the Endangered Species Act, not killing it with intent of species eradication as the CSA seeks and is currently engaged in doing.
 
Killing nature is the same in outcome as killing ourselves and is to my knowledge of truth a clear and present direct attack on god.
 
This action has the warranted potential to improve the lives of every human being on face of this planet in rudimentary ways unlike any other case ever before in United States history when applied in the context of all the furthest conceivable reach of the comparative potential affects of a final ruling in my favor.
 
Steven Hawking, thought of as the "smartest man in the world" by some, says that we have so badly violated the natural law that global warming is upon us and our species faces eminent extinction so we should leave this plant to survive.
 
Steven Hawking has foolish advice on this subject in my opinion because if he was as smart as folks say, he would just stand up for the first principle of gods natural law which is that 'all life is sacred' and he would have filed a case like this one that could go to check and balance the corporate owned and operated United States government's attack on the first principle of Natural Law that is in effect killing us all for profit.
 
In other words this case provides the potential for opportunity to save ourselves with the common Natural Laws of GOD without having to cut and run from our garden planet, it all just simply hinges on us recognizing the highest law, natural law, gods law.
 
Not Congress nor the President or even "the smartest man in the world" has offered anything that compares in its ability to remedy the problems of our own making in this world we now face at every level of daily human existence.
 
There is no more a tragically ironic truth than that of a country and people who seem fueled by the "pride" of their foundation and adherence to the rule of law, yet are clearly destroying us all through violations of the highest laws of the creator, natural law. These the laws that are above all laws are laws, come first last and naturally are the only conditions set forth in the unwritten contract that binds every living thing we share this garden we call earth with.
 
This case could be entirely stated with all the weight it needs to prevail in these four simple words ALL LIFE IS SACRED, but the problem is that these four words in combination are not what they are teaching in the United States Educational system whether it be first grade or law school and so there are very few "higher educated" folks that understand this most basic law of life that all others laws must stem from like branches from the root.
 
I talked with the co council for the government Eric Green by phone on June 22, 2006 and in his effort to get an answer back to me on my query on their position on this motion, Eric left a voice message notifying me that the defendant/government is taking no position on this motion.
 
I ask the court to consider this case as fitting the very definition of an unusual circumstance that warrants the courts liberal consideration in terms of please receiving my original opening argument document into the record as sufficient in representing my opening argument/informal brief to this court in good faith and in the spirit of serving the greater good that would hold truth and justice above unintended necessary extra verbiage on my part that has amounted to the four pages to many at issue in this motion.
 
I beg and pray the court sees fit to grant this motion and accept my original informal opening argument brief in good faith as it does represent my personal religious ritual and exhaustive efforts to communicate the great spirit that is who I am and why I am here appealing to this court the issues of this action.
 
 
 
Respectfully submitted by,
 
Ron Kiczenski________________________ signed and submitted on this day of Monday, June 26, 2006
 

Next document in case: No more documents posted, yet.                                Back to Kiczenski case outline

Hemphasis Home | Hemphasis Site Directory | email Hemphasis