No. 18-518

Charles G. Kinney v. Clerk, Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, et al.

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2018-10-19
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Experienced Counsel
Tags: 42-usc-1983 civil-rights clean-water-act color-of-law due-process federal-clean-water-act free-speech hobbs-act honest-services judicial-discretion professional-speech state-nuisance-law
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity FirstAmendment DueProcess Securities
Latest Conference: 2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Ninth Circuit abused its discretion in dismissing Kinney's appeals, violating his First Amendment rights and depriving him of due process, civil rights, and honest services of the courts

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. By simultaneously dismissing 8 of Kinney’s pending appeals, did this 3 Judge panel abuse its discretion by violating Janus and NIFLA to cover-up acts by a state appellate court clerk and presiding Justices who refused to assign an appellate number for Kinney’s 2012 appeal, and to punish “defendant” Kinney in a 2001 state court case because of his “professional speech”, so they joined forces to compel silence on Kinney? Kinney’s speech was “professional speech” to the . clerk and Justices who didn’t adjudicate disputes, but acted as prosecutors under color of authority; refused to do a ministerial act; and ignored violations of state nuisance law and/or federal Clean Water Act law (“CWA”) by “plaintiff? Three Arch Bay Com. Serv. District so that Kinney was deprived of his federal civil rights and the “honest . services” of the state and/or federal courts, and/or suffered violations of the Hobbs Act. 2. Was this dismissal an abuse of discretion by a panel acting as prosecutors under color of law? 3. Did this appeal (8 of 8) have “merit” because it challenged ongoing nuisances and/or federal CWA violations by “plaintiff? Three Arch Bay CSD? 4. Did this 3 Judge panel abuse its discretion by ignoring 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 federal civil rights violations to the detriment of a “defendant” and : repeated violations of state and/or federal laws? i

Docket Entries

2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-07-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 19, 2018)

Attorneys

Charles Kinney
Charles G. Kinney — Petitioner