No. 18-6962

In Re Walter E. Kostich

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2018-12-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: 14th-amendment 5th-amendment constitutional-rights criminal-procedure double-jeopardy due-process equal-protection jurisdiction magistrate-jurisdiction statutory-interpretation statutory-requirements
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2019-02-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the State prosecution or Courts has the authority to prosecute a criminal case in the absence of a statutory required signed 'Bind-Over Order' initiated by the Magistrate, without offending Due Process, Equal Protection

Question Presented (from Petition)

No question identified. : BY wv QUESTIONS IN CONTROVERSY PRESENTED Question #1), Whether, the State prosecution or Courts has the authority to prosecute a criminal case, in the absence of a statutory required signed “”*Bind-Over Order” initiated by the Magistrate pursuant to 22 O.S. §258 through §264 necessary to confer jurisdiction, for trial proceedings, without offending Due Process, Equal Protection of the law, under the U.S. Constitution 5th & 14th Amendments? Question #2). Whether, a State Court, or prosecution may act contrary to Constitutional, & “State created” legislative statutory double jeopardy prohibitions, while suppressing material information beneficial to the defense, without offending Equal Protection, Due Process of law, United States Constitution 5th & 14th Amendments,

Docket Entries

2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2018-10-08
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 7, 2019)

Attorneys

Walter E. Kostich
Walter Edward Kostich — Petitioner
Walter Edward Kostich — Petitioner