No. 20-6205

Alfred E. Caraffa v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-11-03
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: authentication civil-procedure civil-rights due-process judicial-misconduct standing
Key Terms:
Securities
Latest Conference: 2021-01-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the court documents submitted were fraudulent, with the same judge's name and position, but different signatures

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

No question identified. : 4) Fraudulent Court documents with the a “Same Vistrice Court Sudae's Nome, TN Te —SAmMe position. Even e's’ SARE inetd, ul IN’ a “he Some ence why?) OO al Ro Autherieational Stanatres oN U. S7 aan o& Appeals decinest acted panze; Cron Sedep's Signsved) Why! Be 2D twee “he Yederal aisanict Couth . Clenogtd the Amgunit oF Zelict Rr “weatt wre te 9,994,008 | cellars. 7 an Beech Ba AV -O S49 she i ee Cly) ; a pe a A) way and ee) dge. willed site A , Bequest Tor Service be dent y A — Meargaii ere Bale WF) Fed. S.civ.® As art marmare And refuse tlt Mok On, ee Sy ——— le ne Questions Stesendedd (ast) Diaby ASite the Plaiwhil? Bled under ithe Cou ages Raat BE € this Serv 1983) te ass¥st Wim In Collerenthy preseavkin Wis claims fo te Gourtffce 029 val. 6941349) _ Dehaw lt Sudambnuds SSel), 2(SceeDoRO | Redes ¢(See 2oRo USL 979-768) corcler ISS S83 71) IM Absdldte Tm munis howands Judges avd corrupt an malicious ha" beheviour, SC@ eiil ExchIGN dsAG* CV +00 794 * Plix-M ILE S| Om % ad \e,, * M\ Sher Ao we Chee Ss WET al er QOINION Of “he TLeatices | | ae | nla) Uitte. Skction RB Defendant Guaseacda “i fale SQ) DeFauH Sedg rend. Fd civ P Hale endont 6 aug: tat age: (a "a ANPP 6:3 [aa ote Pe Mabe Counss of SS the Civil ¢ Dir i Nt Kut Not For the! Comma ining ahnee ¢@ lavas! aia ty fp JE MAE vtsliee Dei s Gnd Clay sir — In tae liebididy at qhe Claims Re aicce aut tde Aedions TR) The, Cla ihe Med Ans StubBeome tua €e ‘Rule ASE) Fed. 8. Ciuc BL Aer ate ancl Ce Meng of et RF CASO RELA UN a Ce Ra am Sue? feta PuidOweé AO GA, Seg seater tae _ ie eEdieess Loves. od Mens ons ha Any the eralers, ¥ 4 LU) tall tore sie Wotton OF ub p aane tS Jratry Ze ne, dister< -ourt hes A | ee | ! ¢ Ae em eee eee ees me. Courh js tae, Martian dar Default IStdament Rule GSia) Siled pitta ts rest Ameuded Comblaint and Be Sud athe Cas MMe, fause ive Jig BiLVEe “Te A4 De alice @egreees SM SeNeliag tw fae 4 : AG) er the US. Apdeal8 Caupt ented er (If net Feaudulads) que eivil aetivn ts Bel pending ia DiSe lie Gaur Since se Glaguaponse was wet Aohoatped u } 4 Jj . | Sk 2b hts wy i h Fy Pte fh. « CamifeaV. Tembe Police Bend, ling eus he Semey fF | Parle S Cv¢eat US. ve MESO 15 Ladina’ Pac CamlG 'y, Tepe Police Dep, AD why dees VE temoe elite Dearne Inevfe Aw Cepeat ctobledn with yioleling Ace AO SChae| orlurertbion < Ch 2eAS } al : = Ad) why Under tte. Son to Zxchief of he pe Police Oeok. Chick Moic tS There o> Men ISSUES oF Racial and ENeludinin HE Phatat LES Cyl action [Ree AcMiche N Agizonyd Ee public NewS 04 O&,) __ | | Arizend (41992 colons calle4ion | Rese bel) curd of An Olayer who wason He itter te Plaintiff is Glsely derested wide Ror Oni minal heme = Case Num ber \7 9| 3 5379-2" wasVonven An O/f Bar) AS We ety prasecuder State “NO police i pack” And Next bicet cag We: Nov. 75% ROls | D ) Inf 2029 vol 4. | Detee| Bursuos'+ tp 42 US.U. 8 19@2 Doe 4 Court without daying Fees onl Cast” See the Plaiw& SO Del mot File 74a> \aort_ atlog ‘s oeler 7? ee Coumwouse onc) Piled the civil acd on Te mersen Alter Sittine Gut Shenk tas Anoa Tables’ on A Stone Bowel Wuliteinrtolot) V FOS wR AO ia iS CW CHOON OAd ty CO D7) why under TV, Sailuce to State a Clatvy | iA. DeLendant Tempe Police Ocak tH States Avokler “Misauet by This district cout Se | A — | aie pg Fa LE | Tiel ag : ne! 0a. enn eee eee UL au MASS la \ ProcioN = row} re Wy tis Te. af Qicial’s action (See Sxhiss Aa3 ASI) The Orreinal Complaint by fhe Arreshine Hine Sucae cite Barry V. Sowler, GOR EL2e) aly One cited yiolotion Net tus er ion. | a ll | 30} wine wh did We court lash wiser 2 be Mp DAM aenory Mey% WwW S i 0 CvEcK on THe Cem al case on Och QF, 20.179, this clisniss i . —_ St Ube ue “he. Slerbus of dc Cri drier | bese. Gee Rontnotes E@xhilet A-T og. GF, | sD (Lw dodo WL 97976) the delay ins mi COS. ue Gul TH isearcerahén | aca Beaute ie Phoenix AZ will we Qeauined. Claims Two, three, ong ‘ AWE why ot ONE, Vou c Ciel QixK Lheee Claimd, Bot Qotau Ht Seeman Inder @ule 6G) Aauin

Docket Entries

2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-10-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 3, 2020)

Attorneys

Alfred E. Caraffa
Alfred E. Caraffa — Petitioner
Alfred E. Caraffa — Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent