David James Lola v. Rick Ramsay, Sheriff, Monroe County, Florida
Does an innocent citizen representing themselves against criminal allegations, also known as pro se, and incarcerated prior to trial have a due process right pursuant to the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to rely upon the plain meaning of a statute and an appellate court's order that the defendant will have an opportunity to submit a reply to a respondent's response prior to the court's rendering of a decision?
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED Noes AN innocent ci4+¢2Eew Tepcesenring themself AGAinse coiminal aWegattass, alsO Known as eco se, ANA incarccerateck PMi2ae fo tetal Nase a dove erocess Tight PUCSVOA NE eo tne Fit en ; Sixsn, OC. Foticteenth Amendments to cely Voon the Dain Meaning of oa sratre . appeallate corace'S ochece ther the deFendone woitl Mave an Op POttoarsy to sobmit a ceply to a Ces dondent!S ) Ces DO NSe ecioc to the. coot*'S FENnAdNliG of aw decision ° | Does the Sixth Amendment ci ght to Cormmsel include a Cight te Cepcesent enesell In a State criminal Ococeeching aS aH ereso motively \anecent OS. ccbirzen Who is Ncacesat ed eceecial and €o have Ceasonable access to dow Process secvices Such as caselaw OTM OOTS | ) a Caselaw Searn technology, beaks — G@urxaining celeVant criminal, evidence, Procedural Starotes | and yor CN SHG AoA S § access Co wrtnesses and video Ue Lethnolo gy ¢ a | | Te. | Qu estians Peeconeedk Does an innocent citizen Ceocesenti ng new elt ing& cotminal os ati ons La o kKnewnN as pro se A incace cated feceiwe |, cl ocherce FCSN DH = process © IF O { O n ~~ >. C+ Ze | eple SOntiNe themself AGaIVSte Coimine | ; , lec tlee to along Known AS ote $e and IF caccecated Ociar to cial have & | “eht —_ b Celeace? fron cost ocky lin oCder Ko accecs, Ceasuniatle Ave OCoteSs Socyvices such as a Lau \Wrecaly | im _ocder +o ele pale. hafFense i£ | 2 ¢ able due peocess Socurces ace Ino Covided at +ne fetentton fciiicy ? | | De S AW AWN QV ‘ iti2zen (eo ety lenem sett RW { cimineg\ l¢ CON | a lo tac "€s tol have a pe ht 4a be CANS c ‘Ss venue. Ie kertentidni and the case —~o be lol ese wet din a Afferent country in ord 3/G (CO ace Cea sanable dow LCOcesSS | QueSrirans Reresented ‘ : paecusnes Such as a law Ubracy lnc wet ing ABA Shenwdasds Fac ecepacis ccoiminal defense ( including Ca ve las Statutes Joly in Ose LYONS idenc2. ode a ha seacch engine Compa talale lin Ervndlavs) in ocderc to PCepace. on defense IF c5e sumalle -as hefineck above as a w lipcaty— coe process | ecvic es ce Not pCovided at the detention Fecd| es, B beset on the _ Fee Amend met Se o ace Nh e. | OVCES gud e yah Bom erdk new | taht toa Creresent ones che ae | y¥t ound eck to the Aten devuvret SN cous Wr ] he Fou rt ees : AWM BN ¢ a | . | | : | | | a ae i : 3. ti , _