No. 23-7466

Beatrice M. Uwamariya v. Enias Baganizi

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2024-05-13
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: civil-rights color-of-law constitutional-interpretation due-process extradition federal-procedure fourteenth-amendment judicial-authority standing state-officers supreme-court-orders unauthorized-practice-of-law
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus Privacy
Latest Conference: 2024-12-13 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether state court judges can defy orders of the U.S. Supreme Court

Question Presented (from Petition)

Questions Presented. 1.Honorable Chief Justice Guerrero, of the California Supreme Court, Case S 283118, and the 3 Judges Panels, of the State of California, Riverside Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate, Second Division by ignoring the laws, facts, evidence’s, misapplied Opinion, filed on November 13, 2023, P.2, (L1-2)? “Law Office of Indu Srivastav, and Indu Srivastav for Respondent, Enias Baganizi. No Appearance for Respondent "'. By affirming Honorable Temporary Judge Charles M.Fuertsch, Final Court Order, they failed to apply Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 473 (d). A Judgement void on its face, due to no Court Appearance of Respondent, is subject to be Set aside at any time, and'for U.S Supreme Court to apply Rule 55. Default: Default Judgment; Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, and Rule 60: Relief from a Judgement or order, all applies (except 5), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure? (CR. P.41-L15 to L21) a). Can Congress apply the fourteenth Amendment to State Officers, State Court Judges, individuals, when they act Under Color of Law? _ b) Does a State Court have the authority to defy the orders of the United States Supreme Courts? 2.May the United States Department of Justice, internationally extradite (defined as an obligation imposed by article IV of the U.S Constitution), for Unauthorized Laws Practice, Crimes of laundering and stealing innocent Californians Resident moneys for 23 years; Petitioner moneys included, white collar-crime, for Ms. Indu Srivastav to be fingerprinted to know who she is really. She has been appealing Online, and on Video Call, using India IP Address, with India Coordinates, no one has seen her, because Ms. Srivastav has never set foot in California, to pass the State of California Bar Exam. Through fraud, false claims, she obtained a Law License # 208438? 1

Docket Entries

2024-12-16
Rehearing DENIED.
2024-11-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/13/2024.
2024-10-22
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-06-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-02-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 12, 2024)

Attorneys

Beatrice M. Uwamariya
Beatrice M. Uwamariya — Petitioner
Beatrice M. Uwamariya — Petitioner