liberi v taitz (edpa) - 121 - motion for reconsideration of the order to sever - paed-15307802917

8/9/2019 LIBERI v TAITZ (EDPA) - 121 - MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE ORDER TO SEVER - paed-15307802917

1/46

Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq Attorney Pro Se & Attorney For Defend Our Freedoms Foundation 29839 Santa Margarita Parkway, Suite 100 Rancho Santa Margari ta CA 92688 Tel: (949) 683-5411; Fax (949) 766-7603 E-Mail: [email protected]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

LISA LmERI, et al., ) RESPONSE & MOTION FOR) RECONSIDERATIONPlaintiffs )) No. C 09 18.98 ECRv. ))ORL Y TAITZ, et al., )~ ' . ) FILED..ds;\ Defendants. ) JUN 1 42010

~ C H A E L E. KUNZ.Crerk- - Oep. crerkINTRODUCTION

Defendants, Dr. Orly Taitz and Defend Our Freedoms Foundation (DOFF),hereafter styled "Defendants", fmd themselves ill the position of responding toPlaintiffs' motion for reconsideration of the June 4,2010 order to sever andtransfer this case to Texas and California due to errors in the order caused bymisrepresentations and fraudulent assertions by the Plaintiffs to the Court. In as

Page lo f 11

Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 121 Filed 06/14/10 Page 1 of 46
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/46

much as the situation has become confused owing to the multitude of pleadings, Defendants also make this an alternative motion under FRCP Rule 60(b).

This situation is brought about by what could be described as a case ofconfusion due to multiple pleadings by Plaintiffs and a campaign of ex partecommunications (letters and unftled pleadings) by Plaintiffs to the Court regardingthe events beginning roughly April 2009 to present. This in tum has caused theconfusion which resulted in the Court's order of June 4, 2010 ordering the case tobe severed and transferred to be defective for reasons outlined below. Defendantsdo not seek a transfer to a district court in California and have made this clearnumerous times in writing to this Court as well as the Third Circuit Court ofAppeals but Defendants do request the case be dismissed for lack of federaldiversity jurisdiction. Defendants contend the Court has inexplicably overlookedDefendants' contentions that plaintiffLiberi is a citizen of California and insteadrelied on the Pennsylvania address used by Liberi when indeed she is not a citizenofPennsylvania despite documentary evidence to the contract - a felonyconviction and probation - Plaintiff incurred in California and is nowstudiously trying to ignore.

I. mSTORY OF THE CASEMultiple Plaintiffs sued many different defendants including Defendants on

various theories too numerous to dwell upon here but reflected in the record. The

Page 2of 11



3/46

main and perhaps only viable Plaintiff suing Defendants is Lisa Liberi who purports that she was defamed when in April 2009 defendant published hercriminal record from CA, as a warning to the public, since she had convictions offorgery and grand theft, and was preparing court docwnents and sending them viae-mail and mail to attorney Berg, who filed those docwnents with this very district.Berg and Liberi were also doing donation drives. Taitz has posted this officialrecord with a proper intend to warn the public, particularly since one of the casesdealt with vital records of the President of the United States Barack Obama. Taitzwasned the public that there was a need to see the originals in light ofLiberi'scriminal convictions of forgery. While there is more than one Lisa Liberi in thecountry, Taitz has done her due diligence and interviewed Liberi's arrestingofficer, prosecuting attorney, probation officer, victims ofher crimes and verifiedthat indeed Liberi, who was convicted in San Bernardino county CA in 2008 andwho currently is on probation, but fully under jurisdiction of CA is the assistantpreparing papers for Berg. Her probation allows her to stay with her relatives inSanta Fe New Mexico, but she was not resident ofPA and was not allowed toreside in PA or anywhere else per her supervised probation. Faced with anembarrassing situation, possible revocation of probation and incarceration back inthe state prison in CA, Liberi and Berg have concucted their frivolous andfraudulent legal action, they both provided perjured affidavits, where they claimed

Page 3 of 12



4/46

that Liberi is a citizen ofPA and the only proofof that was Berg's submission of his own business address as an address ofLiberi. Based on perjury and fraud theyclaimed that Liberi is a resident ofPA and that there is jurisdiction in PA based ondiversity. Taitz provided this court previously and providing again officialconviction records from CA, clearly showing her to be under the jurisdiction of thestate of CA and allowed only to NM, not PA. this clearly shows that the whole lawsuit was a farce, a fraud perpetrated upon this court and upon the defendants. It wasfiled with the only purpose to harass the defendents with the need to respond tothousands of pages of pleadings unrelated to the dispute and the case being filed inan out of state jurisdiction, where Taitz is not licensed, does not have access toelectronic filing and has difficulty following the case and responding. Due to thefact that there was no diversity to begin with, Defendants motioned the court todismiss the case due to lack ofjurisdiction. Berg clearly knew that Liberi does notreside in PA, he knowingly and maliciously concocted a case based on his own andLiberi's perjury and with intend to harass. Due to that fact Defendants motionedthe court to dismiss with prejudice and to sanction Berg for violation of attorney'scode ofethics, abuse ofprocess and fuing a frivolous action with intend to harass.In the event this court is not willing to dismiss with prejudice, in the alternativeDefendants are seeking dismissal without prejudice. Since Plaintiffs are opposed totransfer and Defendants are opposed to trsansfer, the case does not follow into the

Page 4 of 11



5/46

category ofcases that can be transferred, it was fIled in improper jurisdiction and the only proper available remedy will be a dismissal in PA.

As noted by the Court in the June 4, 2010 order, jurisdiction really did notexist in this case owing to the presence of New Jersey parties. The removal ofthese parties from the case was accomplished via judicial intervention whichDefendants believe was improper.

Defendants contended the lawsuit was frivolous. Plaintiffs then began acampaign to "paper" Defendants into submission including the fIling ofnumerousprejudicial and irrelevant materials about Defendants which remain in the case fIle.Plaintiffs fIled an interlocutory appeal when thwarted by this Court in an attempt toobtain an injunction but even this setback did not stop the blizzard ofpaper thoughthe Court suspended the case during part of the pendency of the now dismissedappeal.

Plaintiffs continued to fIle materials with the Court even though the case wassuspended and Defendant in tum answered lest the Plaintiffs then contend, as theyhave in the past, that these fIlings and their irrelevant and prejudicial contents werecharacterized as "unopposed" by Defendants. Unfortunately, the record is confusedand many irrelevant and prejudicial materials have been permitted to propagate bythe Court and these materials should be stricken before any transfer.

The Court did not docket any of the Defendants' letters but did docket

Page 5 of 11



6/46

the January 21, 2010 letter by Plaintiff and attorney Berg which was representative of much of the material offered. The letter contained nwnerous

attachments and served no purpose but to tar the Defendants. Defendants'response to the Berg letter was not docketed. In the undocketed letters byDefendants, including their most recent communication in regards to yet anotherex parte attempt by Plaintiffs to intluence the Court and mailed just a few daysbefore the Court's June 4, 2010 order, Defendants have repeatedly stated theyoppose any transfer while Plaintiffs in their letter have demanded a transfer toCalifornia.

ll. REASONS THE JUNE 4 ORDER SHOULD NOT APPLY TODEFENDANTS

Application of the June 4, 20 I 0 order to Defendants will result in injusticefor the following reasons. First, the Court has mischaracterized the order asgranting somehow Defendants' wishes. Defendants repeatedly tried to oppose anytransfer - the Court ignored Defendants' communications although they weretendered only in response to Plaintiffs' attempts to ex parte communicate with theCourt. The Court must have been cognizant of the Defendants' communicationsbecause it docketed one letter from Berg along with its so called exhibits.

Second, a transfer rather than a dismissal will work as an undue hardship onDefendants. Plaintiffs have flIed thousands ofpages of pleading and exhibits in

Page 6 of 11



7/46

this case which Defendants have replied to. There are multiple defendants andplaintiffs ofwhich only Defendants will be transferred to California.

The Court has also failed to take in consideration that Plaintiff Liberi isnot a resident or citizen of Pennsylvania and is a resident of citizen ofCalifornia due to her felony probation there, something she has not refutedbecause it is true. IfLiberi, the convicted document forger, is a citizen ofCalifornia, diversity jurisdiction does not exist and this case must be dismissed asto Defendants. The only evidence of citizenship submitted by Liberi is the businessaddress of her attorney Philip Berg, used as her address on her pleadings,Defendants have disputed this address. This is therefore a disputed fact, discoveryand an evidentiary hearing should be had upon this as Liberi and not the otherPlaintiffs is the main party complaining against Defendants. The whole essence ofthe case revolves around Liberi's address, as over a year ago in the beginning ofApril 2009 Taitz has disclosed on her web site the fact that assistant of attorneyBerg is a felon, convicted in the state ofCA in 2008 in multiple counts of forgeryand grand theft, and therefore there is a need to investigate the documentssubmitted by Berg and Liberi to court. Berg and Liberi were conducting a Nationwide donations drive to support their legal work in exposing originally presidentBush and later Obama. Members of the public demanded answers from Berg, andBerg has filed this frivolous law suit claiming that Liberi is a resident ofPA,

Page 7 of 11



8/46


9/46

citizenship is a factual dispute, which the Court has failed to address except to note Liberi's alleged address on the pleadings, address that was provided by thePlaintiffs without any verification.

i l l . RELIEF SOUGHTThe Court's order of June 4,2010 should not apply as to Defendants and berevised to reflect the following:1. Plaintiff Lisa Liberi has not demonstrated she is a citizen ofPennsylvania andhas in fact along with her attorney Berg affmnatively misled the Court in thisrespect.2. If the Court is yet in doubt, discovery and an evidentiary hearing should beafforded Defendants in regards to Liberi's citizenship.3. The current contents of the Court file is overwhelmingly prejudicial toDefendants and contains extraneous and irrelevant materials that wouldimpede justice if transferred "as is."4. The so called voluntary dismissal ofNew Jersey defendants was not voluntaryin that the New Jersey defendants objected to dismissal without prejudice - thecase should have been dismissed at the point and may still be dismissed nunc protunc.6. Numerous ex parte communications of Plaintiffs with the Court wereinappropriate and give the appearance ofhaving influenced the Court's June 4,

Page 9 of 11



10/46

2010 order in that the June 4 order mirrors the Plaintiffs most recent letter to theCourt.

7. The Court has made references to sanctions against Defendant Taitz in an out ofdistrict court but has refused to take cognizance on the record ofmultiple sanctionsagainst PlaintiffBerg, at least one of those instances ordered in this very judicialdistrict. Sanctions against the defendant had nothing to do with this case or any ofthe parties in this case. Sanctions had to do with political matter of the defendantrepresenting members of active military questioning legitimacy of the commanderin chief. On the other hand sanctions against Attorney Berg, that were presented tothis court showed similar modus operandi, as exhibited in this very case: namelyfuing a frivolous law suit with the purpose of harassing the defendants. Othersanctions dealt with the fact that attorney Berg was not truthful with the court, alsorepresents the same modus operandi, as exhibited in this court. It is not clear whythis court has chosen to conspicuously address one instance of sanctions againstthe defendant, where this order of sanctions is not fmal and is being currentlyappealed, in a political matter involving the President and commander in chief,which has absolutely nothing to do with the dispute in this case; while at the sametime this court has chosen to completely ignore multiple pleadings where thedeferidants have brought to the attention of this court multiple sanctions against thePlaintiff and attorney in this case Philip Berg. Sanctions against Berg were relevant

Page 10 of 11



11/46

as they reflected the same modus of fuing frivolous action, harassment and fraud.That is an additional reason, why the order is extremely prejudicial against theDefendants.8. The case against Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice for the reasons briefed above. Therefore the June 4, 2010 order should be held in abeyance until the above issues are corrected and resolved.

Date: June 10,2010

lsi Orly Taitz, ESQ pro se and for Defend Our Freedoms FoundationI, Orly Taitz, attest that true and correct copy of the above pleadings was sent toAttorney Philip Berg by fIrst class mail, as well as other Defendants in this case.

si Orly Taitz06.10.10Exhibit 1Public Record of Lisa Liberi's Bankrupcy filing with address 11952 Huntley Dr.Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 , San Bernardino County with Liberi's sworndeclaration given under penalty ofperjury.

Page 11 of 12

http:///reader/full/06.10.10http:///reader/full/06.10.10


12/46

Exhibit 2Public Record of Lisa Liberi's declaration made under penalty of perjury andunder laws of CA in San Bernardino County of CA, seeking recusal of SanBernardino District Attorney James Serd from prosecuting a nUtuber of hercriminal cases.Exhibit 3Public record from San Bernardino CA Superior Court of Lisa Liberi's multiplecriminal convictions for forgery and grand theft, as well as conditions of LisaLiberi's formal probation granted on 03.21.2008 in San Bernardino County,CA to last until 03.21.2011

Page 12 of 12



13/46

M 0Iher...,.. U88CI bIj l ie JaInt DeDtor In l ie !li lt8 yea,.- (Indude manted, malden, and tracf8 INlmes):All 0IIw . . . . . . UI8dbIj"Debtor In lhel8lt8 years(IncUte nnted, malden, MCIhde names):Soc.

SAME AS ABOVE

AKA, LISA RENE LIBERI

one. atata III):

[X ] Debtor,. dcmc:IIed ar t i l l Md nIIIdence, ...,..,pIaaa Of buINeI, ar prIIidpe.MMIIIn 11111 0II1rtct for 180 da)'8 nmacoateIy.. .,.dthtl petition or 101'alangerpart fA euch 180 clip han In any oller DIsIrIct.There . . a a.nIoupttycu e concerning debtor'8 aftiIaIa. oeneraI perIner, or pertneashlp pendng In this Dlsbfcl.11111 peftan . . flied by a ar. . . . . . .1p under chaptIJr 11...debtor adm_attgel that a Venue 0Iad0e\n Form II ftIqUto belledbv GIInInd Order 8 7 ~

Cu. orSlc:Uon of 8anIcNIICCYCadI UnderWlllob- - , = ~ - - ..[=- .. .PtItItlon . . Fled CChecIc. . box)E3 a.pIo


14/46

SIjiiIiiiCitAiiIhiiIiid iiWJMdUIIj 'X ' .i 8Ipturtl OfBanIcnIptGyPeUlion ......

bi&i

..- - ~ ~ ~ . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ caUlS I, AlJAtAPIInrIcI Narrt4t fAAllaneytor DIbfar(tI) wang OF CURTIS R. AlJALACURTIS R. AIJALA ATTOlUIIX AT LAWAdchU, 123 WEST wBw STREET, SUITE C. ONTARIO, CA 91762

I dDCIn under pena1ly fill paIfury ... ie Int'ornldGn pnMded In tillpeItIDn Ia tIUa ... oamICt. and h it I . . . . been 8UIt1DItzed mti e . .peIIb CIft bIh8Id . . . debtat.1M debtDr relief ... . . he c:hapC8r of . . . ii,'&kftId 8IrdIICodI.IIIPGdfIId"this petition.

IIgnatan ofNan-AtlomayPetJtkm. . . . . . . . .IIadIfy that I.... alNlnkluptcy peUUon IRPIIW". deftneclin 11 U.s.c.t 110, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . document_ ggmlJllnaalan._ 1hat I hawPfV'oIIdId" debtorwith a CIlpJdtil.. dac:umenL

_ fi&riie CitBdniPiCi PeiHLin p;;;pa;;;

I more ....ana....1II'IPIINd "CIocunant,dIIch addIIionaI. . . toa. appRIpffalltallldlill bm faruch PIIIDIL



15/46


16/46

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 I t 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

5. A few months after the arrest in Texas, I secured a job, got married to William Courvi11eand we bought a home together in Texas.

6. I was divorced in or about the end of 1989 and I accepted a transfer to Newport Beach,California with the company I was working for. I relocated from Texas to California inor about December 1989.

7. On January IS, 2002 a Search Warrant was served on my property located at 11952 Huntley Avenue, Etiwanda" California 91739. At this same time, I was arrested onallegations ofP.C. 470 and P.C. 487. based on San Bernardino County Sheriff'sDepartment Case #1 10200477.

8. My bail was set at $20,000 which was posted on January 15. 2002 and I was releasedfrom West Valley Detention Center.

9. February 25,2002 my Arraignment came on for hearing in San Bernardino CountySuperior Court, Rancho Cucamonga District, Case #0201341972. No one from the SanBernardino County District Attorney's Office appeared, no charges were filed, my bailbond was exonerated and I was released.

10. In or about September 2 0 0 ~ I filed a motion in my Paternity Action, San BernardinoCounty Superior C o Rancho Cucamonga District, Case #RFL-034080, requestingpermission to relocate with my minor son to New Mexico. On or about October 18,2002, my motion was granted along with a new visitation order pennitting my child'sbiological father, John Allen to visit with our son in Albuquerque, New Mexico the thirdweekend of every month at Neutral Comer, a County facility.

11. In or about early November 2002, my husband, child and I relocated to New Mexico.



17/46

t


18/46

5

10

15

20

25

2 3 4

6 7 8 9

11 12 I314

16 17 18 19

21

22 23 24

26 27 28

The reason for the relocation was due to my health complications, harassment I wasenduring from my child's biological father, my father's poor health and to be closer tomy family and assist my sister with her medical and psychiatric conditions. The DistrictAttorney has alleged that I fled California to avoid prosecution without a single shred ofevidence to support such an allegation, once again attempting to prejudice the Courtagainst me.

12. Upon arrival in New Mexico, my husband, Brent Liberi, immediately obtained ajobwitbSeeds of Change located in Santa Fe. My husband is still ""ith this company and wasrecently promoted.

13. January 14, 2003, Michelle D. Strickland, Esq. filed a civil lawsuit on my behalf: in SanBernardino County Superior Court, Central District, Case #SCVSS-98957 against amongothers, Paul Monison, the investigating officer in the matter herein.

14. April 01,2003 Michelle D. Strickland filed a motion re Writ of Possession. D.D.A.James Secord made an appearance as a Special Party of Interest I was not present forthis hearing, however, I was infonned by Ms. Strickland that D.D.A. Secord stated I wasunder investigation and was required to bring the motion for writ of possession before theJudge who issued the search warrant. This was the first time I heard I was underinvestigation. Based on the statements ofD.D.A. Secord my motion was denied withoutprejudice.

15. April 10, 2003, Ms. Strickland filed a motion for reconsideration as she detennined theStatements given by D.D.A. Secord were not accurate. A hearing was set for May 13,2003.

16. May 09,2003 the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office filed the first set ofcharges against me, Case #FWV 028000, based on the same San Bernardino County



19/46

123456789

101112131415161718192021

22232425262728

Sheriff s Deparunent Case #110200477.17. In or about October 2003, during the ongoing preliminary hearing in this matter, D.D.A.

James Secord obtained an ex parte order from the Orange County Superior Co\ll'tLamoreaux Justice Center in order to obtain access to my confidential Paternity Action,Case #AD-60301. D.D.A. Secord failed to give notice to my attorney's or any partiesassociated with the Paternity Action so they wou1d have an opportunity to protect theconfidentiality of that fi1e. I learned of this during my preliminary hearing in Case#FWV-028000 when D.D.A. Secord had my Paternity file brought up to the court roomand requested judicial notice of certain documents.

18. In or about February 2004, I learned that Randolph C. Houts. Attorney for USA FederalCredit Union and a witness in this case obtained copies ofdocuments which were locatedwithin my Paternity Action.

19. On March 31 J 2004, I underwent Open Heart Surgery at the Heart HO!q)ital located inAlbuquerque, New Mexico.

20. As a result of the complications I suffered from my Open Heart Surgery, my courtappearances were continued. My then attorney, David Goldstein and D.D.A. JamesSecord stipulated to have my court hearings continued to July 13. 2004.

21. On or about June 14,2004, the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office signedfor Government Claims filed on my behalf by Michelle D. Strickland for the illegalaccess and dissemination of confidential documents taken from my Paternity Action toRandolph C. Houts.

22. In or about mid June 2004, John Allen, D.D.A. Secord's witness contacted Officer RudyGallegos with the Santa Fe Police Department and attempted to have me arrested on awarrant prior to its issuance. The only way Mr. Allen would have had knowledge a



20/46

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

to 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 ,.....J24 25 26 27 28

warrant was being sought was from D.DA. Secord and/or the San Bernardino CountyDistrict Attorney's Office. D.D.A. Secord was well aware that my child and I are thevictims of John Allen's crimes, for which Mr. Allen was convicted. Further, Mr. Allenwas aware I was being arrested when I flew to California as he also sent the chi1d supportfor July 2004 by restricted delivery knowing I would be unable to pick up the check. (Atrue and correct copy of Officer Rudy Gallegos declaration is attached hereto andincorporated in by reference as Exhibit 3.)

23. On June 30, 2004, D.DA. James Secord obtained another warrant for my arrest from the San Bernardino County Superior Court, Central District, Case #FSB 044914 under my married name of LIBERI involving the same vehicle and Credit Union relative to which I was litigating in the first case, Case #FWV 028000. D.D.A. Secord was aware I was litigating the first case under my maiden name ofRICHARDSON in San Bernardino County Superior Court, Rancho Cucamonga District, as he was the deputy district attorney who filed the first case, Case #FWV 028000.

24. July 12, 2004, I was arrested at the Ontario Airport by Michael Leiberich with the SanBernardino County District Attorney's Office on behalfof D.D.A. Secord when I flew infor my July 13,2004 court date. As previously stated, D.D.A. Secord knew I would beappearing as he had stipulated to the hearing date of July 13,2004.

25. I was taken to West Valley Detention Center, booked and placed in isolation in the men'sunit. I suffered another heart attack, which shut down the bypassed area ofmy heart andKetoacidosis.

26. I appeared in Court July t4, 2004 in-custody for my Arraignment for Case #FSB 044914and bail hearing on both cases. I entered a plea ofNot Guilty to all counts. My bail onthis arrest, Case #FSB 044914 was set at $100,000.00 with a 1275.1 hold. My

http:///reader/full/100,000.00http:///reader/full/100,000.00


21/46

5

10

15

20

25

I.,....

34

6789

11121314

1617]819

2122.,..-. )

24

262728

Preliminary hearing was set for July 26, 2004.27. August 04,2004 at 8:30 a.m. I was present for a bail hearing on both cases and to have

the 1275.1 hold removed on Case FSB-044914. D.D.A. Secord had Mr. Thomas Ricefrom the Department of Insurance appear in attempts to have my bail bond agent, ScottMehr's license revoked. D.D.A. Secord stated to the court that Scott Mehr was kickingme back money paid for the bail premium. and that he had a tape ofour conversation.This simply was not the case; Scott Mehr was reducing my bail premium to 8% based ona new law which had just passed. .Judge Pacheco removed the 1275.1 hold and askedMr. Mehr ifhe was posting my bail. D.D.A. Secord then made an oral motion andattempted to have my bail raised to $750,000.00. Judge Pacheco denied D.D.A. Secord'srequest. Steve & Scon Mehr bail bonds posted my baH totaling $350,000.00. I wasreleased:from West Valley Detention Center on August 05, 2004.

28. On or about August 09, 2004, I had a court appearance in my Paternity Action. I arrivedat Department R-17 of this court at approximately 8:30 a.m. I was sitting in thecourtroom waiting for my attorney, P. Timothy Pittullo, when D.D.A Secord appeared. Igot up and left the courtroom with a friend of mine, and D.D.A. Secord chased me downthe hall. It frightened me and I went into the women's bathroom and waited for awhile.D.D.A. Secord was well aware that I was represented by counsel in the criminal matter.And shouldn't talk to me without my lawyer. D.D.A. Secord came into Department R-17two more times and my family attorney had to intervene

29. On or about December 10,2004, my civil attorney. Michelle D. Strickland flIed a lawsuitagainst D.D.A. Secord, D.A. Michael Ramos, San Bernardino County, San BernardinoCounty District Attorney's Office, San Bernardino County District Attorney's OfficeInvestigator Robert Schreiber, and other defendants on my behalf and on behalfofmy

http:///reader/full/750,000.00http:///reader/full/350,000.00http:///reader/full/750,000.00http:///reader/full/350,000.00


22/46

5

10

15

20

25

1 ..,

3 4

6 7 8 9

11 12 13 14

16 17 18 19

21 22 23 24

26 27 28

minor son, Clifford, for the illegal access and dissemination of confidential documentsfrom my Paternity Action. United Stales District Court, Central District of C a l i f o r n i ~ Case #04-1524-VAP (SGLx).

30. In or about May 2005, San Bernardino County Counsel, representing D.D.A. JamesSecord, D.A. Michael Ramos, San Bernardino County, San Bernardino County DistrictAttorney's Office, SSCDA Investigator Robert Schreiber and other county employeesfiled a motion to dismiss pursuant to F.RC.P. 12(B)(6).

31. County Counsel's motion to dismiss was heard on August 01, 2005. Honorable VirginiaPhillips dismissed Michael A. Ramos, SBCDA Investigator Robert Schreiber and theDistrict Attorney's Office, however found that there was sufficient allegations assertedand held D.D.A. James Secord to answer nine (9) causes of action. The causes ofactionsD.D.A. James Secord was held to answer for include Abuse of Process, Invasion of Privacy, violation ofequal protection of the laws. violations ofnon-discriminatory policing services, civil c o n s p i r a c i e s ~ 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985 and 1986 claims, negligence and violations ofdue process rights. Judge Phillips fwther ruled that the alleged conduct ofD.D.A. Secord is not protected from prosecutorial immunity because it falls outside the scope of his prosecutorial functions. (A true and correct copy of the Federal Ruling on the County's motion to dismiss is attached hereto and incorporated in by reference as Exhibit 4.)

32. I have not been treated fairly by D.D.A. Secord or as all other defendants are treated. It isapparent that there is a conflict which prohibits D.D.A. Secord and the San BernardinoCounty District Attorney's Office from making professional, unbiased decisionspertaining to me and my case. I fear I have no chance at a fair trial as long as D.D.A.Secord and the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office are allowed to remain



23/46

5

10

15

20

25

")..

3 4

6 7 8 9

11 12 13 14

16 17 18 19

21 22 23 24

26 27 28

on my case.33. For the above aforementioned reasons, I respectfully request that D.D.A. James Secord

and the San Bernardino County District Attorney' s office be recused to insure me achance at a fair trial.

I declare under the penalty of perjury of the laws of the State ofCalifornia the foregoing istrue and correct.

DATED: September 21, 2006

LISA LIBERI



24/46


25/46

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

5. A few months after the arrest in Texas, I secured a job, got married to William Courvilleand we bought a home together in Texas.

6. I was divorced in or about the end of 1989 and I accepted a transfer to Newport Beach,California with the company I was working for. I relocated from Texas to California inor about December 1989.

7. On January 15,2002 a Search Warrant was served on my property located at 11952Huntley Avenue, Etiwanda, California 91739. At this same time, I was arrested onallegations ofP.C. 470 and P.C. 487, based on San Bernardino County Sheriff'sDepartment Case #110200477.

8. My bail was set at $20,000 which was posted on January 15, 2002 and I was releasedfrom West Valley Detention Center.

9. February 25, 2002 my Arraignment came on for hearing in San Bernardino CountySuperior Court, Rancho Cucamonga District Case #0201341972. No one from the SanBernardino County District Attorney's Office appeared, no charges were filed, my bailbond was exonerated and I was released.

10. In or about September 2 0 0 2 ~ I filed a motion in my Paternity Action, San BernardinoCounty Superior C o Rancho Cucamonga District, Case #RFL-034080, requestingpennission to relocate with my minor son to New Mexico. On or about October 18,2002, my motion was granted along with a new visitation order permitting my child'sbiological father, John Allen to visit with our son in Albuquerque, New Mexico the thirdweekend of every month at Neutral Comer, a County facility.

11. In or about early November 2002, my husband, child and I relocated to New Mexico.DEC LARAnON OF LISA tiBERI



26/46

123456789

10111213141516171819202122

232425262728

The reason for the relocation was due to my health complications, harassment I wasenduring from my child's biological father, my father's poor health and to be closer tomy family and assist my sister with her medical and psychiatric conditions. The DistrictAttorney has alleged that I fled California to avoid prosecution without a single shred ofevidence to support such an allegation, once again attempting to prejudice the Courtagainst me.

12. Upon arrival in New Mexico, my husband, Brent Liberi, immediately obtained ajob withSeeds ofChange located in Santa Fe. My husband is still with this company and wasrecently promoted.

13. January 14,2003, Michelle D. Strickland, Esq. filed a civil lawsuit on my behalf, in SanBernardino County Superior Court, Central District, Case #SCVSS-98957 against amongothers, Paul Morrison, the investigating officer in the matter herein.

14. April 01,2003 Michelle D. Strickland filed a motion re Writ ofPossession. D.D.A.James Secord made an appearance as a Special Party of Interest. I was not present forthis hearing, however, I was informed by Ms. Strickland that D.D.A. Secord stated I wasunder investigation and was required to bring the motion for writ ofpossession before theJudge who issued the search warrant. This was the first time I heard I was underinvestigation. Based on the statements of D.D.A. Secord my motion was denied withoutprejudice.

15. April 10, 2003, Ms. Strickland filed a motion for reconsideration as she determined thestatements given by D.D.A. Secord were not accurate. A hearing was set for May 13,2003.

16. May 09, 2003 the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office filed the first set ofcharges against me, Case #FWV 028000, based on the same San Bernardino County

DECLARATION OF LISA LIBERI



27/46

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

Sheriff's Department Case #110200477.17. In or about October 2003, during the ongoing preliminary hearing in this matter, D.D.A

James Secord obtained an ex parte order from the Orange COWlty Superior Court,Lamoreaux Justice Center in order to obtain access to my confidential Paternity Action,Case #AD-60301. D.D.A. Secord failed to give notice to my attorney's or any partiesassociated with the Paternity Action so they would have an opportunity to protect theconfidentiality of that file. I learned of this during my preliminary hearing in Case#FWV-028000 when D.D.A. Secord had my Paternity file brought up to the court roomand requested judicial notice of certain documents.

18. In or about February 2004, I learned that Randolph C. Houts, Attorney for USA FederalCredit Union and a witness in this case obtained copies ofdocuments which were locatedwithin my Paternity Action.

19. On March 31, 2004, I underwent Open Heart Surgery at the Heart Hospital located inAlbuquerque, New Mexico.

20. As a result of the complications I suffered from my Open Heart Surgery, my courtappearances were continued. My then attorney, David Goldstein and D.D.A. JamesSecord stipulated to have my court hearings continued to July. 13, 2004.

21. On or about June]4,2004, the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office signedfor Government Claims filed on my behalfby Michelle D. Strickland for the illegalaccess and dissemination ofconfidential documents taken from my Paternity Action toRandolph C. Houts.

22. In or about mid June 2004, John Allen, D.D.A. Secord's witness contacted Officer RudyGallegos with the Santa Fe Police Department and attempted to have me arrested on awarrant prior to its issuance. The only way Mr. Allen would have had knowledge a

DECLARATION OF LISA LIBERl



28/46

123456789

10111213141516171819202122232425262728

warrant was being sought was from D.D.A. Secord and/or the San Bernardino CountyDistrict Attorney's Office. D.D.A. Secord was well aware that my child and I are thevictims of John Allen's crimes, for whichMr. Allen was convicted. Further, Mr. Allenwas aware I was being arrested when I flew to California as he also sent the child supportfor July 2004 by restricted delivery knowing I would be unable to pick up the check. (Atrue and correct copy ofOfficer Rudy Gallegos declaration is attached hereto andincorporated in by reference as Exhibit 3.)

23. On June 30, 2004, D.D.A. James Secord obtained another warrant for my arrest from theSan Bernardino County Superior Court, Central District, Case #FSB 044914 tmder mymarried name of LIBERI involving the same vehicle and Credit Union relative to which Iwas litigating in the:first case, Case #FWV-028000. D.D.A. Secord was aware I waslitigating the flISt case under my maiden name ofRICHARDSON in San BernardinoCounty Superior Court, Rancho Cucamonga District, as he was the deputy districtattorney who filed the first case, Case #FWV 028000.

24. July 12,2004, I was arrested at the Ontario Airport by Michael Leiberich with the SanBernardino County District Attorney's Office on behalfofD.n.A. Secord when I flew infor my July 13,2004 court date. As previously stated, D.D.A. Secord knew I would beappearing as he bad stipulated to the hearing date of July 13,2004.

25. I was taken to West Valley Detention Center, booked and placed in isolation in the men'sunit. I suffered another heart attack, which shut down the bypassed area ofmy heart andKetoacidosis.

26. I appeared in Court July 14,2004 in-custody for my Arraignment for Case #FSB 044914and bail hearing on both cases. I entered a plea ofNot Guilty to all counts. My bail onthis arrest, Case #FSB 044914 was set at $100,000.00 with a 1275.1 hold. My

DECLARAnON OF LISA LIBERl

http:///reader/full/100,000.00http:///reader/full/100,000.00


29/46


30/46

5

10

15

20

25

2 3 4

6 7 8 9

11 12 13 14

16 17 18 19

21 22 23 24

26 27 28

minor son, Clifford, for the illegal access and dissemination of confidential documentsfrom my Paternity Action. United States District Court, Central District of California,Case #04-1 524-VAP (SGLx).

30. In or about May 2005, San Bernardino County Counsel, representing D.D.A. JamesS e c o r ~ D.A. Michael Ramos, San Bernardino County, San Bernardino County DistrictAttorney's Office, SaCDA Investigator Robert Schreiber and other county employeesfiled a motion to dismiss pursuant to F.R.C.P. 12(B)(6).

31. County Counsel's motion to dismiss was heard on August 0I, 2005. Honorable VirginiaPhillips dismissed Michael A. Ramos, SBCDA Investigator Robert Schreiber and theDistrict Attorney's Office, however found that there was sufficient allegations assertedand held D.D.A. James Secord to answer nine (9) causes of action. The causes of actionsD.D.A. James Secord was held to answer for include Abuse of Process, Invasion of Privacy, violation of equal protection of the laws, violations of non-discriminatory policing services, civil c o n s p i r a c i e s ~ 42 U.S.C. 1983, 1985 and 1986 claims, negligence and violations of due process rights. Judge Phillips further ruled that the alleged conduct of D.D.A. Secord is not protected from prosecutorial immunity because it falls outside the scope of his prosecutorial functions. (A true and correct copy of the Federal Ruling on the County's motion to dismiss is attached hereto and incorporated in by reference as Exhibit 4.)

32. I have not been treated fairly by D.D.A. Secord or as all other defendants are treated. It isapparent that there is a conflict which prohibits D.D.A. Secord and the San BernardinoCounty District Attorney's Office from making professional, unbiased decisionspertaining to me and my case. I fear I have no chance at a fair trial as long as D.D.A.Secord and the San Bernardino County District Attorney's Office are allowed to remain

DECLARATION OF LISA LffiERI



31/46


Wherefore, defendants demand judgment that the complaint be dismissed, together with thecosts and disbursements of this action.

D M ~ : V Dr. Orly Taitz ESQ26302 La Paz, ste 211Mission VieJo, CA 92691Pro Se and on behalfof Defend our Freedoms Foundation and as a president of Defend OurFreedoms Foundation

Addendum 1Case FWV028000 - DefendantsNextCourt Date Status Agency I Arrest Date Count 1 Chatge Violation Date

DR Number

1 LIBERI, LISA R RA 0511812001 PC 115(A) 05/1812001110013759

ALIAS: UBERt, LISA R ALIAS: COURVlllERICHARDSON, LISA AliAS: LlSERI, LISA A ALIAS: RICHARDSON, LISA C ALIAS: COURVILLERICH, LISA ALIAS: LIBERt, LISA RENEE AlIAS: LIBERI. LISA ALIAS: RICHARDSON, LISA RENEE

6



32/46


33/46

Case 2:09-cv-O 1898-ER Document 35 Filed 05/28/09 Page 8 of 23

2 PC47O(0)F FORGERY 0511812001 HTA3 PC 472 'F 'FORGE OFFICIAl SEAL 0511812001 HTA4 'PC115(A) :F OFFERIETC FALSEIFORGEO

INSTRUMENT TO FILE0511812001 HTA

5 , .,PC 487(A) 'F GRAND THEFT: PROPERlYlETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

6 "'PC 47O(D) F ,FORGERY 0511812001 HTA1 'PC4n F .FORGE OFFICIAL SEAL ,0511812001 HTA8 PC 115(A) ,F 'OFFERIETC FALSEIFORGEOINSTRUMENT TO FILE

;0511812001 HTA

9 'Pc 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERlYlETC:OVERS400 0511812001 HTA

10, PC487(A) GRAND THEFT: PROPERlYlETCOVERS4QO '0511812001 HTA

11 ,pc487(0)(1);F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBILElANIMALlETC '0511812001

;HTA

12 ;pc 487(A) 'F ..,GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

13 'PC487(0)(1) .F :GRANO THEFT:AUTOMOBILElANIMALlETC 0511812001 HTA

14 PC487(A) 'F :GRANO THEFT: PROPERlYlETC:OVER$400 :0511812001 ;HTA

15 PC487(0)(1) 'F GRAND THEFT:,AUTOMOBILElANIMAUETC '0511812001 HTA

16 PC 487(A) :F , , .. ..'GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001,HTA

11 PC 487(A) F 'GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

Infor' Chargee

8



34/46


- . . .Count Chatge .SeV9lfty :Desctiption Violation Plea StatusDate

1 pc 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETC,OVER $400 05I18f2001 GUILTY :CONVICTED

2 PC476A(A)F 'NONSUFFICIENT FUNDS: CHECKS 05I18f2001 GUilTY ,CONVICTED

3 ,PC470(D)F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED4 PC 472 'F 'FORGE OFFICIAL SEAL 05I18f2001 DISMISSED5 :Pc 115(A) F O F F E ~ C F A L S E F O R G E D

,INSTRUMENTTO FILE05I18f2001 :GUILTY CONVICTED

6

7

:PC487(A)

'PC 476

F

F

GRANO THEFT: PROPERTYJETC 05l18f2001OVER $400

- . .:MAKlNG, POSSESSING, UTIERING 05l18f2001:FICTIOUS INSTRS

GUILTY .CONVICTED

DISMISSED

8 .PC470(D) F FORGERY ,0511812001 DISMISSED9 PC 472 F FORGEOFFICIAl SEAL 05l18f2001 GUILTY CONVICTED10 PC 115(A)F OFFERIETC FALSE/FORGEDINSTRUMENTTO FilE 05I18f2001 DISMISSED

11 PC 487(A) F GRANDTHEFT:PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 'GUllTY CONVICTED

12 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400

05l18f2001 GUilTY CONVICTED

13 PC487(0)(1) F GRANO THEFT:AUTOMOBILElANIMAUETC 05I18f2001 DISMISSED

14 PC 487(A) F GRANO THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 DISMISSED

15 PC487(0)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBILElANIMAUETC 05I18f2001 DISMISSED

9



35/46


16 PC 487(A) F G R A N D T H E F T : P R O P E R T V ~ C 0511812001 DISMISSEDOVER $40017 PC F GRAND THEFT: 0511812001 DISMISSED487(0)(1) AUTOMOBILEIANIMAUETC18 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTVIETC 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTEDOVER $40019 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETC 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTEDOVER $40020 PC 115(A) F O F F E ~ C F A L S ~ O R G E D 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTEDINSTRUMENT TO FILE21 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED22 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED23 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICIAL SEAL 05/1812001 DISMISSED

Case FWV028000 Defendant 1608112 UBERI. USA RENEE - ProbationProbation Type: FORMAL Granted: 0312112008 Expire: 0312112011

SUPERVISED PROBATION GRANTED FOR A PERIOD OF 36 MONTHS ON FOLLOWING TERMSAND CONDI110NS:1) SERVE 26 DAYS IN A SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY JAIL FACILITY, WITH CREDIT FORTIME SERVED, A MATTER OF 26 DAYS, PLUS CONDUCT CREDIT PURSUANT TO 1PC4019 NO ABIDE BY ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE FACILITY WITHOUT THEPOSSIBILITY OF COUNTY PAROLE.2) VIOLATE NO LAW.3) REPORT TO THE PROB OFFICER IN PERSON IMMEDIATELY 0- NO THEREAFTERONCE EVERY FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OR AS DIRECTED. REPORT TO THE PROBOFFICER IN PERSON IMMEDIATELY 0- NO THEREAFTER ONCE EVERY FOURTEEN(14) DAYS OR AS DIRECTED.

10



36/46

Case 2;09-cv-01898-ER Document 35 Filed 05/28/09 Page 11 of 23

4) COOPERATE WITH THE PROBATION OFFICER IN A PLAN OF REHABILITATION ANDFOllOW ALL REASONABLE DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION OFFICER.

5) SEEK AND MAINTAIN GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT. OR ATTEND SCHOOL. AND KEEP THEPROBATION OFFICER INFORMED OF STATUS OF EMPLOYMENT. OR SCHOOL.6) KEEP THE PROBATION OFFICER INFORMED OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE ANDCOHABITANTS AND GIVE WRmEN NOTICE TO THE PROBATION OFFICER TWENTY

FOUR (24) HOURS PRIOR TO ANY CHANGES. PRIOR TO ANY MOVE PROVIDEWRITTEN AUTHORIZATION TO THE POST OFFICE TO FORWARD MAlL TO THE NEWADDRESS. PERMIT VISITS AND SEARCHES OF PLACES OF RESIDENCE BY AGENTSOF THE PROBATION DEPT. ANDiOR LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OFENSURING COMPUANCE WITH PERMIT VISITS AND SEARCHES OF PLACES OFRESIDENCE BY AGENTS OF THE PROBATION DEPT. ANDiOR LAW ENFORCEMENTFOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH PERMIT VISITS ANDSEARCHES OF PLACES OF ReSIDENCE BY AGENTS OF THE PROBATION DEPT.ANDIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITHTHE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROBATION; NOT 00 ANYTHING TO INTERFEREWITH THIS REQUIREMENT. OR DETER OFFICERS FROM FULFilliNG THISREQUIREMENT. SUCH AS THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROBATION; NOT DOANYTHING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT. OR DETER OFFICERS FROMFULFilliNG THIS REQUIREMENT. SUCH AS ERECTING ANY LOCKED FENCES/GATESTHAT WOULD DENY ACCESS TO PROBATION OFFICERS. OR HAVE ANY ANIMALS ONTHE PREMISES THAT WOULD REASONABLY DETER. ERECTING ANY LOCKEDFENCESIGATES THAT WOULD DENY ACCESS TO PROBATION OFFICERS, OR HAVEANY ANIMALS ON THE PREMISES THAT WOULD REASONABlY DETER, THREATTHREATEN THE SAFETY OF. OR INTERFERE WITH, OFFICERS ENFORCING THISTERM. EN THE SAFETY OF, OR INTERFERE WITH, OFFICERS ENFORCING THIS TERM.

1) NEITHER POSSESS NOR HAVE UNDER YOUR CONTROL ANY DANGEROUS ORDEADLY WEAPONS OR EXPLOSIVE DEVICES OR MATERIALS TO MAKE EXPLOSIVEDEVIces.8) SUBMIT TO A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF YOUR PERSON. RESIDENCE ANDiORPROPERTY UNDER YOUR CONTROL AT ANY TIME OF THE DAY OR NIGHT BY ANYLAW-ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, WITH OR WITHOUT A SEARCH WARRANT. AND WITHOR WITHOUT CAUSE (PEOPLE -V- BRAVO).9) NEITHER USE NOR POSSESS ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE WITHOUT MEDICALPRESCRIPTION. A PHYSICIANS'SWRmEN NOTIce IS TO BE GIVEN TO THEPROBATION OFACER.10) SUBMIT TO A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST AT DIRECTION OF PROBATIONOFFICER. EACH TEST IS SUBJECT TO AN $11.00 FEE, TO BE COllECTED BY

CENTRAL COLLECTIONS11) NOT POSSESS ANY TYPE OF DRUG PARAPHERNALIA. AS DEFINeD IN H&S11364.5(D)

11



37/46


12) PARTICIPATE IN A COUNSELING PROGRAM AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATIONOFACER, SUBMIT MONTHLY PROOF OF ATTENDANCE ANDIOR SUCCESSFULCOMPlETION TO THE PROBATION OFFICER AS DIRECTED AND BE RESPONSIBLEFOR PAYMENT OF ALL PROGRAM FEE(S).13) NOT ASSOCIATE WITH KNOWN CONVICTED FELONS OR ANYONE ACTIVELYENGAGED IN CRIMINAL ACTMTY B-OR CODEFENDANT(S) OR VlCTIM(S).14) NOT ASSOCIATE WITH KNOWN ILLEGAL USERS OR SELLERS OF CONTROLLEDSUBSTANCES,15) NOT MAINTAIN A CHECKING ACCOUNT OR COMPLETE OR ENDORSE ANY CHECKSUNLESS MADE PAYABLE TO YOU AND NOT HAVE ANY BLANK CHECKS IN YOURPOSSESSION WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE PROBATION OFFICER.16) SUBMIT A RECORD OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURES TO THE PROBATION OFFICERQUARTERLY.17) NEITHER POSSESS NOR USE ANY CREDIT CARD WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THEPROBATION OFFICER.18) NOT DRIVE OR POSSESS KEYS OR DOCUMENTATION TO ANY MOTOR VEHICLEUNLESS LEGALLY REGISTERED TO YOU OR AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER,EXCEPT IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT.19) REPORT ALL MOTOR VEHiClES REGISTERED TO YOU TO THE PROBATION OFFICERWITHIN SevEN (7) DAYS OF ACQUISITION.20) SUBMIT TO AND COOPERATE IN A FIELD INTERROGATION BY ANY PEACE OFFICER

AT ANY TIME OF THE DAY OR NIGHT.21) CARRY AT ALL TIMES A VALID DRIVERS LICENSE OR DEPARTMENT OF MOTORVEHiClES IDENTIFICATION CARD AND DISPLAY SUCH IDENTIFICATION UPONREQUEST BY ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT FIRST NOTIFYING THE PO. CONTAININGYOUR TRUE NAME AGE AND CURRENT ADDRESS22) ENROLL IN THE DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAM AT THE DIRECTION OF THEPROBATION OFFICER, AND SHOW PROOF OF ENROLLMENT TO THE PROBATIONOFFICER WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS.23) MAKE RESTITUTION TO THE VlCTlM(S) (SEE PROBATION REPORT) IN THE AMOUNT

OF 59223.n PLUS A 10% ADM INISTRATIVE FEE. TO BE PAID THROUGH CENTRALCOLLECTIONS24) MAKE RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM (SEE PROBATION REPORT) IN THE AM OUNT OF$35000.00 PLUS A 10% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, TO BEPAID THROUGH CENTRALCOLLECTIONS

12

http:///reader/full/35000.00


38/46


39/46


ALIAS: RICHARDSON. LISA RENEE

Case FWV028000 Defendant 1608112 UBERI, USA RENEE - StatusCUstody HlA

Filing Type Held to Answer Filing Date 0SI09I2OO3On:tered Bail SO.oo Posted Bail $0.00D.A James R. Secord Defense Dean Pilei (CourtAppoInted,Next Action: Deputy Repotftl: RA-RC 110013759

Wamlnt Type Status Issued AffidavitNONE NlA MIA

ProbIIfIon Type Granted ExpirationFormal 0312112008 0312112011

Santance ConvictedDate County Jail CTS0112512G08 26 Days 26 DaysState Prison Max SentenceNlA MIAFine and Penally Restitution Fine Restitution to Victim

o HlA

Case FWV028000 Defendant 1608112 UBERI, USA RENEE - Charges14



40/46


Arrest ChargesCount Charge Severity Description ViolationDate

Plea Status

1 PC459 F BURGLARY 0511812001Filed ChargesCount Charge Sewdty Description VIOlationDate Plea Status

1 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVERS400 0511812001 HTA2 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 HTA3 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICIAL SEAl 05/1812001 HTA4 PC 115(A) F OFFERIETC FALSEIFORGEDINSTRUMENT TO FilE

0511812001 HTA

5 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVERS400 0511812001 HTA

6 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 HTA7 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICiAl SEAl 0511812001 HTA8 PC 115(A) F OFFERlETCFALSEIFORGEDINSTRUMENT TO FilE 0511812001 HTA

9 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

10 'PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA11 PC487(0)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBllElANIMAUETC 0511812001 HTA

15



41/46

Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 35 Filed 05128/09 Page 16 of 23

12 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTY/ETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

13 PC487(0)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBILElANIMAUETC 0511812001 HTA

14 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 05/1812001 HTA

15 PC487(D)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBllEIANIMALJETC 0511812001 HTA

16 PC 487{A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

17 PC 487{A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 HTA

InforChargesCount Charge Severity Description VIOlation

DatePIes Status

1 PC 487{A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400

0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED

2 PC476A(A) F NONSUFFICIENT FUNDS: CHECKS 0511812001 GUILTY CONVICTED

3 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED4 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICIAL SEAl 0511812001 DISMISSED5 PC 115(A) F O F F E ~ C F A L S ~ O R G E D INSTRUMENT TO FILE 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED

6 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED

7 PC 476 F MAKING, POSSESSING, UTIERINGFtCTIOUS INSTRS 0511812001 DISMISSED

8 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED

16



42/46


9 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICIAL SEAL 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED10 PC 115(A) F OFFERIETC FALSE/FORGEDINSTRUMENT TO FILE

0511812001 DISMISSED

11 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTVIETCOVER $400 0511812001 GUllTV CONVICTED12 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED

13 PC487(D}(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBILEIANIMAUETC 0511812001 DISMISSED

14 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVER $400 0511812001 DISMISSED

15 PC487(0)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBllEIANIMAUETC 0511812001 DISMISSED

16 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTVIETCOVER $400 0511812001 DISMISSED

11 PC487(0)(1) F GRAND THEFT:AUTOMOBllElANIMAUETC 0511812001 DISMISSED

18 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTYIETCOVERS400 0511812001 GUlLTV CONVICTED

19 PC 487(A) F GRAND THEFT: PROPERTVIETCOVER $400 0511812001 GUllTV CONVICTED

20 PC 115(A) F O F F E R l E T C F A L S ~ O R G E D INSTRUMENT TO FilE 0511812001 GUllTV CONVICTED

21 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED22 PC 470(0) F FORGERY 0511812001 DISMISSED23 PC 472 F FORGE OFFICiAl SEAL 0511812001 DISMISSED

case FWY028000 Defendant 1608112 LlSERI, LISA RENEE Probation17



43/46


Probation Type: FORMAL Granted: 0312112008 Expil'fl: 0312112011

SUPERVISED PROBATION GRANTED FOR A PERIOD OF 36 MONTHS ON FOLLOWING TERMSAND CONDmONS:

1) SERVE 26 DAYS IN A SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY JAIL FACIUTY, WITH CREDIT FORTIME SERVED, A MATTER OF 26 DAYS. PLUS CONDUCT CREDIT PURSUANT TO 1-PC4019 NO ABIDE BY ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE FACILITY WITHOUT THEPOSSIBILITY OF COUNlY PAROLE.2) VIOLATE NO LAW.3) REPORT TO THE PROB OFFICER IN PERSON IMMEDIATELY 0- NO THEREAFTER ONCEEVERY FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OR AS DIRECTED. REPORT TO THE PROB OFFICER INPERSON IMMEDIATELY 0- NO THEREAFTER ONCE EVERY FOURTEEN (14) DAYS OR

AS DIRECTED.4) COOPERATE WITH THE PROBATION OFFICER IN A PLAN OF REHABIUTATION ANDFOUOWAU REASONABLE DIRECTIVES OF THE PROBATION OFFICER.5) SEEK AND MAINTAIN GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT. OR AliENO SCHOOL. AND KEEP THEPROBATION OFFICER INFORMED OF STATUS OF EMPLOYMENT. OR SCHOOL.6) KEEP THE PROBATION OFFICER INFORMED OF PLACE OF RESIDENCE ANDCOHABITANTS AND GIVE WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE PROBATION OFFICER TWENTY-FOUR (24) HOURS PRIOR TO ANY CHANGES. PRIOR TO ANY MOVE PROVIDEWRITTEN AUTHORIZATION TO THE POST OFFICE TO FORWARD MAIL TO THE NEW

ADDRESS. PERMIT VISITS AND SEARCHES OF PLACES OF RESIDENCE BY AGENTSOF THE PROBATION DEPT. ANDiOR LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OFENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH PERMIT VISITS AND SEARCHES OF PLACES OFRESIDENCE BY AGENTS OF THE PROBATION DEPT. AND/OR LAW ENFORCEMENTFOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITH PERMIT VISITS ANDSEARCHES OF PLACES OF RESIDENCE BY AGENTS OF THE PROBATION DEPT.ANOIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING COMPLIANCE WITHTHE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROBATION; NOT DO ANYTHING TO INTERFEREWITH THIS REQUIREMENT. OR DETER OFFICERS FROM FULFILLING THISREQUIREMENT. SUCH AS THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF PROBATION; NOT DOANYTHING TO INTERFERE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT, OR DETER OFFICERS FROMFULFILLING THIS REQUIREMENT. SUCH AS ERECTING ANY LOCKED FENCESfGATESTHAT WOULD DENY ACCESS TO PROBATION OFFICERS. OR HAVE ANY ANIMALS ONTHE PREMISES THAT WOULD REASONABLY DETER, ERECTING ANY LOCKEDFENCESIGATES THAT WOULD DENY ACCESS TO PROBATION OFFICERS, OR HAVEANY ANIMALS ON THE PREMISES THAT WOULD REASONABLY DETER, THREATTHREATEN THE SAFETY OF, OR INTERFERE WITH, OFFICERS ENFORCING THISTERM. EN THE SAFETY OF, OR INTERFERE WITH. OFFICERS ENFORCING THIS TERM.

18



44/46


7} NEITHER POSSESS NOR HAVE UNDER YOUR CONTROL ANY DANGEROUS ORDEADLY WEAPONS OR EXPLOSIVE DEVICES OR MATERIALS TO MAKE EXPLOSIVEDEVICES.8) SUBMIT TO A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OF YOUR PERSON, RESIDENCE ANDIORPROPERTY UNDER YOUR CONTROL AT ANY TIME OF THE DAY OR NIGHT BY ANYLAW-ENFORCEMENT OFACER, WITH OR WITHOUT A SEARCH WARRANT, AND WITHOR WITHOUT CAUSE (PEOPLE -V- BRAVO).9) NEITHER USE NOR POSSESS ANY CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE WITHOUT MEDICAlPRESCRIPTION. A PHYSICIANS'S WRITTEN NOTICE IS TO BE GIVEN TO THEPROBATION OFFICER.10) SUBMIT TO A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE TEST AT DIRECTION OF PROBATIONOFFICER. EACH TEST IS SUBJECT TO AN $11.00 FEE, TO BE COLLECTED BYCENTRAL COLLECTIONS11) NOT POSSESS ANY TYPE OF DRUG PARAPHERNAliA, AS DEFINED IN H&S11364.5(D)12) PARTICIPATE IN A COUNSELING PROGRAM AS DIRECTED BY THE PROBATION

OFFICER, SUBMIT MONTHLY PROOF OF ATTENDANCE ANDIOR SUCCESSFULCOMPlETION TO THE PROBATION OFFICER AS DIRECTED AND BE RESPONSIBLEFOR PAYMENT OF AlL PROGRAM FEE(S).13) NOT ASSOCIATE WITH KNOWN CONVICTED FELONS OR ANYONE ACTIVELYENGAGED IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY B-OR CODEFENDANT(S) OR VlCTIM(S).14) NOT ASSOCIATE WITH KNOWN I l leGAl USERS OR SEUERS OF CONTROllEDSUBSTANCES,15) NOT MAINTAIN A CHECKING ACCOUNT OR COMPLETE OR ENDORSE ANY CHECKSUNLESS MADE PAYABLE TO YOU AND NOT HAVE ANY BLANK CHECKS IN YOURPOSSESSION WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE PROBATION OFFICER.16) SUBMIT A RECORD OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURES TO THE PROBATION OFFICERQUARTERlY.17) NEITHER POSSESS NOR USE ANY CREDIT CARD WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THEPROBATION OFFICER.18) NOT DRIVE OR POSSESS KEYS OR DOCUMENTATION TO ANY MOTOR VEHICLE

UNLESS LEGAlLY REGISTERED TO YOU OR AN IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER,EXCEPT IN THE COURSE OF EMPLOYMENT.19) REPORT AU MOTOR VEHICLES REGISTERED TO YOU TO THE PROBATION OFFICERWITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS OF ACQUISITION.

19



45/46

Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 35 Filed 05/28109 Page 20 of 23

20) SUBMIT TO AND COOPERATE IN A FIELD INTERROGATION BY ANY PEACE OFFICERAT ANY TIME OF THE DAY OR NIGHT.

21) CARRY AT ALL TIMES A VALID DRIVERS LICENSE OR DEPARTMENT OF MOTORVEHICLES IDENTIFICATION CARD AND DISPLAY SUCH IDENTIFICATION UPONREQUEST BY ANY PURPOSE WITHOUT FIRST NOTIFYING THE PO. CONTAININGYOUR TRUE NAME AGE AND CURRENT ADDRESS

22) ENROLL IN THE DRUG TREATMENT PROGRAMAT THE DIRECTION OF THEPROBATION OFFICER, AND SHOW PROOF OF ENROLLMENT TO THE PROBATIONOFFICER WITHIN SEVEN (7) DAYS.23) MAKE RESTITUTION TO THE VlCTIM(S) (SEE PROBATION REPORn IN THE AMOUNT

OF $9223.n PLUS A 10% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE, TO BE PAID THROUGH CENTRALCOLLECTIONS

24) MAKE RESTITUTIONTO THE VICTIM (SEE PROBATION REPORn IN THE AM OUNT OF$35000.00 PLUS A 10% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. TO BEPAID THROUGH CENTRALCOLLECTIONS25) MAKE RESTITUTION TO THE VICTIM (SEE PROBATION REPORn IN THE AMO UNT OF

$66951.08 PLUS A 10% ADMINISTRATIVE FEE. TO BE PAID THROUGH CENTRALCOLLECTIONS

26) PAY A RESTITUTION FINE IN THE AMOUNT OF $200.00, PLUS A TEN PERCENT (10%)ADMINISTRATIVE FEE THROUGH CENTRAlCOLLECTIONS.

27) THE DEFENDANT IS NOTTO FILE ANY LAWSUITIlEGAl ACTION WITHOUT PRIORCONTACT WITH PROBATION OFFICER.

28) DO NOT APPLY FOR CREDIT OR A LOAN WITHOUT PRIOR CONTACT WITHPROBATION OFFICER.

29) COMPLY WITH ANY COURT ORDERED PAYMENT SCHEDULE.30) MAKE RESTITUTION TO VICTIM (SEE PROBATION REPORn IN AN AMOUNT TO BEDETERMINED BY PROBATION.31) MAKE RESTITUTION TO VICTIM (SEE PROBATION REPORT) IN AN AMOUNT TO BEDETERMINED BY PROBATION.32) PROBATION MAY BE SERVED THROUGH INTER STATE COMPACT AGREEMENT INTHE STATE OF NEW MEXICO UPON APPROVAL FROM PROBATION.

20

http:///reader/full/35000.00http:///reader/full/66951.08http:///reader/full/35000.00http:///reader/full/66951.08


46/46

Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 35 Filed 05/28/09 Page 21 of 23Case 2:09-cv-01898-ER Document 121 Filed 06/14/10 Page 46 of 46

liberi v taitz (edpa) - 121 - motion for reconsideration of the order to sever - paed-15307802917

Documents