IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Action

 

Julian Heicklen, Chair

The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

Plaintiff

 

v.

 

Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr. (814–355–6732)

Ruth DeWitt 814–355–6727)

Ann Lose (814–355–6727)

Maxine Ishler (814–355–6727)

Barbara Gallo (814–355–6727)

 

Centre County Courthouse

Bellefonte, PA 16823

 

Defendants

 

 

PETITION TO ENFORCE THE LAW

 

            Now comes Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff, acting as his own counsel, who respectfully represents as follows:

I. Jurisdiction

 

1. The Court’s authority to hear this case is grounded on 42 PA.C.S.A. 761.

 

II. Parties

 

2.     Julian Heicklen is a voter in Centre County registered with the Libertarian Party. He is Chair of the Libertarian Party of Centre County. He is a Member of the Board of Directors of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. He is the Libertarian Party’s candidate for Centre County Jury Commissioner in 2001. He was the defendant in two criminal cases where juries were chosen improperly.

3.     The Libertarian Party of Centre County is an affiliate of the Libertarian Party of Pennsylvania. It is the official organ of the Libertarian Party in Centre County.

4.     Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr. is President Judge of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas and Chair of the Centre County Jury Commission.

5.     Ruth DeWitt is the Democratic Party member of the Centre County Jury Commission.

6.     Ann Lose is the Republican Party member of the Centre County Jury Commission.

7.     Maxine Ishler is the Court Administrator of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas.

8.     Barbara Gallo is the Assistant Court Administrator of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas.ഀ 

III. Causes of Action

 

9.     Pennsylvania Statute 16 Pa.C.S.A. §460(a) states: “All meetings, regular and special, of the board of county commissioners and of all boards, commissions and authorities, created by or operating as agencies of a county, are hereby declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times.”

10.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(a) says , in part: “In order to accomplish the objectives of section 4501 (relating to declaration of policy), the jury selection commission shall at least annually prepare a master list of prospective jurors. The list shall contain all voter registration lists for the county, which lists may be incorporated by reference, or names from such other lists which in the opinion of the commission will provide a number of names of prospective jurors which is equal to or greater than the number of names contained in the voter registration list.”

11.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(b) says: “Maintenance and access to master list.—The group of names compiled as set forth in subsection (a) shall constitute the master list of prospective jurors. The list shall be open to the public for inspection.”

12.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(c) says: “Selection of names for jury service.—At least once each year the commission shall select from the master list of prospective jurors the number of names designated by the president judge, which names shall be selected at random.”

13.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4522 List of qualified jurors says: “After receipt of the juror qualification forms as provided in section 4521(d) (relating to selection of prospective jurors), the jury selection commission shall determine whether or not those individuals returning the forms are qualified for jury service, as provided in section 4502 (relating to qualifications of jurors). The names of qualified persons compiled as set forth in this section shall constitute the list of persons who are qualified to serve as jurors and shall be open for public inspection.”

14.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4523 says: The jury selection commission shall create and maintain a list of names of all prospective jurors who have been disqualified and the reason for their disqualification. The list shall be open for public inspection.”

15.  Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524 says, in part: “the commission shall publicly select at random from the master list or jury wheel such number of names of persons as may be required to be summoned for assignment to jury arrays. A separate list of names and addresses of persons assigned to each jury array shall be prepared and made available for public inspection at the offices of the commission no later than 30 days prior to the first date on which the array is to serve.”

16.  Pennsylvania Statute 65 P.S. §66.2 (commonly known as the Right-to-Know Act) states: “Every public record of an agency shall, at reasonable times, be open for examination and inspection by any citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”

17.  Pennsylvania Statute 65 P. S. §121 states: “Any person, holding a public office in this Commonwealth, who pleads nolo contendere or guilty, or is convicted in a court of record of extortion, embezzlement, bribery, malfeasance or misfeasance in office, or fraudulent conversion of public moneys or property, or for any misdemeanor in office, shall forfeit his office, and the sentence imposed by the court shall include the direction for the removal from office of such person.”

18.  Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution states, in part: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused has a right to…an impartial jury of the vicinage”

19.  Amendment VI to the U. S. Constitution states, in part: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed”

20.  Amendment XIV, Section 1 to the U. S. Constitution says, in part: “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any stated deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

 

IV. Legal Definitions

 

21. Black’s Law Dictionary [Seventh Edition, Bryan A. Garner, Editor-in-Chief, West Group, St. Paul, MN (1999)] defines certain relevant words as follows:

 

a.     Array (n): (1) panel of potential jurors; venire. (2) jurors actually impanelled.

b.     Array (v): to impanel a jury. (b) call names of jurors as they are impanelled.

c.     Panel: (1) list of persons summoned as potential jurors. (2) a group of persons selected for jury duty (venire).

d.     Venire: a panel of persons who have been selected for jury duty. synonyms: jury panel, jury pool.

 

22.  Unfortunately, these definitions leave some ambiguity. In addition, these terms are used differently in different statutes. For example, the term master list is used to describe one group of prospective jurors in 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(a) and another group in 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524. Also in 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4526(d), it states that jury panels are selected from arrays, even though Black’s Law Dictionary says that array and jury panel are synonyms.

23.  In order to make the definitions consistent with each other and the laws quoted above, we shall use the following nomenclature:

 

a. Master List of Prospective Jurors: A list of county residents which is at least as large as the voter-registration list. We shall call this the Master List.

b. List whose size is selected by the president judge from the Master List. The list to which juror qualification forms are submitted. This shall be called the Master Juror List.

c. List of those from the Master Juror List qualified for jury duty. This shall be called the Qualified Juror List.

d. List of those from the Master Juror List, who were disqualified as potential jurors. This shall be called the Disqualified Juror List……List of people summoned to court from the Qualified Juror List from which jurors are selected. According to the definitions above, this is the array or venire or jury panel or jury pool. This shall be called the Jury Pool.

e.     List of people selected from the Jury Pool to become the prospective jury members and be subjected to preemptory challenge. We shall call this the Prospective Jury.

f.      The list of people from the Prospective Jury that survive the preemptory challenges. This is the petit jury. We shall call it the Jury.

 

V. Jury Selection in Centre County

 

24.  In Centre County, PA, the Master List is obtained from the Tax Assessment Office. It includes the names of all people listed on the occupational assessment tax roll.

25.  From the Master List 6000 names are selected to form the Master Juror List.

26.  In some unspecified manner, the Master Juror List is reduced to 400 names constituting the Qualified Juror List.

27.  Questionnaires are sent to the people named in the Qualified Juror List. From the response to these questionnaires, the Jury Pool of 150 people is selected. These are summoned to Court.

28.  In Court, names are selected at random to form a Prospective Jury. Some people are disqualified based on open questions asked in the courtroom by the presiding judge. The Prospective Jury consists of 26 members.

29.  The judge or the attorneys, at the judge’s discretion, questions the members of the Prospective Jury. Based on the answers and other (sometimes unconstitutional) criteria, the Prospective Jury is reduced by preemptory challenge to a Jury consisting of 12 jurors and two alternate jurors.

 

VI. Centre County Demographics

 

30. The adult population compositions in Centre County and State College Borough are given in Table I. The Centre County Jury Commission uses the Occupational Assessment Tax (OAT) rolls as the Master List. It can be seen that this list contains fewer names than the voter registration roll population, in violation of Pennsylvania Statute 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(a).


 

TABLE 1: GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF THE ADULT POPULATION (≥18 YEARS OLD) IN CENTRE COUNTY, PA

Item

Centre County (CC)

State College

(SC)

CC – SCa

U. S. Census 2000

111,292 (100%)­b

36,208 (100%)c

75,084 (100%)

Voter Registration

88,791 (79.8%)d

26,694 (73.7%)d

62,097 (82.7%)

From OAT

72,277 (64.9%)e

11,057 (30.5%)e

61,220 (81.5%)

PSU Students

37,860 (34.0%)f

Not Available

Census — OAT

39,015 (35.1%)

25,151 (69.5%)

13,864 (18.5%)

aDifference of previous two columns

bU. S. census figures for 2000 from Exhibit A

cU. S. census figures for 2000 from Exhibit B

dCentre County voter registration rolls of July 27, 2001 from Exhibit C

eOccupational Asessment Tax population from Exhibit D

fPenn State University student enrollment at the University Park campus for academic year 2000–2001, excluding foreign students, from Exhibit E

 

31.  Table 1 shows that the number of non-foreign Penn State students at the University Park campus (PSU students) is almost identical to the difference in the adult population of Centre County and the number of people on the Centre County OAT roll. Almost all Penn State students are exempt from the OAT and do not appear on the OAT roll. Further confirmation comes from the fact that the difference between the Census and OAT in State College Borough is 25,151, the estimated number of students residing in that Borough. (The remaining students live in the nearby townships of College, Ferguson, and Patton.)

32.  The preceding demonstrates that the Jury Commission Master List discriminates by occupation. In addition this has a significant effect on the geographical distribution of the Master List. Most of the Penn State students live in State College Borough. While 81.5% of the non-State College population is represented on the Master List, only 30.5% of the State College Borough population is so represented. Students and State College residents cannot get a jury of their peers.

33.  Table 2 shows the age distribution of Centre County residents. Because of the Penn State students, the percent of the young adult population is much higher and the percent of elderly is much lower in State College than in the rest of Centre County. The number of people ≥25 years of age in State College (11,026) is almost identical to the number of people on the OAT from State College (11,057), suggesting that the 18–24 year old age group from State College has been omitted from the OAT.


 

TABLE 2: AGE DSITRIBUTION OF THE ADULT POPULATION (≥18 YEARS) IN CENTRE COUNTY

Age Composition

Centre Countya

State Collegeb

Non-State Collegec

Total Adults (≥18)

111,292 (100%)

36,208 (100%)

75,084 (100%)

18–24 Years

36,383 (32.7%)

25,182 (69.5%)

11,201 (14.9%)

≥25 Years

74,938 (67.3%)

11,026 (30.5%)

63,912 (95.1%)

≥65 Years

14,119 (12.7%)

2,247 (6.2%)

11,872 (15.8%)

aU. S. census figures for 2000 from Exhibit A

bU. S. census figures for 2000 from Exhibit B

cDifference of previous two columns

 

34. The racial composition of Centre County is given in Table 3.

 

TABLE 3: DISTRIBUTION OF SOME ADULT (≥18 YEARS) RACIAL MINORITIES IN CENTRE COUNTY, PA

Race Composition

Centre Countya

PSU Studentsb

Non-PSU Studentsc

Total Population

111,292 (100%)

37,860 (100%)

73,432 (100%)

White — Hispanic

100,613 (90.4%)

33,211 (87.7%)

67,402 (91.8%)

Black and African American

3,090 (2.8)

1,572 (4.2%)

1,518 (2.1%)

Asian and Pacific Islands

4,630 (4.2%)

1,858 (4.9%)

2,772 (3.8%)

Hispanic

1,887 (1.7%)

1,155 (3.1%)

732 (1.0%)

Native American

126 (0.1%)

64 (0.2%)

62 (0.08%)

Other

946 (0.8%)

Not Available

Total Minorities

10,679 (9.6%)

4,649 (12.3%)

6,030 (8.2%)

aU. S. census figures for 2000 from Exhibit A

hPenn State University student enrollment at the University Park campus for academic year 2000–2001, excluding foreign students, from Exhibit E

cDifference of previous two columns.

 

35. The racial minorities are underrepresented on the Master List. Their percentages of proportional representation are:

 

Blacks and African Americans: 75% (2.1/2.8)

Asian and Pacific Islanders: 90% (3.8/4.2)

Hispanic: 59% (1.0/1.7)

Native Americans: 80% (0.08/0.1)

Total Racial Minorities: 85% (8.2/9.6)

 

36. Religious discrimination also exists. It is most pronounced for the Jewish population. The number of adult Jews in Centre County who are not Penn state students is 700-800 according to Dr. David Werner, President of the United Jewish Appeal in Centre County (Exhibit F). Penn State Hillel, The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life, estimates the number of Penn State students who are Jewish to be 3900 (Exhibit G).

37. Based on these estimates we find that there are 4,650 adult Jews in Centre County out of an adult population of 111,292 which is 4.2%. The Penn State Jewish student population is 3900 out of a total Penn State student population of 40,571 at the University Park Campus including foreign students (Exhibit E), which is 9.6%. The adult Jewish population in the Master List is about 750 out of 72,277 in the OAT, which is 1.0%. Thus the Master List represents only 23.8% (1.0/4.2) of the adult Jewish population of Centre County.

38. Even this is not sufficient for Defendant Judge Charles Brown. Before the jury was selected in Plaintiff’s criminal trial, it was announced that the trial date would be September 21, 1998. Defendant Judge Charles Brown, who presided, asked all of those in the Jury Pool who could not serve on that day to identify themselves, so that they could be excused. This date was Rosh Hashanah, a Jewish High Holy Day, so presumably all of the Jews were excused. Plaintiff had notified Defendant Judge Charles Brown and Cheryl Spotts from the Court Administrator ‘s office at the pre-trial conference of July 28, 1998, that this was Rosh Hashanah and that he could not appear. Defendant Judge Charles Brown refused to change the date for trial. On August 3, 1998, the Jury of 14 jurors was selected. After the selection of the Jury, Defendant Judge Charles Brown changed the trial date to October 7, 1998. In this manner Defendant Judge Charles Brown excluded the possibility of any Jewish jurors.

 

VII. Attempts to Obtain Information

 

39.    On June 13, 2001, Plaintiff stopped at the Court Administrator’s Office of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas to obtain the date of the next public meeting of the Centre County Jury Commission. He was told that the Jury Commission does not hold public meetings.

40.    That same day, Plaintiff wrote a letter (Exhibit H) to Defendant Charles C. Brown, Jr. asking for explanations for the failure to hold public meetings, and why the master list and jury arrays are not being selected in public. Plaintiff received no response to this inquiry.

41.    On July 17, 2001, Plaintiff went to the Court Administrators Office of the Centre County Court of Common Pleas at 8:30 AM and requested to see the Master List of potential jurors, the Master Juror List, the Qualified Juror List, the Disqualified Juror List with the reasons for their disqualification, and the Jury Pool. Plaintiff was informed by Defendant Barbara Gallo that Defendant Judge Brown would have to be consulted before such information was released. Defendant Gallo asked Plaintiff why he wanted this information, but Plaintiff refused to provide it.

42.    Plaintiff returned to the Court Administrators Office three times during the morning of July 17, 2001, to obtain the information. The first two times, he was informed that Defendant Judge Brown had not yet made a decision. At the fourth visit of Plaintiff, at 12:04 PM, Defendant Gallo said that Judge Brown required that Plaintiff submit a written letter stating exactly what he wanted and for what purposes he would use the information.

43.    On July 24, 2001, Plaintiff presented Defendant Gallo with a list of questions regarding jury selection (Exhibit I) and a self-addressed return envelope. Defendant Gallo said that she would complete and return the questionnaire within one week. She replied by mail on July 26, 2001 (Exhibit J) saying that Plaintiff’s memo was forwarded to Judge Brown for response. No response was received from Defendant Judge Charles Brown or anyone else.

44.    The Defendants will not release the recent compositions of the Qualified Juror List or the Jury Pool. However Plaintiff was the defendant in two criminal trials in 1998. The composition of his Qualified Juror Lists and Jury Pools are described in three articles written by Plaintiff (Exhibits K, L, and M). A summary is given in Table 4.

 

TABLE 4: GEOGRAPHICAL AND AGE DISTRIBUTION OF PLAINTIFF’S QUALIFIED JUROR LISTS AND JURY POOL

Item

Qualified Juror List (I)

Jury Pool (I)

Qualified Juror List (II)

Jury Pool (II)

Number in List

Date List Available

Date List Used

400

7–24–98

8–3–98

147

7-31-98

8-3-98

400

9–18–98

10–12–98

 

University Park Residents

   Expected Statistically

   Actual

 

47.3

4

 

17

0

 

47.3

1

 

Ages 18–34

   Expected Statistically

   Actual

 

220.4

Not Given

 

78

29

 

220.4

Not Given

 

Ages 18–21

   Expected Statistically

   Actual

 

96.4

Not Given

 

34

4

 

96.4

Not Given

 

 

45.    For the jury selection of August 3, 1998, the Qualified Juror List was made available ten days (including two weekends) before the jury selection date; for the Jury Pool, three days (one working day) before jury selection. Both times were less than the required thirty days.

46.    The statistically expected number of University Park residents in the Qualified Jury List was 47.3; the actual number, 4. The statistically expected number of University Park residents in the Jury Pool was 17; the actual number, 0.

47.    The statistically expected number of 18–34 year old residents in the Jury Pool was 78.3; the actual number, 29. The statistically expected number of 18–21 year olds in the Jury Pool was 34; the actual number, 4.

48.    For the jury selection of October 12, 1998, the Qualified Juror List was made available 24 days before the jury selection, less than the required thirty days. The statistically expected number of University Park residents in the Qualified Jury List was 47.3; the actual number, 1. No information was obtained for the Jury Pool to be used on October 12, 1998, because the case was dismissed before release of the members of the Jury Pool.

 

VIII. Claims

 

49.    The Jury Commission does not hold public meetings nor does it conduct all of its business in public. Specifically some of the jury lists are not chosen in public. These are the Master List, Master Juror List, Qualified Juror List, Disqualified Juror List, and Jury Pool. The failure to conduct business in public violates Pennsylvania Statutes 16 Pa.C.S.A. §460(a) and 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524 and is misfeasance.

50.    None of the lists named in the preceding paragraph are available for public inspection in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(b), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4522, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4523, and 65 P. S. §66.2 and is misfeasance.

51.    The Master List, which is the list of occupational assessment taxpayers, is smaller than the voter registration list in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(a) and is malfeasance.

52.    There is no evidence that the Jury Commission maintains a Disqualified Juror List. The failure to create and maintain such a list is in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4523 and is misfeasance.

53.    The Qualified Juror List and Jury Pool are not available 30 days before use in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524 and is misfeasance.

54.     The Master List and Master Juror List are not randomly selected from the county population. In particular, Penn State students have been omitted. This violates 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(c), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524, Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

55.    Because Penn State students are systematically excluded from the jury lists, there is occupational discrimination in the selection of juries. Thus a Penn State student cannot obtain a jury of his peers, which means that the jury is not impartial. This violates Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U. S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

56.    The jury lists are not representative of the geographical population distribution of the county. In particular, the State College School District is underrepresented. Specifically, the University Park section of the State College Borough is not represented at all in the Jury Pool. Thus a resident in the State College Area School District, and especially in University Park, cannot obtain a jury of his peers, which means that the jury is not impartial. This violates Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U. S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

57.    The jury lists are not representative of the age distribution of the county. In particular, young adults (ages 18–34) are underrepresented. Specifically, the 18–21 year old residents are almost totally excluded in the Jury Pool. Thus a young adult, and especially a person of age 18–21, cannot obtain a jury of his peers, which means that the jury is not impartial. This violates Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U. S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

58.    The jury lists are not representative of the racial distribution of the county. In particular, African Americans, Asians, and Hispanics are underrepresented. Thus a person of a racial minority group cannot obtain a jury of his peers, which means that the jury is not impartial. This violates Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U. S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

59.    The jury lists are not representative of the religious distribution of the county. In particular, Jews are underrepresented. Thus a Jewish resident of the county cannot obtain a jury of his peers, which means that the jury is not impartial. This violates Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, and Amendments VI and XIV to the U. S. Constitution and is malfeasance.

 

IX. Remedies

 

60.    Plaintiff moves that Defendants Brown, DeWitt, and Lose be removed from office as required by Pennsylvania Statute 65 P. S. §121.

61.    Plaintiff moves that Defendants Brown, DeWitt, and Lose be ordered to pay just compensation, as determined by the jury, to the Penn State Student Government or other appropriate Penn State student groups.

62.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to obey state and federal laws and the Constitutions of Pennsylvania and the United States.

63.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to obey Pennsylvania Statutes 16 PaC.S.A. §460(a), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4521(a-c), 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4522, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4523, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §4524, and 65 P. S. §66.2.

64.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to obey Article I, Section 9 of the Pennsylvania Constitution and Amendment VI of the U. S. Constitution.

65.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to conduct Jury Commission business in public. Selection of all jury lists should be public.

66.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to make available all jury lists, including the Disqualified Juror List, for public inspection without reservation or qualification.

67.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to use a Master List which is larger than the voter registration list and is representative of the county demographics.

68.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to include Penn State Students in the Master List, and that all lists contain a statistical representation of such students.

69.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to make available the Qualified Juror List and the Jury Pool at least 30 days prior to selection of the Prospective Jurors.

70.    Plaintiff moves that the Defendants Maxine Ishler and Barbara Gallo be ordered to have the Jury Pool be representative of the occupational, geographical, age, racial, and religious composition of Centre County.

71.    Plaintiff moves that the Court impose any other penalties on any or all of the Defendants that the jury deems reasonable and appropriate.

 

 

April 7ff relief that may be appropriate under the circumstances of this case. s cas.

 should instruct the defendants to hold th Respectfully submitted,

 

 __ ___________________

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

Chair, Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

 

________ August 23, 2001_

Date


VERIFICATION

 

            Subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsifications to authorities, I, JULIAN HEICKLEN, verify that the averments of fact set forth in the foregoing PETITION TO ENFORCE THE LAW are true and correct upon my personal knowledge of information and belief.

 

 

____________________

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

Chair, The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

 

___ August 23, 2001__

Date

 


IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Action

 

Julian Heicklen, Chair

The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

Plaintiff

 

v.

 

Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr. (814–355–6732)

Ruth DeWitt 814–355–6727)

Ann Lose (814–355–6727)

Maxine Ishler (814–355–6727)

Barbara Gallo (814–355–6727)

 

Centre County Courthouse

Bellefonte, PA 16823

 

Defendants

 

 

 

CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE

 

            I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of PETITION TO ENFORCE THE LAW in the above-captioned matter was served on Defendants by depositing the same within custody of the Centre County Sheriff on  August 23, 2001, with instructions to serve to each of the Defendants listed above.

 

 

______________________

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

Chair, The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

 

___ August 23, 2001__

Date


EXHIBITS

 

Exhibit A: U. S. census figures for 2000 from U. S. Census Bureau web page at http://factfinder.census.gov/

Exhibit B: U. S. census figures for 2000 from State College Borough Planning Office

Exhibit C: Centre County voter registration rolls of July 27, 2001 from the Centre County Board of Elections

Exhibit D: Occupational Asessment Tax population from Personal Tax Audit Report for June 11, 2001 from the Centre County Assessment Office

Exhibit E: Penn State University student enrollment at the University Park campus for academic year 2000–2001 from Penn State University web page at http://www.psu.edu/

Exhibit F: Letter of August 15, 2001, from Dr. David Werner, President of the United Jewish Appeal in State College-Bellefonte and one of the Pennsylvania State Chairmen to Whom it may Concern

Exhibit G: Letter of August 13, 2001, from Deena Ultman, Administrator, Penn State Hillel, to Julian Heicklen

Exhibit H: Letter of June 13, 2001, from Julian Heicklen to Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr.

Exhibit I: Memo of July 24, 2001, from Julian Heicklen to Barbara Gallo

Exhibit J: Letter of July 26, 2001, from Barbara Gallo to Julian Heicklen

Exhibit K: J. Heicklen (July 25, 1998) “Venire Composition of Centre County”

Exhibit L: J. Heicklen (August 2, 1998) “Venire Composition of Centre County”

Exhibit M: J. Heicklen (September 19, 1998) “Venire Composition of Centre County”

 


 NOTICE TO PLEAD

 

 

To: Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr. (814–355–6732)

Ruth DeWitt 814–355–6727)

Ann Lose (814–355–6727)

Maxine Ishler (814–355–6727)

Barbara Gallo (814–355–6727)

 

Centre County Courthouse

Bellefonte, PA 16823

 

 

            You are hereby notified to file a written response to the enclosed PETITION TO ENFORCE THE LAW within 20 days from service hereof or judgment may be entered against you.

 

 

_______________________

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

           


IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Action

 

Julian Heicklen, Chair

The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

Plaintiff

 

v.

 

Judge Charles C. Brown, Jr. (814–355–6732)

Ruth DeWitt 814–355–6727)

Ann Lose (814–355–6727)

Maxine Ishler (814–355–6727)

Barbara Gallo (814–355–6727)

 

Centre County Courthouse

Bellefonte, PA 16823

 

Defendants

 

 

MOTION FOR JURY TRIAL

 

 

 

1. The Pennsylvania Constitution, Article I, Section 6 says, in part: “Trial by Jury shall be as heretofore and the right thereof remain inviolate.”

 

2. Plaintiff moves for a trial by jury.

 

____________________

Julian Heicklen, Plaintiff

Chair, The Libertarian Party of Centre County

Calder Square

P. O. Box 11111

State College, PA 16805–1111

Telephone: 814–238–8054

 

 

___ August 23, 2001__

Date