36 Rachel Immenu #2
William D. Snyder, Chair, Judiciary Committee, 412
House Office Building, 402 South Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL
Jerusalem, Israel 93228
December 2, 2012
Ms. Brooke Kennerly, Executive Director, Judicial
Qualifications Commission, Room 102, Historic Capitol Building,
Tallahassee, FL 32399-6000
Pam Bondi, Florida Attorney General, Office of
Attorney General, State of Florida, The Capitol PL-01, Tallahassee, FL
Jerry L. Demings, Sheriff , Orange County
Sheriff’s Office, 2500 West Colonial Drive, Orlando,
Captain Nancy DeFerrari, Warden, Orange County
Jail Facilities, 823 W Central Blvd Orlando, FL 32805
Pamela R. Masters, Clerk of Court, Fifth District Court of
Appeal, 300 South Beach Street, Daytona Beach, FL 32114
Belvin Perry, Jr., Chief Judge, Orange County
Courthouse, 425 N. Orange Avenue, Orlando, Florida 32801
E. SCHMIDTER, et al.,
I am writing to request that you take
legal action action against Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. of the Orange
County Court for the following reasons:
I distributed Fully Informed Jury
Association (FIJA) literature at the Orange County Courthouse,
deliberately challenging court orders prohibiting the distribution on
the sidewalk connecting the parking garage and the courthouse, as well
as on most of the courthouse plaza. As a result I was arrested on
August 22, 2011, for contempt of court. My property was seized by
the deputy sheriffs and still has not been returned.
On the same day at the arraignment, Chief
Judge Belvin Perry, Jr. for Orange County presided. I exercised
my U. S. Constitution Amendment V right to remain silent.
For this I was punished.
Judge Perry charged me with contempt of
court. He did not set bail, but confined me to the Orange County
Jail for 22 days until he held a bail hearing. Judge Perry made
no effort to provide me with counsel as required by Amendments VI and
XIV of the U. S Constitution. In addition, Article I, Section
16(a) of the Florida Constitution states:
BELVIN PERRY, JR.,
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, ORLANDO DISION
CASE #: 6:12-CV-1102-ORL-31-KRS
Heicklen and Schmidter v. State of
Appellate Case # 5D113036
Re: Ninth Judicial Circuit Court
in and for Orange and
“to have compulsory
process for witnesses”
I was denied all of those rights. Three summoned jurors
appeared to testify, but five others who filed statements with the
Court were not called for cross examination.
My trial was set for September 1,
2011. Judge Perry, the litigant accuser, presided at the trial
and acted as the prosecutor. I acted as counsel pro se.
Three jurors summoned for other cases and
two deputy sheriffs testified. I had no opportunity to confront any of
these witnesses prior to trial.
None of the witnesses claimed that I had
approached them or targeted jurors, because, in fact, I had done
neither. I had stood on the sidewalk and offered pamphlets to any
passersby. I could not distinguish potential jurors from anyone
I was convicted of criminal contempt, even
though I was arrested for civil contempt, sentenced to 145 days in jail
and fined $200 plus court costs. Then I was returned to jail until my
bail hearing on September 10, 2011, where I was released on $12,000
bail pending appeal.
While in jail, my legal papers were
confiscated and destroyed by prison guards on my day of entry. I
was denied access to the law library during my whole stay of 22
days. Since I was acting as counsel pro se, this made it
difficult to prepare a complete defense. Three written requests to
Judge Perry for a jury trial were ignored. Judge Perry claimed
that he never received them.
An appeal was filed on my behalf within 30
days after the trial by my counsel at that time, Adam Sudbury.
Legal briefs for appellants were submitted both by Counsel Sudbury and
myself in June, 2012
A defense of the conviction was submitted
by Judge Perry on September 2, 2011. In his brief, Judge Perry lied
three times, thus committing three counts of perjury. See:
“to confront at trial adverse witnesses”
“to be heard in person, by counsel”
“to have a speedy and public trial by impartial
was that Appellant Heicklen had approached and targeted jurors.
There was no testimony to that effect by recipients of the pamphlets or
deputy sheriffs. Heicklen never approached nor targeted
anyone. He stood on a public sidewalk and offered pamphlets to
anyone passing by him.
The appellate court required a response
from the state attorneys representing Appellee Perry
No response has been received, nor any request for an extension, from
Judge Perry or his counsels. In fact no further correspondence at
all has been received from them.
To make sure that I did not overlook or
miss anything, I requested in my letter of November 5, 2012 to the
appeals court, with copies to all concerned parties, that all
correspondence of the Appellee’s counsels with the court should
be sent to me by November 20, 2012
No response from any party.
Obviously, neither the counsels for the
Appellee nor the Florida Attorney General are contesting the appeal.
Therefore the conviction is automatically overturned. All the
relevant case documents in my possession are posted at:
1. I request the Florida House of Representatives Judiciary
Committee initiate impeachment proceedings against Judge Perry.
2. I request the Judicial Disciplinary Committee to strip
Judge Perry of his judgeship and license to practice law.
3. I request the Florida Attorney General to initiate
criminal proceedings against Judge Perry for perjury and treason (or at
4. I request the Florida Attorney General to remind the
Orange County Jail of its duty to keep hands off legal documents, allow
all inmates access to the law library, and see that inmate mail to the
courthouse is delivered.
5. I request the Sheriff to return all of my confiscated
6. I request the appellate court to see that I am reimbursed
The second lie was that a U. S. Circuit
Court in Huminski v. Corsones, 396 F. 3d 53 (2004) had upheld a trial
court’s decision to ban expressive speech in the court parking
lot. The district trial court found Judge Corsones guilty of
violating Huminski’s First Amendment rights. The Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld Huminski’s right, but reversed the
decision based on judicial immunity.
In the third claim, Judge Perry stated
that in United States v. Grace, 461 US 171 - 1983, the Supreme Court
upheld U. S. Statute 40 U. S. C. § 13k which permits banning
pamphleteering on court plazas. Actually the Supreme Court
declared that statute unconstitutional. Furthermore the Court
proclaimed that free speech on court plazas could not be banned by
Judge Perry knew that he was lying,
because he had made these claims in another court decision
I had written to him at that time pointing out his errors
In his brief, Judge Perry admitted that in
the Schmidter trial, he asked: “WHERE DO WE END WITH FREE
SPEECH?“ My correct answer is NOWHERE! (U. S. Constitution
Amendment I and Florida Constitution, Article I, Section 4).
a. my attorney fee of $5000,
b. filing fee for this appeal,
c. my expenses in the Orange County Jail,
d. bail bondsman fee of $1200,
e. $22,000 for the time spent in jail,
f. and $100, 000 for aggravation and time devoted to fighting
PRICE OF FREEDOM IS ETERNAL VIGILANCE
Thank you for
Yours in freedom and justice,
Counsel Pro Se
Organizer, Tyranny Fighters
Appellant Julian Heicklen certifies that
copies of this letter of December 2, 2012, have been sent by
E-mail to the following:
JOHN EDWIN FISHER, ESQUIRE Fisher Rushmer, P.A.
JAMIE BILLOTTE MOSES, ESQUIRE Fisher Rushmer, P.A.
Counsel Pro Se
Organizer, Tyranny Fighters