"First the Central Government implemented Federalism therein violating Appellant' rights under Amendment X. Then the prosecutor violated Appellant's rights under IXth Amendment by interfering with the rights between two persons to contract."
Well, now I am convinced. Conviction overturned.
LOL! By far the most nonsensical motion I've ever read, with the proviso that I haven't seen Rufus' masterpiece yet.
Serious question: does anyone know whether Horton has a learning disability and/or is known to have diagnosed cognitive disabilities?
This motion could have been written by a moderate-to-severe stage Alzheimer's patient, a mentally retarded person, or someone who has suffered brain damage and/or is currently on strong psychoactive drugs.
I can't wait to see Rufus' legal tome cribbed from random passages of Black's Law Dictionary and citing to the Magna Carta and Code of Hammurabi.
"America is the land of the free. (Scott-Key v. Great Britain (1775)). The illegal Federal government, through the unconstitutional Bureau of Prisons, has denied my right to be free. On this basis alone, I am being illegally detained and the Federal government has defrauded me, for which I bring claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act and demand my immediate release and the arrest of the trial judge and jurors for kidnapping and illegal detainer. Failure of this Court of Appeals to order this would be contrary to the Geneva Convention and require me to file with the International Criminal Court in the Hague to imprison all Court of Appeals personnel who would be committing crimes against humanity against me. Don't make me go all Medieval on you!"
