Nevada Supreme Court rebukes judge for too-harsh treatment of defendant

LVRJ logo

john tatro rebukeNevada Supreme Court rebukes judge for too-harsh treatment of defendant

The Supreme Court should rebuke Carson City Judge John Tatro by what he did to Ty Robben by retaliating against Robben with a $500,000.00 dollar bail and 22 days in jail for trumped up charges related to serving a subpoena to former NDOT Director Susan Martinovich who had actually committed a “hit and run” by running over Robben’s foot!

The Carson City Sheriff covered up the incident and the Sheriff, DA Neil Rombardo and Judge Tatro lashed out at Robben, poisoned his jail food and then sent Nevada “bounty hunters” after Robben in Lake Tahoe, CA. Now Robben has filed criminal charges against the Justin Brothers Bail Bond company, their bounty hunter named Doug Lewis. Robben has a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the Justin Bros and he’s filed a Judicial Ethics complaint against the Judge Tatro. Tatro and DA Rombardo continue the relentless retaliation against Robben and are trying to have him incarcerated once again!

Robben is fighting back with massive protests in Carson City Nevada in front of the courthouse and State capital including the Nevada Supreme Court with big signs demanding Judge Tatro and DA Rombardo resign.

The Nevada Supreme Court better clean up the lower courts in Nevada, including the Justice Courts. Most people do not know that a case from the Justice Court can only be appealed to the District Court in most cases, not the Supreme Court. People can suffer serious damage by a deranged Justice Court Judge (as happens in Carson City John Tatro’s court) – have no “trial” with a jury and only appeal to the District Court Judge who is as corrupt as the Justice Court Judge… No oversight and people are very, very outraged about the “manifest abuse of desecration” and flagerant  abuse of authority by acting under the color of law.

The Supreme Court wants a Nevada appellate court and they want voters to shell out millions of tax dollars to fund the scheme. With the recent D- corruption grade Nevada received by the center for Pubic Integrity in 2012, the Supreme MUST CLEAN UP and remove corrupt judges!

The Supreme Court order can be found here: PEREZ (JUAN) VS. DIST. CT. (STATE)

While the District Court, arguably, could have justified jailing Perez under its
contempt power, it violated these plain rules, It never formally held Perez in contempt.
It did not enter an order detailing the contemptuous behavior or specifying the
punishment. It did not cite Perez for criminal contempt or prove it beyond a reasonable
doubt. Instead, the Court summarily remanded him for displaying attitude and held him
without bail. Then in response to Perez’s motion for release or reinstatement of his
previously-posted bail, the Court increased his bail from $3,000,00 to $1,000,000,00
(which is tantamount to no bail given Perez’s financial ability), Other than Perez’s
alleged attitude, the record reveals no reason to warrant good cause for the increase.
The issue presented here does not simply concern the so-called fine print of
constitutional and statutory provisions on bail.

The deeper issue is guarding our founding principle that this is a government of laws, not of men, Rule of law means the “supremacy of regular power as opposed to arbitrary power.” Garner, Bryan A. (Editor in Chief), Black’s Law Dictionary, Abridged 9th Edition, p, 1137, (West Publishing Company, 2010). Permitting a court to increase bail based on a defendant’s demeanor is the mark of arbitrary power, Allowing it to justify its decision after the fact and under the guise of a defendant’s criminal history also exemplifies arbitrary power. Approving this under the court’s contempt power but relieving the court of its due process obligations prevents the ability to even review for capricious incarcerations, Our State in particular-with an elected judiciary-prizes accountability and safeguards against
misuses of judicial power, See Goldman v, Nevada Comm’n on Judicial Discipline, 108
Nev. 251, 256 (1992) (“Nevadans have historically manifested a pronounced sensitivity to potential abuses of judicial power.”); see also Houston v, Eighth Judicial Dist, Court I ex rel. County of Clark, 122 Nev. 544, 553 (2006) (noting contempt power should be  used with care and circumspection).

No matter a defendant’s insolence, the rule of law still protects him. Despite the daily challenge of presiding over rude defendants with poor attitudes, the rule of law does not accept misbehavior becoming the basis for setting bail.

…Petitioner later appeared in district court for the appointment of counsel after his retained attorney withdrew from representation. After petitioner thanked the district court for appointing new counsel, the district court informed the petitioner, “You’re remanded.
Thank you. An attitude like that, you can sit in jail.” Petitioner remained in jail for fifteen days without bail. Upon petitioner’s motion for setting of reasonable bail, the district court reiterated that petitioner had a “terrible attitude in court.” Petitioner apologized. The district court then denied petitioner’s request for bail citing his prior narcotics-related convictions, failure to appear in court twelve years earlier in a different case, and prior use of multiple social security numbers and aliases. After petitioner’s court appointed public defender made a second request for bail to be set, the district court set bail at $1,000,000. At a subsequent hearing to stay the proceedings so that the petitioner could file this petition, the district court instructed petitioner’s counsel to make sure to inform this court about petitioner’s “attitude” in district court. The Nevada Constitution guarantees the people of Nevada the right to bail in non-capital offenses and prohibits the district court from imposing excessive bail. See Nev. Const. art. 1, §§ 6 and 7; see also NRS 178.484(1) (“[A] person arrested for an offense other than murder of the first degree must be admitted to bail.” (emphasis added)); St. Pierre v. Sheriff, 90 Nev. 282, 286, 524 P.2d 1278, 1280 (1974) (“[O]ur Constitution does not encompass inclusion of a non-capital offense as non-bailable.”). “This traditional right to freedom before conviction permits the unhampered preparation of a defense, and serves to prevent the infliction of punishment prior to conviction.” Stack v. Boyle, 342 U.S. 1, 4 (1951). In deciding a reasonable amount for bail the district court may consider “the nature of the offense charged, the penalty which may be inflicted, the probability of the appearance of the accused, his pecuniary condition, his character and reputation, and the circumstances surrounding the case relative to the likelihood of conviction.” Ex parte Jagles and Varnes, 44 Nev. 370, 195 P. 808 (1921); see also NRS 178.498; NRS 178.4853. However, “Bail must not be. . . more than the accused can reasonably be expected under the circumstances to give, for if so it is substantially a denial of bail.” Ex parte Malley, 50 Nev. 248, 253, 256 P. 512, 514 (1927).
Our review of the record reveals that the district court violated the Nevada Constitution in two ways. It denied the petitioner bail for fifteen days and then imposed a bail amount which greatly exceeded the amount the petitioner could reasonably be expected to pay. As the real party in interest notes in its answering brief, the district court imposed a bail amount that was fifty times greater than the Clark County standard bail schedule for category B felonies. In light of the district court’s failure to consider all of the relevant factors, see NRS 178.498, its stated reason for remanding petitioner to custody, petitioner’s indigent status, and the amount of bail, we can only conclude that the district court was attempting to punish petitioner for his attitude without utilizing the procedures provided for in Nevada law. See NRS 22.030(1) (explaining when a person may be punished summarily for contempt); NRS 22.010 (defining contempt). For these reasons, we conclude that the district court manifestly abused its discretion by remanding petitioner to custodywithout bail for fifteen days and imposing excessive bail. See State v.Dist. Ct. (Armstrong), 127 Nev. , 267 P.3d 777, 779-80 (2011)
(discussing when a writ of mandamus will issue). We therefore

ORDER the petition GRANTED AND DIRECT THE CLERK OF THIS COURT TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS instructing the district court to vacate its order setting bail at $1,000,000, set bail at the original amount imposed by the justice court, and recuse itself from presiding over this matter.
Hardesty,  cc: Chief Judge, Eighth Judicial District Hon. Doug

By FRANCIS MCCABE – LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

rjDistrict Court Judge Doug Smith didn’t like the way Juan Perez said “Thank you.” – So the judge locked Perez up in jail for 15 days and then raised his bail from $3,000 to $1 million.

On Tuesday, the Nevada Supreme Court rebuked Smith, ordering Perez’s bail returned to $3,000 and the case moved to another judge’s courtroom.

The district court manifestly abused its discretion by remanding (Perez) to custody without bail for fifteen days and imposing excessive bail,” stated the Supreme Court order signed by justices Michael Cherry, James Hardesty and Ron Parraguirre.

Continue reading

We’re in the mix for $115,000.00 dollars in the Alex Jones InfoWAR “Operation Paul Revere”

alex jones paul rev

Online Virtual Film Festival

Three (3) Cash Prizes will be awarded:
Grand Prize – $100,000 cash
Second Place – $10,000 cash
Third Place – $5,000 cash

We can mix a video and tell our stories of how we’re using the Internet to expand out on-the-street protests against local and State corruption here in Nevada and California. The protests serve as a beacon and are “eye candy” to passers by.  The massive signs and CRIME SCENE banner  bring light to the issues and can’t be ignored when driving by the State Capital or the Reno and Carson City courthouses.

A protest comes and goes, but a “movement” stays and grows.”

We have a catalog of videos and documentaries and we’ll enter a mash-up including some new stuff and a very special surprise, a custom InfoWAR banner for Alex Jones and his crew for the Bilderberg meeting demonstrations. Here is some of out work and we’ll post out contest entries here very soon. Continue reading

Director of Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline David Sarnowski retiring

nv judicial ethics

David Sarnowski, general counsel and executive director of the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline, is retiring after 32 years in state service. Sarnowski has been in his present post for 11 years and said he doesn’t know what he will do after leaving state government June 30, 2013. His retirement was disclosed at a meeting of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee on Friday.

The commission will select a replacement for the job, which pays $137,145 a year.

tatro judgeWe’re reviewing Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline and previous complaint against Carson City judges like 2006 Nevada Appeal Judicial ethics complaint filed against Justice of Peace Tatro. Look for new complaints against Judge Tatro to be filed and shown here ASAP. We see “Judge” Tatro abusing his “authority” by acting under the color of law and  committing “crimes against humanity and public decency”.

Why in the world does the Nevada Supreme Court allow these so called “judges” (Tatro has no law degree) to act in this manner when they are trying to convince taxpayers to support a new Intermediate Appeals Court in Nevada?

A Carson City woman who previously accused bailiffs at the capital’s district court of violating her rights, manhandling, and injuring her during an arrest has filed a complaint with the Nevada Commission on Judicial Discipline accusing Justice of the Peace John Tatro of bias.Tonya Brown last month lost her lawsuit in federal court against the city and the bailiff who arrested her for trespassing.Brown said she believes Tatro was biased against her in her justice court trial on the trespass charges in which she was convicted. She said Tatro’s comments were so biased that, during her federal court civil-rights trial, …

Carson City Judge Tatro

Carson City Judge Tatro

Continue reading

Protesters gather in front of Reno Nevada home of Federal Prosecutor Ron Rachow

On November 23, 2012 Protesters gather in front of Reno Nevada home of Federal Prosecutor Assistant U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Rachow

Reno police (“RPD”) were apparently called by Mr. Rachow and RPD let the protesters continue their free speech and exercise their 1st amendment rights in front of Mr. Rachow’s Reno home. Thank you RPD, Guy Felton also thanks  Steven Pitts and salutes the RPD,  and we appreciate the professionalism of the RPD.

There is the Nolan Klein case where the prosecuting attorneyRon Rachow, intentionally withheld all of the exculpatory evidence that showed that someone else was responsible for the May 9, 1988 Payless Shoe Store crime. This was discovered in 2009 when Judge Adams ordered DA Richard Gammick to turn over the entire file in the Nolan Klein case. In the file were the handwritten notes that he was not going to turn over any of the exculpatory evidence that some else was responsible for that crime as well as the 3 other crimes, ALL HIDDEN FROM THE DEFENSE AND JURY.  Not only did Mr. Rachow withhold the evidence that would have cleared an innocent man, several employees within the Washoe District Attorney’s Office knew about this AND SAID NOTHING SINCE 1988. Mr. Rachow defied a 1988 Court Order by Judge Peter Breen to turn over all of the evidence.
Ron Rachow killed an innocent man

Ron Rachow killed an innocent man

In fact, in a September 22, 2008  interview given by Washoe County District Attorney, Dick Gammick regarding Mr. Klein being considered for a Pardon, Gammick publicly admitted that they opened up the DNA and tested it.  Shortly thereafter, ADA John Helzer appeared before the Nevada Pardons Board on October 29, 2008 stating prior to Mr. Klein ever  being considered for a Pardon he heard things so looked in Mr. Klein’s file. He looked, he saw and HE SAID NOTHING ABOUT THE OTHER SUSPECT.
     The Nevada Pardons Board denied Mr. Klein a Pardon, thereby, by their denying Mr. Klein a Pardon one can only conclude that they have to had to condone the Washoe County District Attorney’s Office of Brady Violations.
     After the Pardons Board Hearing, Mr. Klein’s attorney’s filed a Motion for Dick Gammick to turn over the DNA test results.  Washoe County District Court Judge Brent Adams issued and Order for Gammick to turn over the DNA test results and included the entire file in the Nolan Klein case.  On June 10, 2009 the file was turned over.  No tests results have ever been turned over.
     Just prior to Mr. Klein’s death in 2009 he learned the truth what the Washoe County District Attorney’s office did and how far several of members of the office went to coverup what Ron Rachow did.
     The Sparks Police Department’s theory was that Mr. Zarsky was responsible for this crime as well as other crimes in which those other victims cleared my innocent brother, Nolan Klein.
Sparks Tribune – Nevada in Brief In a 2010 video I  have Richard “Dick” Gammick on tape why he continued to employ Mr. Steven Barker who had been cited several times in several different cases for withholding evidence, even DNA that exonerated the person.
      In September the film crew will be coming to the Reno/Carson area to film the documentary movie “Lawless America”. Nolan Klein’s case will be featured as a part of the documentary movie on judicial corruption that will be presented to the United States Congress and the Sundance Film Festival.  Several requests thus far have been sent to Mr. Gammick and still no response.

Please See http://www.justicefornolanklein.net

Please See Nevada Prison Watch

Please See The Nolan Klein story on Lawless America

Ron Rachow must be charged with the murder of Nolan Klein. – Tonja Brown

Protesters gather in front of Reno, Nevada U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Rachow home 11/23/2012

Protesters gather in front of Reno, Nevada U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Rachow home 11/23/2012

Ron Rachow protest

Protesters gather in front of Reno, Nevada U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Rachow home 11/23/2012

Continue reading

Nevada Intermediate Court of Appeals Amendment – Why not get the lower courts right first?

Nevada is one of only 10 states + DC without an intermediate appellate court. Like many other states, the state’s constitutional article related to the judiciary locks the state into a supreme court, district courts, justice of the peace courts, and (if the legislature approves, which it has), municipal courts. In 1980 and 1992 voters rejected efforts to amend the constitution to allow, but not require, the legislature to create an intermediate appellate. A third attempt in 2010 (Question 2) was rejected 47/53%.

Nevada judges are some of the highest paid in the Nation.

Nevada’s jurists are well compensated in comparison to their counterparts in other states, according to a 2011 report by the National Center for State Courts (NCSC). Judges for the state Supreme Court are paid $170,000 annually, which puts Nevada well above the average and 10th on the list of best-paying states. The median salary for state Supreme Court justices across the United States is $146,917.

According to transparentnevada.com Carson City judges are paid (2011) as follows:

John Tatro: $125,707.40 *

Tom Armstrong: $66,393.76 (partial pay from 2011) *

James Todd Russell: $172,080.96 *

James Wilson: $159,561.74 *

Carson City DA Neil Rombardo made $162,641.05 in 2011 *

Carson City Department of “Alternative Sentencing” Chief Rory Planetamade $147,909.99 in 2011. 

Other “Alternative Sentencing” public servants are paid very, very well and others not:

Catherine “Maddog” Summers was paid $113,597.47 in 2011.

Martin Hale was only paid $33,073.80 in 2011.

* This does not include bribes, kickbacks and other RICO Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act – “payments” that remain unreported.

A Carson City Justice/Municipal Court “Judge” (Justice of the Peace “JP”) only requires an education level of a High School Diploma – No higher education is required like say a degree in law!

From Carsonnow.org: The qualifications to be a candidate are established by Nevada State Law, (NRS 4.010) which states that a Justice of the Peace for Carson City must:

— Be a qualified elector

— Not have been removed from judicial office by the Legislature or removed or retired from judicial office by the Commission on Judicial Discipline

— Have a high school diploma or its equivalent as determined by the State Board of Education

— Reside in Carson City

The base pay range for the Justice of the Peace/Municipal Judge is $75,000 to $105,257.36 per year. The actual starting salary will be determined by the Carson City Board of Supervisors and will be based on the successful applicant’s education and experience.

California pays its high court judges the most of any state, with annual salaries of $218,237. But the pay scale varies widely for jurists in Nevada’s other neighboring states. Arizona pays its Supreme Court judges $155,000, while Utah pays them $145,350. The annual salary for high court judges in Oregon is $125,688, while Idaho pays just $119, 506.In general jurisdiction trial courts, Nevada judges are paid $160,000. The state is ranked 8th on the generosity list in this category. he median salary for general trial courts across the United States is $132,500.

The Survey of Judicial Salaries is published by the NCSC with information provided by state court administrative offices across the United States. The NCSC is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the modernization of court operations and the improvement of justice at the state and local levels throughout the country. It functions as an extension of the state court systems.

The Nevada Intermediate Court of Appeals Amendment may appear on the 2014 ballot in the state of Nevada as a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The measure would establish an intermediate court of appeals in the state. State Senator Michael Roberson claimed that the state’s courts are overloaded with cases, which is why the measure is being proposed. If approved, the court would use existing facilities to operate. According to reports, the measure’s $1.3 million cost would be used for salaries and other staff requirements.

A similar measure was found on the November 2, 2010 statewide general election ballot, where it was rejected by voters.

Nevada must get its judicial act together before Taxpayers allow millions more tax dollars to fuel the troubled Nevada judicial industrial complex.

Citizens and Taxpayers must demand competent judges that follow the laws and the constitutions of the United States and Nevada.

In January 2012 the Las Vegas Review Journal did a series of stories called “Judging the Judges”: Nevada high court justices again ask for appeals court

See the excellent LVRJ Story here: http://www.lvrj.com/news/judging-the-judges-nevada-high-court-justices-again-ask-for-appeals-court-136498223.html

Here are some of the reader comments:

Nevada judicial reform

Nevada judicial reform

We propose these standards as presented for the worst State, Georgia: http://www.lawlessamerica.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=716:candidate-for-judge-introduces-state-legislation-designed-to-reform-the-legal-and-judicial-process-changes-desperately-needed-part-1&catid=104:initiatives&Itemid=105

The business-as-usual methodology in Nevada’s courts must change.  Nevada received a D- grade for CORRUPTION from the Center for public integrity in 2012. The “Judicial Accountability” section got a D+ grade and this is unacceptable and must not be rewarded by expanding an already corrupt system.

Nevada corruption report card 2012

Nevada corruption report card 2012