There are only thirteen which show yet there were more and believe you-me, these courts site the lies as justification in other rulings! I need to vent because my briefs as a pro se litigant have to be focused on responding to the merits of the case, which is jack-shit! The court shouldn't have even docketed the eviction case against me! ! I paid my freaking rent!
And my housing complaint needs to address the the continuous abuse and neglect of maintenance, as well as illegal intruders!
I need to get my keyboard out .. I will do my best to place things in chronological order. Just keep in mind that I have briefs to prepare and am very overwhelmed with things. Even leaving my apartment is so stressful because they steal and vandalize - illegally entering.
There are only 13 opinions/rulings in the system but I need to do more searching because I had a lot more cases than that and alot more activity! For example, Appellate rulings on cases which they deliberately withheld trial court rulings!
I have to type them because they will be difficult for you to see since they are deceptively typed with SMALL FONT!
1. Bradley v Barber
139 Conn App 146 (2012) 54 A 3d 1080
139 Conn App 146
Appellate Court of Connecticut
Anne M. Bradley
V
Jerald S Barber et al THERE WAS NO ET AL!
No. 33793
Argued September 21, 2013
Decided November 13, 2012
Appellate Court of Connecticut...November 12, 2012....138 Conn App 146 ...54A 3d 1980
The plaintiff Anne Bradley appeals from the judgment of dismissal rendered pursuant to PB 14-3. The court has reviewed the record, briefs and oral argument thoroughly in this case and has considered the applicable law. We find no error by the trial court in its order dismissing the action.
Citations: 139 Conn App 146, 54 A 3d 1080 (Mem)
Attorney Barber defaulted and also committed a crime by failing to go to court when he was subpoena'd! The court granted the subpeona! I did that to secure my rights since I figured he would fail to appear! Instead, his "secretary" named STEPHANIE WILLIAMS went to the court only at the time he was supposed to appear and said he couldn't make it because he had a sick child - his wife or x-wife could have taken care of the child and no doubt is did nothing for the child and there was no proof!
Attorney Barber stole my $2300 retainer promising he would sue the West Haven Police as well as the University for the illicit arrest and abuse I went through - to include these scumbag crooks forcing me to Yale Hospital, which was KIDNAPPING. They included the abuse, to include being drugged and raped there to teach me a lesson that I don't matter!
Casename was State v Bradley, I was illicitly arrested on 6/16/2025 when I went to pick up my book in the afternoon. I needed the morning to complete Housing Authority papers, applying for Section 8. 360 State Street was marked to be constructed. (In 2009, I followed up with my application because the BOZZUTOS were supposed to take my Qualifying application for Section 8 and process me but they didn't - and some good people, probably FBI, pointed it to their attention in 2012!) I was charged with RISK OF INJURY which is a charge to a child, that is how damned incompetent the police officer was. He was only interested in hype since RISK OF INJURY is a big deal! The judge changed it to RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT, another misdemeanor which requires the VICTIM on record to submit a letter of complaint, notarized, unless the victim was incompetent. They recorded the victim to be the University President, Steven Kaplan! I never even met him in person! He helped me get processed quickly so I could attend the upcoming semester and put the bad experiences behind me. HIS SECRETARY WAS A WOMAN WHO I SAT BY IN CHURCH! I had no idea she worked for the University, let alone the President's office! She was a liar through and through and her daughter, about 10 years younger than me, also was a liar! She said she was disabled from a car accident and could not work! SHE WAS A SECRETARY AT THE UNIVERSITY, I think she work in the Provost Office.
This was a criminal case only because of them and the prosecutor was LAWRENCE MARK HURLEY, who was arrested for embezzling court money and money from the Prosecutor's union - which he obviously did all the time he was there! 19 years! Yet the judge in Middletown limited the state police from auditing to three years - even though it resulted in over 100 charges of embezzlement - a total of over $200,000 stolen from both locations! He forged checks and deposited them in his hidden accounts, which he purchased at a store - prepaid accounts!
I AM TARGETED BECAUSE I AM AGAINST CORRUPTION!
JERALD BARBER STOLE MY MONEY AND DID NOTHING, CONSPIRING WITH LAWRENCE MARK HURLEY! He refused to give me my money back!
================================================================================
Insert :
This is missing from the Westlaw and Appellate records!
AC 30029 - this was my appeal of the trial ruling. The judge went along with the ruling; rather than set it aside which he could have done!
Then judge x-hole rules acquittal as if he made it on his own damn motion!
It was a trick because I had submitted my appeal and other motions!
Once I withdrew my appeal, the State entered appeal of acquittal - a totally UNLAWFUL action! Acquittals cannot be appealed. Setting ASIDE could have been appealed!
I found some documents to support what happened since the court frauds RECORDS, frauds the facts, and more!
Some notes are missing here ..it began with
State v Anne Bradley (illicitly arrested by officer for RISK OF INJURY (which is of a child, duh) - then Lawrence Mark Hurley changed it to RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT - fudging records, not modifying charge or explaining anything. He just wanted to convict me. Abd he got caught embezzling after statute of limitations was up on this ππ© case. My Motion To Dismiss due to Statute of Limitations was shoved under the rug! Judge CRONIN expected to grant it. He said my motion was quite compelling. Then the LAWLESS court system transferred him! I got stuck with Judge Carnival Ronan and he spoke in circles and could give a crap about any motion I submitted because it didn't have pictures! ...I typed this case info...but it must have been deleted -especially for the Italian sausage head Russo who came up with the VS about my using glue when I wasn't licensed. I will look at this more later. It's been a long day. - posted 9/3/2025
6/16/2006;
These court morons seem to think they can make a movie of this - claiming in court I used glue that I was not licensed to use - and voila, the prosecutor was made a judge for being such a good liar....
This guy better not make things in
Connecticut! He'll get arrested for gluing!
I may insert the next page here since I wasn't finished explaining the REAL facts of the State vs James case! The f*king court gets all my work appropriately prepared and they don't do a damn thing because they can always rely on my mother and siblings to say I'm guilty so they can build their public value as they had when I lived in upstate NY.
My mother died in August 2024. I wouldn't have typed the above. In fact. This landlord wanted to scarf up anticipated inheritance so they filed a fraudulent eviction, stealing what they figured were my only copies of the rent checks so I couldn't prove otherwise,! Meantime REAL business landlords are renting apartments. Unfortunately they don't take Section 8. Who could blame them? HUD money has been so obscunded! Even used to pay for transgender operations when Obama was in office!
My sister refused to even attend an unemployment hearing to vouch for me being truthful. I was fired! They said I quit and I was refused unemployment! My relatives could have cared less about my livelihood. How many people can relate to this when they read it?
Yet that same sister took the side of a paedophile priest who poisoned my father with arsenic or the like to make him bleed out - rather than support my efforts to help Dad!
She didn't even know him, except talked to him in the damn phone - why she would talk to him was to DECEIVE me! Her sister!
I'll stop with that rant. It was all so painful to see my relatives obsess over killing their own father. And they got away with it!
π΄ I am providing several pages here. I doubt I will have time to create a blog of papers unless I just say "Read at your own Risk" because they won't be in proper order
Illicit Arrest No. 2
*
Illicit arrest in 2016 - state police stalked me for 40 minutes in the lobby. They knew if they came to my apartment, I wouldn't let them in and would call FBI Agent Aldenburg's voicemail because they have no right to stalk me or cold-call me like a Fuller Brush salesman! They are so outside the law, which actually keeps them employed! Many good state troopers left their jobs after the Petit murders - fully knowing it was an inside job and the state covered up for it! The media claimed many left due to trauma - not hardly! It was due to CORRUPTION BY THE STATE COVERING UP FOR THE CONTRACTED DERLECTS WHO KIDNAPPED AND MURDERED THE FAMILY WITH POLICE OUTSIDE OF THE HOME NOT DOING A DAMN THING TO SAVE THEM!
AND WHERE WAS DR. PETIT? HE USED A SCALPEL TO SLASH HIS FOREHEAD AND SAID THEY HIT HIM WITH A BAT! HE LEFT THE BASEMENT BEFORE THE HOUSE WAS BURNED DOWN AND HERE THE MOM AND DAUGHTERS WERE BURNING TO DEATH AS POLICE DO NOTHING BUT CALL 911!
A lot of money was generated and obviously paid alot of people off! Plus made Dr. Petitva multimillionaire before he married the niece who was spitting image of Jennifer
Hawk-Petit!
Me: Where is the complaint from the alleged victim?
Judge x-hole: I don't understand
I learned a lot of things from Lori Semrau! To make her the alleged victim - then not give me a letter of complaint, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY LAW - MADE THE WHOLE CASE A SHAM!
THE ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS IN THIS LAWLESS STATE!
Back to Illicit Arrest No. 1....
I appealed the jury's verdict!
#30029!
They fraud records more by adding the state's "Notice Of Intent To Appeal" - the damn date is 7/7/2008, same date of the appeal! Apparently they couldn't get away with backdating it more. Jill Driscoll, the chief clerk who replaced Eileen who sleeze her way through her job, was probably holding that position by then since Hurley was arrested by state police on over 100 counts of embezzlement....
WTF!
The court would not have been able to issue me an appeal number if that Notice Of Intent was in place and the prosecutor would have stopped my appeal.
I filed my appeal the day of the trial and filed several motions by the end of the next day!
I had to have submitted the preliminary documents verified but I could not print them - maybe they're in microfiche which gave much weight to my defense and the courts played more Devil's Chessboard tactics! They are nothing but f*king FRAUDS here!
Completely lawless!
Re: My appeal form below
Approved on 7/9!
I wouldn't have withdrawn what had not been approved yet!
Forms are frauded!
Lawrence Mark Hurley used a chemical to remove signatures on checks right in the courthouse! He and Russo, et al obviously did it on court documents!
He stole hundreds of thousands of dollars - if not MILLIONS! The judge denied state police request to audit more years due to obvious probable cause!
The judge treated it as an interest-free loan and ordered Hurley to pay it back, changing over 100 counts of embezzlement to one count larceny, one count forgery!
The state's appeal was dated July 7, 2008 - their backdated fraudulent notice of intent to appeal was approved -
I did not get a copy because it was wedged in the record! My appeal was approved; whereas if they really issued that, it wouldn't have been!
This Notice Of Intent was never handed to me; because it was a fraudulent document placed in the record to allude the State had a right to appeal before I did - oh, but the judge forgot, WTF, and HAD to approve the appeal I submitted, AC 30029
Frauding records in the court is so commonplace - especially since Lawrence Mark Hurley was there removing signatures on checks and forging them FOR YEARS.So what did his oath-taking subordinates do when this supervisory prosecutor forged checks? Nothing!!!
And SHE, Melanie Cradle was too busy rock-a-
bye babying apparently! She worked at that courthouse for years!
The bow broke on the Titanic; The Boe-ings supposedly broke on September 11; Bowe Bugdahl abandoned post and taught al Qaeda how to bomb the tanks so they could kill off the Navy Seal Team Six after they got pissed when they discovered it wasn't bin Laden who died - yet they were ordered to shoot him in the head; and don't forget Beau is Biden, who was really Robert Biden. Obama had Joe Biden call Joe III Hunter and Robert Beau weird nicknames that never surfaced before - as a means for coverup of Obama crimes on Bowe Burgdhal and their hunting for Navy Seal Team Six and so many more ...both sons were satanic collateral...."Beau" died of a brain tumor that was cancerous/John Kerry's daughter played up to the son of the Iranian official so he would marry her and voila, he became a Harvard Doctor specializing in brain cancer Devil's Chessboard tactics made it seem like the Iranian official's son killed him!
So, Attorney Cradle's name became quite useful to the wordsmiths.
And when I was illicitly arrested and the case was a year past statute of limitations, she mosied over to me to fulfill Lawrence Mark Hurley 's dream to convict me even though he was indicted on at least 100 counts of embezzlement without taking one step into federal court!
If you see any Due Process in this, it must be they named one of the prosecutors that name!
Illicit Arrest No. 1 π
My motion was to Acquit! Not vacate guilty plea! Russo lied so much, worked hand in hand with Lawrence Mark-The-Embezzler Hurley
He wasn't arrested because of anyone in Milford reporting him - just the opposite! Which is why they decided to break laws to get me convicted for nothing I did that was wrong!
Guilty PLEA - not the jurors' ruling! I refused to plea because they had no probable cause! Judge x-hole said, "then I will enter pleas of not guilty" - completely illegal and they conspired with each other! - posted 9/4/2025
There was no MOTION TO VACATE GUILTY PLEA! I WAS ACQUITTED! TRIAL JUDGE RULES THE STATE COULD APPEAL ACQUITTAL BASED ON CASE STATE VS JAMES - A FRAUDED CASE TO FIT THEIR WANTS. Mr James was not on prison one day. The trial judge dismissed the case and the judge died of a heart attack!
I will post the frauded State vs James case here. It is 10 pages. Bear with me ..
I will type all this also... bear with me. I'll be back tomorrow. Posted 8/27/2025 10:10pm
π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄
STATE V JAMES, 261 CONN 395 (2002)
Note, this is the only page I have, yet you will see the records are altered when I type the 11 pages.
In fact, this is so legible, I will just begin typing the 11 pages....NOTICE THE DATE: My case was 2006...to 2012 - they forced probation on this criminally-managed case and the probation stopped after a few months of them further proving they were the criminals, not me!
261 Conn 395
Supreme Court of Connecticut
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V
JOSEPH ALEXANDER JAMES
NO 16591
ARGUED MAY 20, 2002
DECIDED AUG 13, 2002
Synopsis
Defendant was charged with five marijuana-related offenses. Lie! There was only one case! There may have been 5 COUNTS. Not separate offenses! The Superior ...I need to make a phone call...brb...done.
The Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford, McMahon, J., granted defendant's motion to suppress written confession and evidence of a shipping receipt, dismissed information, and denied state's request for permission to appeal. What REALLY happened was the trial judge through out the case! And he died from a heart attack right after that! Mr. And Mrs. James told me! He only submitted a deposition he was doing his job delivering a package that was accepted in Shipping and Receiving, leaving it for an employee! State appealed from the denial. The Appellate Court dismissed appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, 64 Conn. App. 495, 779 A. 2d 1288. Granting state's petition for certification to appeal, the Supreme Court, NORCOTT, J. Held that (1) trial court has abused its discretion in denying the state permission to appeal on a question of law if the state demonstrates that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason, a court could resolve the issues in a different manner, or the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further; (2) trial court's denial of state's request for permission to appeal from determination that probable cause did not exist for defendant's arrest was abuse of discretion, and (3) probable cause existed for defendant's arrest in connection with package delivered to a company after shipping service's drug-sniffing dogs detected marijuana in package.
A West Hartford police officer impersonated a FedEx driver and dropped off the package! That would be a guarantee that the package was safe if he was really a FedEx driver - and he impersonated a FedEx driver WITHOUT FEDEX'S PERMISSION! He kept the suit in his officer apparently whenever he felt like entrapping someone!
Judgment of Appellate Court reversed and case remanded.
The shit gets deeper!!!!
Attorneys and Law Firms
**823 *396 Marjorie Allen Dauster, senior assistant state's attorney, with whom, on the brief, were James E. Thomas, state's attorney, and Victor Carlucci, Jr. Assistant state's attorney for the appellant (state)
*397 Nicholas P. Cardwell, Hartford with whom, on the brief, was Matthew J. Costello, for the appellee (defendant)
*395 BORDEN, NORCOTT, PALMER, VERTEFEUILLE and ZARELLA, Js
Opinion
NORCOTT, J
Following our grant of certification, the state appeals from the Appellate Court's dismissal of its appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The state claims that the Appellate Court improperly (1) refused to incorporate the inquiry of Lozada v Deeds, 498 U.S. 430, 432, 111 S. CT 860, 112 L. Ed 2d 956 denials of state's appeal, The state also request that this court exercise its general supervisory power and review its claim that the trial court improperly concluded that the police lacked probable cause to arrest the defendant. We reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court.
FedEx Fraud, a detective, brought in a package, which was presumed safe. Packages are supposed to have packing slips without having to open them. The slip would be on the outside. In this case, the package was a personal order, which the company apparently allowed. Since it was via FedEx, it was presumed to be safe. So they told Me. James to just go give it to him or leave it in his work area. CHAIN OF CUSTODY is not possessing! In fact the fraudulent detective should have been arrested!
The defendant, Joseph Alexander James, was charged with criminal attempt to possess four ounces or more of marijuana in violation of Cenera Statutes Sections 53a-49 (a) (2)~2 and 21a-279 (b...They are making my phone lose power yet I have it plugged in to a batter fully charged! I have to return in a little while - to let this charge up. WTF!!!!
I am finally resuming. 7:38pm 8/28/2025
possession of four *398 ounces or more of marijuana in **824 violation of General Statutes Section 21a-279 (b), conspiracy to transport with intent to sell one kilogram or more of marijuana in violation of General Statutes Section 53a-48 (a)~4 and 21a-278 (b)~5, criminal attempt to possess with intent to sell one kilogram or more of marijuana in violation of Sections 53a-49 (a)(2) and 21a-278(b), and possession with intent to sell one kilogram or more of marijuana in violation of Sections Section 21a-278 (b). The trial court, McMahon J., granted the defendant's motion to suppress his post arrest voluntary statement and evidence of a shipping receipt obtained ina search incident or his arrest on the grounds that the police lacked probable cause for the underlying arrest. This suppression led to a dismissal of the charges.
Dismissal of the charges was because there was a fraudulent long form! Mr. James was on-the-job just delivering a box -- he was doing his job! He could have cared less what was in the box! FedEx is supposed to be the ones to validate it as safe! So Detective Happy Ass Farms tried to entrap Mr. James and he framed himself - setting himself up for a lawsuit by FedEx! JUDGE MCMAHON - OR THE JUDGE WHO WANTED TO DISMISS THE CASE - HAD AN UNTIMELY HEART ATTACK WHICH KILLED HIM! I am not sure if he was the judge who tried it. If I recall, the judge wanted to dismiss it without trial. The records may be frauded about a trial even. Mr. James had never been arrested before, either. He and his wife raised 5 kids! Finding the opinion of Judge McMahon would be a desire of mine but it is all such bullshit with it comes to the courts here! Almost all! There are a few good judges. Like this judge who considered the arrest a sham! Pursuant to Section 54-96, the state requested permission to file an appeal. The trial court denied that motion. The state appealed to the Appellate Court from that denial, and sought to challenge on that appeal the granting of the motion to suppress. The Appellate Court upheld The trial court's denial of permission to appeal, and did not reach the substantive merits of the case because it had dismissed the state's appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. *399 State v James, 64 Conn. App 495, 501, 779, A 2d 1288 (2001),
This certified appeal followed.~6
The following facts and procedural history are relevant for the resolution of the state's claims in this appeal. After a "controlled delivery"~7 Mr James was doing his job! What about after a controlled entrapment of the lame detective? of a package containing marijuana by an undercover police detective to the defendant's workplace in West Hartford, Detective DUFAS wore a FedEx uniform which he kept handy in his office whenever he felt like arresting someone! the defendant was arrested for attempted possession of four ounces or more of marijuana, possession of four ounces or more of marijuana, He did not possess it! He had a chain of custody as a deliverer, it was processed through RECEIVING - THIS IS BEYOND JUDICIAL MALPRACTICE! IT IS OUTRIGHT STUPID! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that! Conspiracy to transport with intent to sell one kilogram or more of marijuana, attempt to possess with intent to sell one kilogram or more of marijuana, and possession with intent to **825 sell one kilogram or more of marijuana. Thereafter, the defendant moved to suppress, as involuntary, certain written statements that he had made~8 He moved to supports the lies coming from Detective DUFAS police report! The trial court denied that motion WTF! The trial court granted the motion! They are frauding the facts which were previously stated! This was obviously a group effort to alter the record! The defendant then moved to dismiss the charges on the basis that the police lacked probable cause to arrest him. Finally, a moral of truth! An evidentiary hearing was held on that motion, at which the defendant made an oral motion to suppress certain other evidence, consisting of his written confession and a Federal Express shipping receipt discovered on the defendant in a search incident to his arrest. The trial court granted that motion. He only went to court once, maybe twice! The judge threw the case out! *400 to suppress, concluding that tyhe police lacked probable cause to arrest the defendant. ~9
The state moved in the trial court for reconsideration of its suppression decision on the basis that Judge McMahon was murdered by a forced heart attack! The consequence of not conspiring with the insider elites! So another judge who was an obvious sleeze-along either said that or - most likely none of this happened and the judges went along with frauding records to alter the case so Jude Levin could grant the state's appeal 5 minutes after he issued the acquittal - as if the appeal I had submitted had no due process! AC 30029. Man, I need to rest from this! It is all so corrupted and so traumatic for me! I have two briefs I need to complete yet! I have not even started them! I just wonder, WHY TRY? THE ENDS JUSTIFIES THE MEANS! I already motioned the Appellate Court to rule in my favor due to the obvious case of fraud and inept Chief Housing Clerk and Judge Alias who is not even an attorney obviously! They break the laws on a daily basis and worse yet, people are murdered if they don't go along, obviously! ...I will resume this tomorrow. I also need to return to the law library, so I may not resume this till tomorrow night or late afternoon. - 8/28/2025
π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄
Great. It is 10:15 pm. This section turned back up so I will resume.
The state moved in the trial court for reconsideration of its suppression decision on the basis that the subsequently obtained evidence was sufficiently attenuated from the arrest to be admissible, even if the arrest was considered to have been illegal. The state also moved for written articulation of the trial court's motion to suppress. In addressing these motions, the trial court orally articulated its position with regard to probable cause and stated that the evidence seized was not sufficiently attenuated from the illegal arrest to be admissible.
In my case, there was no evidence. They blasted it with the hose off the truck! The picture was fraudulent! I went to the Allentown Fire Dept and spoke to the chief! He obviously considered the whole thing absurdity and a waste of taspayer money! THEY FIRED HIM or gave him option for early retirement! They did not want him to testify in court! I still wanted him there and they judge refused my subpoena, that the Assistant Chief became chief and "knew all about the case" when he didn't; he was GROOMED to testify and he talked to me as if he knew me and I had never met him before. Nevertheless, I asked him specific questions and he perjured himself. I could not pursue this. They would not let me.
Subsequent to the articulation, the trial court granted the defendant's motion for dismissal of all charges. THEY DID NOT SAY HE WAS ACQUITTED! Yet he was acquitted! He told me he was - the judge threw out the case!
The trial court also stated that, with respect to the probable cause determination, "The sole issue" that it had to decide was what had actually transpired during the course of the arrest. The court explained that based upon its own knowledge and experience, probable cause did not exist on the facts of this case and that therefore, the evidence seized and the statements made by the defendant [were] fruit of the poisonous tree and tainted by the illegal arrest". After the case was dismissed, the state immediately moved for permission to appeal pursuant to Section 54-96. The court fails to publish that in the Practice book - another tactic to play with! It goes from Section 44-37 to 60-2! (2016 version)
The trial court refused to grant the state permission to appeal, citing State v McMillan, 51 Conn App 676, 725 A. 2d 342, cert denied 248 Conn 911. 732 A 2d 179 (1999) for the applicable abuse of discretion standard of review under Section 54-96. The trial court stated that pursuant to McMillan the only question it had to ask *401 itself in denying the state permission to appeal was, "Did I abuse my discretion?" The trial court answered, "I don't think so," and explained that an appeal was unnecessary because its probable cause determination was based on a "a full evidentiary hearing" with witnesses, arguments, and motions for articulation and reconsideration. I had no evidentiary hearing! My case was based on ONE misdemeanor charge which failed to even coincide with the law, requiring public presence and more.
The state appealed from the trial court's denial of permission to the Appellate Court State v James supra 64 Conn App at 495, 779 A 2d 1288. The state claimed that a trial court's denial of the state's request for permission to appeal is subject to the inquiry of Lozada v Deeds, supra 498 US at 432 111 S CT. 860, as is the denial of certification of a petition to appeal from the the denial of a petition for a new trail. Seebeck v State, 246 Conn 514, 534, 717 A 2d 116 (1998), and the denial of a petition for certification to appeal from the dismissal of a habeas corpus petition. Εimms v Warden, Λ230 Conn 608, 616, 646 A 2d 126 (1994). See State v James, supra at 498-99, 779 A 2d 1288. The state **826 argued that denial of permission for its appeal "constitutes an abuse of discretion if the state demonstrates that another court could resolve the issue in a different manner. Id, at 498, 779 A. 2d 1288. WTF - demonstrates? How the hell can they demonstrate? Id at 498, 779 A 2d 1288. The Appellate Court rejected the state's claims and held that the trial court did not engage in "such clear, arbitrary and extreme abuse of discretion that we can concluded that an injustice appears to have been done." Id, at 500, 779 A 2d 1288. It then dismissed the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, noting that the trial court's grant of permission to appeal under Section 54-96 is a jurisdictional prerequisite. Id, at 501. 779 A 2d 1288. This certified appeal followed.
I
We first consider whether the Appellate Court improperly refused to incorporate the three factor inquiry articulated by the United States Supreme Court in Lozada v Deed, supra 498 US at 432, 111 S CT 860, into the abuse *402 of direction standard that governs our review of a trial court's decision to deny the state permission to appeal pursuant to Section 54-96. The defendant argues that the Lozada inquiry is at issue. The defendant also argues that application of the Lozada inquir5y would "diminish to a virtual nullity" the trial court's discretion in the Section 54-96 context. We agree with the state and conclude that the Appellate Court improperly failed to adopt the three factor inquiry of Lozada v Deeds supra at 432, 111 S CT 860. For the reasons discussed herin, we hold that a trial court has abused its discretion in denying permission to appeal under Section 54-96 if the state demonstrates that (1) "the issues are debatable among jurists of reason." They did not even canvass the jurors! (2) "A court could resolve the issues [in a different manner]", or (3) the questions are "adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further" (Internal quotation marks omitted) Id The police officer illegally arrested Mr. James. What did the prosecution do with that?
A
It is well established that trial court denials of permission for state's appeals under Section 54-96 are subject to review for "clear and extreme" abuse of discretion. See e.g. State v Bergin, 214 Conn 657, 600-61, 574 A 2d 164 (1990); State v S & R Sanitation Services, Inc, 202 Conn 300, 308, 521 A 2d 1017 (1987); State v Avcollie, 174 Conn. 100, 109-11, 384 A 2d 315 (1977), State v Anonymous, 55 Conn App 250, 252-53, 739 A 2d 298 (1000). Although the abuse of discretion standard is highly deferential to the trial court, when denial o f permission to appeal under Section 54-96 presents a "manifest abuse...where injustice appears to have been done," the "statute's condition requiring the [trial] court's permission to appeal cannot serve to insulate a trial court from review by this court..."
Obvious improper quoting, breaking up sentences! State v Avcollie, supra at 110, 384 A 2d 315
A trial court's discretion under Section 54-96 is certainly not unfettered. Even when a trial court's decision denying *403 the state permission to appeal questions of alaw under Section 54-96 is based upon "considered reasons" the deferential standard of review will not insulate the decision from appellate review if the decision is rooted in incorrect legal principles. For example, in State v Bergin, supra 214 Conn at 661, 574 A 2d 164, we held that even where a trial court issued a four page memorandum of decision on issued briefed by the parties, it nonetheless had abused its discretion in denying the state permission to appeal. Bergin, which is similar to the **827 present case, also involved a probable cause determination by the trial court. Id at 661-62, 574 A 2d 164. In State v Bergin supra at 661, 574 A. 2d 164, we referred to probable cause as an issue of law that we [often review] despite the trial court's mislabeling of what are, "under the governing precedents, appealable legal issues" as "factual determinations..." Id at 662, 574 A 2d 164; see also Εtate v Clark, 255 Conn 268, 279, 764 A 2d 1251 (2001). In State v v Bergin supra at 662-63, 574 A 2d 164, we noted: "Confidence in our judicial system would be severely eroded if the trial court had the authority to dismiss charges against this defendant before trial on an unsound premise, and could then insulate its decision from appellate review." Despite the otherwise deferential standard of review, where issues of law are involved, it is absolutely imperative that "the trial judge recognized his [or her] obligation "to play fair with the system" State v S & R Sanitation Services, Inc, supra 202 Conn at 312, 521 A 2d 1017.
*404 B
The Lozada inquiry was established in order to determine whether a petitioner has made the requisite "substantial showing of the denial of a federal right" for the issuance of the required certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C Section 2253, and Barefoot v Estelle, Λ463 U.S. 880, 893, 103, S CT 3383, 77 L. Ed 2d 1090 (1983) Lozada v Deeds, supra 498 at 432, 111 S. CT, 860. In Lozada, the United States Supreme Court held that the required "substantial showing" was made [if the petitioner] "demonstrates that the issues are debatable among jurists of reason; that a court could resolve the issues [in a different manner]; or that the questions are adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further" (internal quotation marks omitted) Id. In the federal courts, the probable cause certificate serves the same policy goal as the granting of permission or certification to appeal does in Connecticut, namely to screen out frivolous appeals while still protecting the litigants' statutory right to appellate review of adverse determinations. Sec, e.g. Barefoot v Estelle, supra at 892-93, 103, S CT 3383, Seebeck v State, supra 246 Conn at 533 , 717 A 2d 1161; Simms v Warden, supra, 230 Conn at 616, 646 A 2d 126. The Lozada inquiry already provides us with well marked guideposts for the exercise of trial court discretion in two other areas of appeals requiring permission or certification to appeal. Sec e.g, **828 *405 Seebeck v State, supra at 534, 717 A 2d 1161 (denial of permission to appeal denial of petition for new trial); There was no freaking trial so why did the state not just request a damn tiral? Even if it was denied, they could say their requested it, so DUE PROCESS OF LAW WAS BROKEN! Simms V Warden, supra at 615-16, 646 A2d 126 (denial of certification to appeal denial of writ of habeas corpus)
Γn Simms v Warden, supra 230 Conn at 615, 646 A 2d 126, Λwe held that the abuse of discretion standard governing the review of denials of permission for state's appeals under Section 54-96 was also applicable to denials of petitioner's timely requests for certification to appeal adverse habeas corpus determinations pursuant to General Statutes Section 52-470(b)
We stated, however, that in the habeas corpus context, the abuse of discretion standard required "amplification..." Id Accordingly, we held in Simms that "in an appeal under Section 52-470(b), a petitioner will establish a clear abuse of discretion in the denial of a timely request for certification to appeal if he can demonstrate the existence of one of the Lozada criteria...WTF, it isn't even a criminal case!
I am skipping over a lot of this crap!
The defendant argues that the Appellate Court properly concluded that the Lozada inquiry is inapplicable to denials of stat requests for permission to appeal. ....
Skipping over more - read the pages I imaged if you are interested.
We now grant the state's request and will invoke our supervisory powers, pursuant to PB 60-2, in order to reach the probable cause issue. WTF No trial and they say this shit: For reasons discussed herin, we hold that the trial court improperly concluded that, as a matter of law, there was no probable cause to arrest the defendant WHAT ABOUT THE FACT THE ARREST WAS ILLEGAL? With a dead judge, they have "free game"!
A
So now that they made that damn ruling, they say: As a threshold matter, we must first determine whether the exercise of our supervisory powers pursuant *411 to PB 60-2 is appropriate in the present case.
I am skipping over more of this shit.
Moreover, in determining whether probable cause existed to arrest the defendant, the trial court incorrectly focused on the police officers' actions with respect to investigating Chen's role in any potential criminal activity.
Police officers - yet one name! Don't worry, the police report is not kept on file!
First, Melanson observed Chen, the usual recipient of packages at Har-Conn, open the delivered package, look inside, and *417 remark to a coworker that this was "Joe's package..." Chen then called for "joe" over the building's public address system. After Melanson, who still appeared to be a Federal Express driver, stalled for time by pretending that the package needed to be signed for again, the defendant entered the shipping area. When Melanson asked about the package, Chen told him that the package belonged to the defendant Why the hell would the FedEx driver ask about the package he already delivered - this is total stupidity! Here the package was already opened! Any FedEx driver would have left! He cannot ask for a signature on an opend package! Also, Mr. James had told me that the package was not opened by anyone! It was signed for and presumed safe because FedEx is responsible for checking packages! I am skipping over more!
The judgment of the Appellate Court is reversed and the case is remanded to that court with direction to reverse the trial court's judgment of dismissal, and to remand the case to the trial court with direction to deny the motion to suppress and for further proceedings according to Law. More like according to LIE!
The rest of this BS are footnotes. They did not record what the outcome was! The judge was already dead. The issue is, DID ANY OF THIS SHIT EVEN HAPPEN? TEY PROBABLY FRAUDED THE RECORD TO USE AS A CASE AGAINST ME - I had defended myself saying the case was a sham - saying that there was no trial - saying that I was charged a misdemeanor only. The court lied, the court illicitly adduced charged, the court told the reporter it was REDUCED charges and she had to type that.
I looked up more info in the court to find out what the determination was and they had on record that Mr. James was sent to prison for 48 months which was a freaking lie and DOC was all in on it because they get more federal funding!
He may have made an out of Court settlement with the state if he had a decent attorney. Due to cyber crime on my phones, I doubt I would be able to contact the James's to find out what happened to him after they erroneously deported him. His wife said he was so upset that he did not even care to return! He wanted his wife to go back to Jamaica with him. I think all their kids were grown up.
So that is what happened there - crimes of fraud and legal malpractice right in plain sight! The Appellate Court may have been playing ball-toss to stall for more time ...yet the elephant in the room is criminal intent to alter records and I saw many, many altered records on Lois Law! They kept the records as-is yet destroyed court documents which proved the the opinions were a sham! And Lois Law was shut down to further cover up the fraud and legal malpractice!
DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.
This was my, the Appellant's,
Motion to DISMISS -
see the end where it says WHEREFORE. The appellant motions this court to dismiss the case.
THE RECORD IS FRAUDED!
WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL IS A FORM!
I always signed the documents I submitted!
I am not an attorney ! I had no juris number!
I didn't have to give the other party
- the prosecutor, in this case, who was a fraud and embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars in three years, as discovered in court-limited audits -
a signed copy but had to sign it for the court!
The fraudulent notice of intent to appeal was granted by judge x-hole so he didn't have to grant state's motion to appeal - but he did because there was no notice of intent! They frauded records! Commonplace! Lawrence Mark Hurley was there for 20 years frauding records, forging checks, using a chemical to remove signatures which was handy-dandy to fraud court documents! And now, it's even easier to do with Internet and partnering with technocrats like Microsoft!
State vs Joseph Alexander James was a sham! They killed the trial judge who told Mr James he was going to dismiss it! They frauded the record indicating that Mr. James was in prison! He wasn't in jail or prison!He got a decent judge and they killed him!
Pre-appeal Motion was another Motion To Dismiss by me, not the State! Yet they want to allude the State was the appellant! THIS was a second arrest - in 2016, when State police came to my residency, stalking me for 40 minutes in the lobby, while paid employee Karem Singh was watching the video to tell them when I left my apartment. I was taking trash out and they rushed up the elevator. WTF
Attorney Gambardella motioned to strike the complaint which was out of order of Due Process of Law! They are supposed to Motion to Dismiss; and the complainant can revise accordingly: and only motion to Strike when the issues they claimed in the motion were not addressed or more disputes arose from revising the complaint!
This state doesn't care to follow laws! They are primarily organized crime!
This is the crap I have had to deal with for years! CORRUPTION! LAWLESSNESS! ORGANIZED CRIME!
You will notice that "101" is repeated due to cyber crime; not because I submitted it that way. The numbers are identically scripted! They did that with "103" also! Probably more! They frame themselves!
π΄Incase I want to note something here ..
Frauded records! State didn't have to Motion For Permission - if the damn "States Notice Of Intent To Appeal" was really issued and granted!
π΄
Date is 7/7/2008! Two years after I was illicitly arrested! One year+ after statute of limitations! The case should have been dismissed a year before that! Judge Cronin was going to dismiss it! The court made him go to another court despite his saying he would be back and issue a formal opinion. THAT is what was similar to State v James - except in Joseph Alexander James' case the judge was obviously murdered! He had an untimely heart attack!
The court frauded records by injecting a STATE'S NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL to give reason why they could appeal when I had AC30029 appeal in progress!
What's the use here? This is such a dishonest place to live - and that's Why I left upstate NY and never returned! I had no support from siblings - they learned by going along with the corruption they had money!
Including my righteous sister who accused me of not being obedient to the scumbag organized criminal attorneys!
Why the hell even try?
I will type out the case here. Copies of the imaged pages should be uploaded, but I double check today and can't find them! I will upload again if necessary.
π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄
π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄
I may create another blogpost to upload all images I take - but Android/Google no longer puts them in chronological order. For the most part, they are reverse chronological but they have mish-mashed the order also.
================================================================================
2. State V Bradley
Supreme Court of Connecticut
March 25, 2010
295 Conn 917 990 A 2d 867
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V
ANNE M BRADLEY
Docketed March 25 2010
Attorney: Lisa A Riggionne, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition.
Opinion
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 30149) is denied.
NORCOTT, J did not participate in the consideration of or decision on the petition.
All Citations
295 Conn 917, 990 A 2d 867 (Mem)
===============================================================================
3. State v Bradley
Appellate Court of Connecticut
137 Conn App 585
August 21, 2012
137 Conn App 585
No. 33370
Argued May 29, 2012
Decided August 21, 2012
Decided on March 25, 2010
Lisa Riggione, senior assistant state's attorney, in opposition . With whom on the brief, Kevin H. Lawlor his brother was an attorney who was a horrible teacher and pathalogical liar at Univ of New Haven! And Kevin S. Russo, supervisory assistant state's attorney, for the appellee (state) NOT THE FREAKING UNIVERSITY! UNDERSTAND THE CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY THE COURT!
Opinion
*587 In this matter, the defendant, Anne Bradley was found guilty by a jury of breach of peace in the second degree in violation of CGS 53a-181 (6)
Richard Blumenthal decided to take part in this criminal activity and had them ADDUCE TWO CHARGES OF BREACH OF PEACE, which he obviously knew was OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!
1. The case was one year past the statute of limitations! I motioned to dismiss several times including it was past statute of limitations. Judge CRONIN said he was likely to dismiss the case! He said he would issue his deecision at my next hearing. THE CHIEF COURT ADMINISTRATOR took him off the case and transferred him to another court! Judge RONAN, who was a complete asshole, reappeared on the case. I had two years of hearings by assholes until Judge Cronin presided and they transferred him! THEY FRAUD THE CASE MORE BY USING HIS NAME FOR THE OPINION!
Opinion
PER CURIAM
*587 In this matter, the defendant, Anne M. Bradley, was found guilty by a jury of Breach of the Peace in the second degree in violation of CGS 53a-191 (6)
Judge Bruce Levin, father of an attorney π΄ I removed from a personal injury case because he was a liar and could have cared less about filing workers comp for me, and more! I had a bad concussion from a man who ran into me on my way to work! A co-worker took me to the hospital! The paramedics on the ambulance REFUSED even though my forehead was all black and blue! I had a concussion and was crying from the trauma and pain and being treated like shit because they wanted to "protect" the multi billion medical company. The one who slammed into me was obviously trying to push me into traffic at a very heavy traffic 4-corners, Exit 39 off the highway going to work at Kaman Aerospace. I was so far ahead of the job that all the processing was finished. I had caught the woman I replaced up and finished a week ahead! I was very competent using the 10-key and that was a big reason why.
π΄That attorney was Paul Levin whose office was located at 200 Pearl Street , Hartford CT. Somewhere here I made a mistake he was at Capital Avenue. No he wasn't. I'm very tired and will finish this to the best of my ability later today. It is 2:31 am on August 23, 2025
The defendant thereafter moved for a judgment of a acquittal I moved for acquittal, for retrial, to set aside, removal of the judge, and whatever else I could move - all of which the court should have ruled on! But Levin did not and the clerk in the office just said, "You should be glad; you were acquitted" I said I have been cheated since DAY ONE! THIS WAS A VERY TRAUMATIZING TWO YEARS BY CROOKED PEOPLE and they refused to dismiss it since the statute of limitations is one year! So don't tell me how lucky I am with anything! My motions should have been heard - all of them! THEY MADE THE RECORDS DISAPPEAR because dishonesty is their best policy!
THE POINT i motioned them all and no ruling was heard, alluded the judge was doing me a favor acquitting when it as all Devil's Chessboard tactics so the state could appeal - but that was illegal! APPEALS ON AC QUITTALS OF MURDER CANNOT EVEN TAKE PLACE UNLESS POLITICIANS STEP IN AND CLAIM INFRACTIONS OCCURRED DURING COURT!
JUDGE LEVIN RULED THAT HE WOULD ACCEPT KEVIN RUSSO'S APPEAL USING STATE V JOSEPH ALEXANDER JAMES case ....
I looked up that case and found more fraud, more abuse of power, more corruption!
I spoke to both him and his wife! He did not miss any work yet the court altered the case to him being sentenced to prison for 48 months!
Mr. James was entrapped by a West Hartford detective who dressed in a Fed Es suit WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF FEDERAL EXPRESS and therefore impersonating Fed Ex! Mr. James was doing his job delivering shipping and receiving products. This was a received product which was sent to another employee. It was not his job to open anything. It was given to that employee and it was filled with some kind of illegal drugs. NOT ONE FREAKING ONCE DID THEY INDICATE THE EMPLOYEE WAS ARRESTED AND THERE WAS ANOTHER CASE! Mr. James, who had worked there several years, a legitimate immigrant from Jamaica, was thereafter deported back to Jamaica to cover up their lying asses in court! The trial judge on his case said the case had no merit and he was throwing it out! THE JUDGE THEN DIED OF A HEART ATTACK! This was definitely murder!
Marta James was a hair dresser and very nice. We kept in touch for a while but my computer was destroyed by cyber crime!
Some asshole is trying to delete what I type and get me off my blog!
....which the trial court granted on July 7, 2008. The state then filed a motion requesting permission to appeal, which the trial court granted. All premeditated!! The appeal was immediately following the judge's acquttal!
The state appealed and this court reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case with direction to reinstate the jury's guilty verdict and to proceed to sentencing.
Judge Levin granted the acquittal and then granted the appeal and granted it to be reinstated! Judge Levin ADDUCED the two breach of peace charges during Voire Dire which is also ILLEGAL!
He charged me and I refused to plea saying there was no long form information and the charge was illegal due to DOUBLE JEOPARDY and also the case was past the statute of limitations! They didn't care because they had one string they could play - MY FREAKING RELATIVES, WHO LITERALLY KILLED OUR DAD AND HAVE ALWAYS OBSESSED ABOUT FRAMING ME AS A BAD PERSON!
My own mother stole my winter job and disrupted my livelihood to pay my mortgage in the store I owned and also lived in after the HUD tenant was late on rent, and failed to do work for me to compensate for the rent! I did what I could to help him and he just played on the string of dishonesty. I did not even officially evict him in 1980. I let him and family leave on their own recognizance - and I never got any supplement from HUD. The prior owner was probably getting it! It was so long ago, I just recall dismissing the struggles. One mortgage was paid off and the other one was current. I had excellent credit yet nobody would report my credit to the bureaus! Because I had the audacity to tell a stalking sex trafficker to leave me alone, he was a pig - and almost get murdered by the sander truck driver!
The state appealed and this court reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case with direction to reinstate the jury's guilty verdict and to proceed to sentencing. See State v Bradley, 123 Conn App 197, 4 A 3d 347, cert denied, 295 Conn 917, 990 A 2d 867 (2010). On March 21, 2011, the trial court sentenced the defendant to six months of incarceration, execution suspended, and two years of probation. This appeal followed:
The probation was STOPPED. No order was entered in the system and the damn probation officer said she was trying to get me forced to prison because she changed the report date and DID NOT EVEN CALL ME, and said because she emailed me, she was trying to get me arrested - telling me this in person when I was "reporting". She probed me every time for my personal information and I said it was none of her business. I did not commit any crimes and had never committed any crime. I am against corruption!
I think the New Britain Chief of Police William Sencio and the detective Sargent Baden and Agent William Aldenburg had her fired and more. I WAS TOLD MY PROBATION ENDED after 6 months or less of their bullshit!
On appeal, the defendant claims that her constitutional right against double jeopardy was violated when, on the state's appeal from the posttrial judgement of acquittal entered for her by the trial court, this court reversed the trial court's judgment and remanded the case with direction to reinstate the jury's verdict.
The defendant's claim is controlled by the our Supreme Court's decision in *588 State v Avcollie 178 Conn 450, 453, A 2d 118 (1079), cert denied, 444 US 1015, 100 S CT 667 62 I, Ed 2d 645 (1980) in which the court held
"When a case has been tried to a jury, the principle of double jeopardy does not prohibit an appeal by the prosecution providing that a retrial is not required in the event the prosecution is successful in its appeal. This, where a jury returns a verdict of guilty by the trial court thereafter renders a judgment of acquittal, an appeal is permitted and double jeopardy does not attach. "
MORE LIES! I argued in trial court Voire Dire for illegally charging me afyer statute of limitations - during Voire Dire also illegal - Double Jeopardy for charging me twice for breach of peace -
I also referred to these illegalities in my motions to acquit, motion for retrial, motion to remove the judicial authority, and other motions all reflecting they are crooked as hell!
I continued with that and they freaking lie on record to satisfy RICHARD BLUMENTHAL'S crimes - and he gained more power from the elites by causing me this harm. I saw him at a St. Patrick's Day Parade and said it was unfair and he wanted me to go away! I never went to a St Patrick's Day Parade here again! Blumenthal always showed up to strut his criminal stuff, having a reputation of being a paedophile also! He considered himself a good replacement for Joe Lieberman. Well, apparently Former Senator Lieberman was better regarded yet confronting corruption was not his thing. [This was edited about 8 hours after I typed it 8/22/2025]
Id, at 453, 423, A 2d, 1118. Because this court directed the trial court to reinstate the jury's guilty verdict after it reversed the judgment of acquittal, and no new trial of her case was there by necessitated, the court's order did not place the defendant twice in jeopardy for the same offense. Accordingly, the defendant's claim must fail.
The judgment is affirmed.
All citiations
137 Conn App 585, 49 A 3d 297 (Mem)
Footnotes
The defendant also claims that the court erred in denying her motion to review her sentence and that it considered improper matters at her sentencing hearing. During the pendency of this appeal, the defendant successfully completed her sentence of probation.
No - it was not "completed" do the math! There were not 2 years! More lies about this! Also they should have said,
Due to the fact we were so busy in creating the Sandy Hook Shooting fraud and swindling the economy of at least one trillion dollars and the need to cover up for Obama crimes, and also geoengineer the Hurricane Sandy so people will "oo" and "ahh" as if God had his hand in all this, we decided slack off our criminal activity of fraud on this case and stop the illicit probation order.
There is this no practical relief that we can AFFORD the defendant as to her sentence. Accordingly, the defendant's claims regarding her sentence are moot. See State v. Boyle, 287 Conn 478, 486-87, 949 A 2d 460 (2008); see also State v Scott, 83 Conn App 724, 726-27, 851 A 2d 353 (2004) (defendant's challenges to judgment of conviction were not moot due to his completion of sentence but his challenge to terms of condisional discharge was moot because court could not afford practical relief as to such claim)
================================================================================
4. State v Bradley
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided Dec 12, 2012 Right when the fake Sandy Hook Shooting occurred!
Opinion
The defendant's petition for certification her appeal from the Appellate Court 137 Conn App 585, 49 A 3d 297, is denied.
All Citations
307 Conn 939, 56 A 3d 950 (Mem)
================================================================================
9. State V Bradley I took this out of the order printed due to its relevancy with the prior cases
2007 WI 3173693
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available
UNPUBLISHED OPINION CHECK COURT RULES BEFORE CITING
Superior Court of Connecticut
Judicial District of ANSONIA -MILFORD
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
V
ANNE M BRADLEY
No. CR0600596518
October 19, 2007 - recorded/frauded date of State's appeal on Trial: July 7, 2007 MORE FRAUDED RECORDS! THE CASE WAS A YEAR PAST STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, Trial WAS IN 2008! PROSECUTOR LAWRENCE MARK HURLEY WAS ARRESTED A FEW MONTHS BEFORE THAT. KEVIN RUSSO REPLACED HIM, CONTINUOUSLY SPINNING LIES!
OPINION
CRONAN, J There was no opinion by this judge! He presided over one hearing - he said he expected to dismiss it - and said he would issue an opinion at the next hearing! I complained that there was no opinion and they switched back to RONAN!
SO THIS DOCUMENT IS 100% FRAUDULENT
*1. This is a criminal case in which the defendant was charged with Reckless Endangerment in the Second Degree under Section 53a-64 of the Connecticut General Statutes. The defendant has filed two separate Motions to Dismiss. The first on December 30, 2006 and the second on July 31, 2007. Both matters were joined and heard on September 13, 2007.
This Court has reviewed both Motions. The Motion dated December 30, 2006 reflected the defendant's dissatisfaction with her experiences with the Milford Superior Court in general and with the role of state's attorneys, defense attorneys and judges. The Motion dated July 31, 2007 reiterates many of the same complaints but employs various sections of resources including the Connecticut General Statutes, the Connecticut Practice Book and ABA Standards to reinforce her complaints.
This court must apply the authority granted to it by the CPB Rules of the Superior Court, 41-8, in reviewing the Motion to Dismiss. 41-8 states the following defenses or objections, if capable of determination without a trial of the general issue, shall, if made prior to trial, be raised by a motion to dismiss the information:
1) Defects in the institution of the prosecution including any grand jury proceedings.
I was illicitly arrested! Even Reckless Endangerment requires to be in a public place! I did not even know what Dr. Kaplan looked like! There also was no Long Form Information in the file - Judge CRONAN said the case was badly mishandled!
2) Defects in the information including failure to charge an offense
So x-hole Judge Levin claimed I argued they failed to charge me an offense! TOTALLY A LIE! THEY FRAUD RECORDS TO COVER UP WHAT REALLY HAPPENED!
3) Statue of Limitations
It is one year! Illicitly arrested 6/16/2006, Had a fraudulent attorney Jerald S. Barber so I lost two months defending myself; One year expired 6/17/2007 - I refused to plea because the preliminary hearing did not cover any reasons for the charge. They immediately jumped into the assumption I was guilty with no letter of complaint from Dr. Kaplan, which is required by law!
4) Absence of jurisdiction of the court over the defendant of the subject matter.
There was no subject matter!
5) Insufficiency of evidence or cause to justify the bringing or continuing of such information or placing the defendant on trial
A MOTION TO DISMISS IS A PRE-TRIAL MOTION! WTF!
6) Previous prosecution barring the present prosecution
Sure, the prosecutor wants you to suck him off and everything will be alright! And he goes on to raping and molesting kids as his hobby!
7) Claim that the defendant has been denied a speedy trial
8) Claim that the law defining the offense charged is unconstitutional or otherwise invalid
9) ANY OTHER GROUNDS!!!!
And I was thorough! Looking up case laws in Lois Law and also looking the cases up on microfiche finding out they were frauding records on a continuous basis!
The Court has reviewed all of the relevant claims made by the defendant and concludes that none satisfy the provisions of a 41-8 of the CPB. Several of the claims may well serve as defenses for the defendant at the time of trial, but the Court finds no basis for granting either Motion.
The defendant's Motion to Dismiss are denied.
Not denied by Judge Cronin! This was obviously written by the slimeball Russo because he was constantly twisting words and evading responsibility!
================================================================================
12, State v Anne Bradley
Appellate Court of Connecticut
September 28, 2010
124 Conn App 197
No. 30149
4 A 3d 347
CRIMINAL JUSTICE - disorderly conduct. - they lie again to allude I was drunk! I haven't had any alcohol since 1993! Evidence was sufficient to support verdict that defendant recklessly created a condition that was both public and hazardous.
SYNOPSIS
Background: Following jury verdict finding defendant guilty of one count of breach of peace Note, not only was I unlawfully charged during Voire Dire by a judge who was getting revenge for his son Paul Levin of 100 Capital Ave, Hartford, CT - but the judge only allowed 3 preemptory challenges on a jury of 6 when there is supposed to be one preemptory per juror - so he could sleeze in the contractor who worked for only West Haven police, so he testified. And I requested he be removed and was refused! I cited laws, rules and not a damn thing mattered to this hell-bent derelict of a judge! And the contractor was apparently made the lead juror; yet another juror assured me that he was hell-bent on getting me convicted and so he recommended the guilty of one of the violations of charges, breach of peace to get the whiner off their backs and they could go back to work and the judge not complain that the jury was hung by the x-hole who I wanted removed - not only because I had the pre-emptory challenge to do so but also because of conflict of interest, being a contractor for all police in West Haven!
The Superior Court, Judicial District of Ansonia-Milford, Levin, J, granted defendant's Motion for judgment of acquittal, and state appealed. And do they state that Judge Levin appealed his own damn ruling? NO!!
Holding: The Appellate Court held that evidencce was sufficient to support verdict that defendant recklessly created a condition that was both public and hazardous.
Reversed and remanded with direction.
1. Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct. Weight and sufficiency of evidence
I was NOT in a public place, as required to charge me for either misdemeanor! They also label at as disorderly conduct which was false and no relevance.
They also lie - falsify facts and fail to even administer the law!
Evidence at trial for breach of the Peace was sufficient to support jury verdict that defendant, who mailed university president a package, opened by president's secretary, containing "a pile of junk" consisting of a cellular telephone and flattened beer cans and soda cans that were glued together with an adhesive which caused a burning sensation when smelled by campus police officer, recklessly created a condition that was both public and hazardous; while package was addressed to university president, it was opened by his secretary three freaking days before - with no HAZMAT procedure and just a nasty woman who was getting her kicks lying to me at church and now for her big hurrah, entrap me! Her name was Lucy Wendlyn and I noticed on internet she died - good riddens! And she was not even retired yet! What does that mean? It means the underworld uses people and throws them away! Karen, her daughter who also lied to me, probably died too!
Containing a "pile of junk" consisting of a cellular telephone and flattened beer cans and soda cans that were glued together with an adhesive which caused a burning sensation when smelled by campus police officer, recklessly created a condition that was both public and hazardous;
AND THEY FOLLOWED NO HAZMAT PROTOCOL AND NOBODY ADVISED THEM TO FOLLOW ANY! ONLY WHEN I BROUGHT IT UP DID THEY CALL THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WHICH DESTROYED THE "EVIDENCE" AND OF COURSE THE LETTER INSIDE SO THEY COULD BE LYING ASSHOLES!
WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT A COURT THAT USES HERESAY? And I said that all along! No evidence! Not even any photos - just two bit scumbags that got their kicks to get me arrested and put me in my place - and I was a matriculated student with an ID and rights but the damn school did not even follow their own regulations as well as what is set forth by the Dept of Education!
While package was addressed to university president, it was opened by his secretary, defendant was aware that president had an "open door policy" and encouraged visitors to his office and there was expert testimony that glue used to glue together items in package could cause contact dermatitis "in many cases" CGS A 53a 181 (6)
ATTORNEY AND LAW FIRMS
**347 Kevin D. Lawlor, state's attorney, Lisa A. Riggione, senior assistant state's attorney, and Kevin Russo, supervisory assistant state's attorney, filed a brief for the appellant. (State)
They do not keep briefs for public view so why the hell they say this is like saying someone has a gun but the gun is not even loaded! They also fail to include Lawrence Mark Hurley, who was the only prosecutor on the case against me for almost two damn years - maybe more than two years! He was arrested in 2008....
GRUENDEL, HARPER AND BEACH, Jus
OPINION
PER CURIAM
The trial court did not set aside the judgment - outright lie!
*198 The state appeals from the judgment of the trial court setting aside the jury's verdict finding the defendant, Anne M. Bradley, guilty of one count of breach of **348 the peace in the second degree in violation of the General statutes 53a 181 (6)
(a) A person is guilty of breach of the peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person: (1) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous or threatening behavior in a public place; or (2) assaults or strikes another; or (3) threatens to commit any crime against another person or such other person's property; or (4) publicly exhibits, distributes, posts up or advertises any offensive, indecent or abusive matter concerning any person; or (5) in a public place, uses abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture; or (6) creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do. For purposes of this section, “public place” means any area that is used or held out for use by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests.
(b) Breach of the peace in the second degree is a class B misdemeanor.
For emphasis, in order to charge someone breach of peace, they have to qualify for all elements, including being in a public place.
I was never there! They listed Dr. Kaplan as the victim yet claim Lucy Wendlyn was victim but she never went to the hospital - and only when I asked why they did not follow any HAZMAT PROTOCOL, did they send officer gofer to the hospital when the package was opened three days before that!
They destroyed the package too! There was no evidence and only heresay which did was one story by one person and another story by another but it didn't matter because they could rely on more fraud by techs to alter the recording when the transcripts are made!
Jurors who do not play the court's GAME will face problems in their lives!
This source is written by a Connecticut Prosecutor so take it with a grain of salt because THREATENING is not BREACH OF PEACE. It is threatening! That is a separate charge! They lie like hell here and all to collude with each other!
Elements of the Crime Which Must be Established by The Prosecution
To be convicted of breach of peace in the second degree in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-181 the state's attorney has to prove that the defendant acted with the intent to cause "inconvenience, annoyance or alarm" or recklessly creating a risk of the same, engaged in one of the following acts:
- Fighting in a public place;
- Violent or threatening behavior in a public place;
- A physical assault;
- Threaten to commit a crime or damage someone's property;
- Publicly post, exhibit or advertise obscene or offensive materials concerning another person;
- Use obscene or vulgar language or gestures in a public place;
- Create a hazardous or physically offensive condition in a public area.
The book on prosecutorial conduct etc was written by another scumbag who supports sex trafficking and peadophilia: Alan Dershowitz! I made the lame mistake of sending his office emails - and a year later his slut secretary who I found out from credible sources, he was having sex with, boldly and rudely told me she just deleted all my emails. I said, "
Why did you not inform me of this?' Her answer was just as slutty as she is!
THERE IS NO JUSTICE WHEN THE JUSTICE DEPT AND COURTS ARE LAWLESS!
The charge of BREACH OF PEACE requires a person to be in a public place!
The charge of breach of peace requires the person to basically alarm one or more persons in a public place!
Dermatitis was not experienced by Lucy Wendlyn, who was the one who claimed opened the package and claimed to be hurt yet did not even see the nurse on campus! I asked her and she resented my asking and did not want to answer!
With all the crooks around me, she did not have to answer! I said, "That in itself proves why - she is lying!" The absence of evidence is evidence of absence, I said!
The state claims that the evidence There was no f'king evidence! They got the fire dept to go to the campus and blast it with their hose - blasting it to smitherines, and disposing of it!
Was sufficient to support the jury's verdict. We agree with the state. Accordingly, we reverse the *199 judgment of the court and remand the case with direction to reinstate the jury verdict and to proceed to sentencing.
WHAT THEY DID WAS AGREE TO THE JUDGE'S F'KING APPEAL! HE APPROVED IT; SAME ONE WHO RULED ACQUITTAL. IT IS CONSTANT LEGAL MALPRACTICE IN THE COURTS!
The record reveals the following facts, which the jury reasonably could have found, and the following procedural history. In 2006, the defendant applied for and was granted admission to the University of New Haven. At about this same time, she began writing letters to Stephen Kaplan, LIE!!! I was admitted just days before that and could attend my first class on a Saturday but I needed to get my book, which was Friday. It was a very close call. I was on the campus for registering and processing but they had no funds for me to get my book and I had to wait for money in my account. I paid for that book!!! I had to call with a southern accent and say I was calling for my friend since the police harassed me and threatened me and told I could not call anyone or write anyone there! I pulled it off and they credited back the book - money I so desperately needed! I did not have social security yet and when I did get it, they failed to make it retroactive to two years before that when I had Medicare right away. I was told Medicare is a two-year wait! They only gave me a few months, 1/3 of which I paid ahead on my rent because Corey my landlord needed money to pay his mortgage! He then lied about my not giving him rent and I had to prove it through my bank account!
Do not be nice to people here - they only stab you in the back! I would leave in a heartbeat if I could!
the president of the University. The defendant testified that these letters initially explained her "aspirations" to Kaplan but that eventually she began discussing "stress factors" that she feared would interfere with her enrollment. For instance, in a letter dated June 2, 2006, the defendant discussed at length her frustrations related to a worker's compensation claim she made against an employer.
That was true. The letter had more in it. Much more since I had just been matriculated and was looking forward to participating and sorry that I could not go up the four flights of stairs to his office to thank him personally.
They like to mention the possibility of stealing money and using some fake legal reason!
And that is definitely a modus operandi of all the sleeze bags that TAKE money and don't make money here! For instance, my monther died in August - this corrupted landlord figured I would get an inheritance so they filed an eviction and claimed I did not pay rent for August and September. As a section 8 tenant they are required first to submit a pre termination notice and give me 30 days to get my rights. THAT IS LAW.
BUT NO, they did not do that! And it did not matter to this fake judge who is obviously not an attorney or got it out of the same cracker jack box that Barack Obama got his - since he did not attend classes even! He was an elite, his father was a powerful CIA terrorist!
NOTE! This opinion admits the letter was sent or received June 2! It was mailed June 2 - the campus received it June 3 and that means it was brought to Lucy Wendlyn on June 3. It was priority mail and I finally found my priority tracking number despite the fact that damn school had it and withheld that evidence as well! Priority mail is delivered to the offices! It was fairly slow at that time since classes had not started - she got it on June 3! For her to testify that she left it unopened for three days was even laughable. Do the math! She had it for 13 days! They did not even have any letters which I wrote to Dr. Kaplan and could have easily obtained them! They would be incriminating themselves!
She made an ass out of herself so many times that even donkeys would be put to shame to be described like them!
On June 16, 2006, a package that she had been sent by the defendant another injected lie! I sent the Priority Mail to Dr. Kaplan! There was no evidence of the package - only the DESTRUCTION OF THE PACKAGE. THE FIRE DEPT SPRAYED IT WITH THEIR HOSE, CONTRARY TO SHOWING THEY POURED WATER ON IT, USING THE SCHOOL'S FAUCET - THEY USED THEIR HOSE AND OBLITERATED THE LETTER AND PAPERWEIGHT! HERE LUCY WENDLYN READ THE WHOLE LETTER WITHOUT USING PLASTIC GLOVES AND HAD NO SUDE EFFECTS! SHE PRACTICALLY GROWLED AT ME WHEN I POINTED THAT OUT! AND SHE HAD OPENED IT DAYS BEFORE YET WAS GROOMED TO LIE ABOUT IT - WHICH SHE DID VERY BADLY! Reminder: this was a woman I sat by in church with her daughter Karen (who told me she was permanently disabled and couldn't work - yet I found out at trial she also worked for the University of New Haven!) who turned out to be a liar through and through! via the United States Postal Service arrived at Kaplan's office. The package was opened by Kaplan's executive secretary, Lucy Wendlyn They spell her name wrong as WENDLAND to protect the guilty!
Wendlyn, having previously opened correspondence sent to Kaplan from the defendant, recognized the return address as the defendant's and opened the package. Inside the package, Wendlyn found a "pile of junk", consisting of a cellular telephone and flattened beer cans and soda cans that were "glued together" in "one piece". They use quotation marks yet fail to cite the source - if it was the transcript or most likely, Russo told us to type that. And they just assume it was junk because they are conspiring. The junk was held together with a "polymeric adhesive" So said Prosecutor Russo, who earned his pay to play points and became a judge who conspired with Obama to push the Sandy Hook Shooting fraud! In many cases such adhesives can cause skin irritation. The package also contained a handwritten letter the defendant had written to Kaplan, the first paragraph of which read, "I bet nobody has ever given you literal junk before. And her's some junk, but I sanitized it with Clorox before spraying glaze on it." Upon opening the package and examining and touching the contents, Wendlyn experience inconvenience, annoyance, and alarm. In court, I asked her if she was so alarmed, why did she take time to read the whole letter and then carefully put the paperweight and letter back in the package? Russo objected and Levin sustained of course! And I also asked why she had them destroy the letter as well - and asked her if she made a copy of it and also asked her where were the other letters - object, object, and object - and Levin sustained!
Levin only overruled my objections! Even when Russo used the "Golden Rule" saying to the jury that rule, WHICH IS UNLAWFUL. It is not just frowned upon as shitty prosection.
It didn't matter because they struck it from the transcript as a surprise! And I asked her what she did when she opened the package. She glared at me and said "I did not like it!" She also admitted to taking the letter out and reading it all. And again, no mention of having any harm come to her; just the fact she wanted to hate me! Being a liar at church just wasn't enough to satisfy her. I had crocheted a blanket for Fr. Moffo and gave it to him. She would not acknowledge that but she knew it.
My closing statement emphasized that Lucy Wendlyn was doing a bad job in helping police entrap me and I stated why, coming right from her statements.
*200 Wendlyn contacted the campus police and Sargeant Ronald Whittaby of the University police department responded, Whittaby brought the package back to the campus police department where he removed the objects contained therein. I asked Lucy Wendlyn if she wore plastic gloves. She said no. Whittaby was so stupid that he proved he was not wearing gloves yet supposedly had to contain the paperweight and claimed it was dangerous and did not even put on plastic gloves! ENTRAPMENT WAS ALL THIS CASE WAS ABOUT AND THE WHOLE DAMN COURT WAS IN ON IT!
Whittaby testified that; with no proof! No video, yet they use videos all over police departments! This was a slam-dunk attack on me and no matter what laws they break, they were hell-bent to feed the bad wolf πΊ which is the corruption that has claim to fame feeding Walk Street!
As Whittaby did this, he noticed a chemical smell emanating from the items in the package and saw that the items were held together with "some type of gooey substance" And they refered to Whittaby as an expert! That is like the "got it" crap that the technocracy uses - children use a term like that. Of course we know that most of the technocrats are paedophiles and rapist along with being everyday criminals in operating their businesses! Whittaby touched the substance with his fingers, which he then brought c lose to his nose to smell. After doing so, Whittaby felt "a burning sensation" in his mouth area, which became so painful that he he feared he was going to get blisters. After dropping the package off at the forensics laboratory on campus for analysis Nobody from forensics testified and there was no report entered as evidence - only Whittaby's gooey bullshit! Whittaby went to a hospital where he was treated for irritant dermatitis and released the same day. Irritant dermatitis is a skin inflammation caused by a chemical irritant. Whittaby entered the police department while they were harassing me. His hands look fine. I asked to see them. The stupidity that he said was so bizar, and of course none of it was recorded After all , they were just a police department! Another thing I asked about and got a big "I object!" From Russo. Which was sustained by Paul Levin's daddy who only was there to serve one purpose, get me convicted!
The state charged the defendant, who is not an attorney licensed to practice law in Connecticut and was self-represented throughout the jury trial and the proceedings before the court, with one count of reckless endangerment in the second degree in violation of General Statutes Section 53a-64
More fraud, they slip in a different statute than what was on the police slip which I was handed! He used a different statute and charged me with Risk of Injury! Claiming Dr. Kaplan was the victim!
And two counts of breach of the Peace in the second degree in violation of section 53a - 181 (6) Every damn record on that case, including the prosecutor had just Reckless Endangerment - they are frauds, they disrupted my life, they cost me so much pain and suffering! Once Richard Blumenthal cooked up this adding two of the same charge agenda - which is DOUBLE JEOPARDY, a federal crime! - they all ganged in! The jury returned a verdict of not guilty on the count of reckless endangerment and not guilty of one count of breach of the Peace. There was no canvassing of the jurors allowed!
Count three of the state's information charged, in relevant part, "On they isolate the "O"as if it was a necessary religious satanic requirement! **349 the 16th day of June, 2006 14 days after they got the package and my letter! At or around the area known as the University of New Haven [the defendant] recklessly created a risk that caused inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm on [Wendlyn] , in that she created a public and hazardous condition by the act of introducing a chemical into an envelope which was not licensed or privileged to do. In violation of 53a - 181 (6)" These people should have been imprisoned for what they did to me with this nonsense - rhetoric! Instigated by Kevin Russo and Lawrence Mark Hurley! The jury returned a verdict of guilty on the count of breach of peace. *201 Following the verdict, the defendant filed a motion for a judgment of acquittal, which was granted by the same x-hole who agreed with the jury! Yes, the judge agreed since he could have set it aside during the trial! by the trial court. In its appeal from the judgment of the trial court, the state argues that the court improperly determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict. We agree with the state.
They also agree with the damn judge because he appealed himself! This Devils Chessboard trick was preplanned! Because I had all possible motions submitted! I was prepared for the worst since the jury seemed to be latching on to lies - but they really weren't. The only liar in the jury was the contractor and he was making the jury hung by his obsession to get me convicted - no doubt pay to play!
We begin by setting forth our standard of review. It is well established that under the common law a trial court has the discretionary power TO BREAK THE LAW! To modify, or vacate a criminal judgment before the sentence is executed. The Superior Court's power in the respect, as evidenced by PB 42-51 et seq, provides a defendant with the ability to request that the court render a judgment of acquittal despite a guilty verdict. The trial court, thus, may determine that the verdict is legally flawed, and either release the defendant or order a new trial. Citations omitted: internal quotation marks omitted. State v McCahill, 261 Conn 492, 517, 811 A 2d 667 (2002)
Where, as here, the trial judge disagrees with the verdict of the jury, a vexing question often arises ... When this occurs, we review the action of the judge in setting the verdict aside rather than that of the jury in rendering it. Citation omitted; internal quotations marks omitted. Campbell v Gould 194 Conn 35, 39, 478 A 2d 596 (1984). In the present case, the trial court determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict. "In reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, we apply a two-part test. First we construe the evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdicgt. Second, we determine whether upon the facts so construed and the inferences reasonable drawn therefrom the [trier of fact] reasonably could have concluded that the cumulative force of the evidence established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt...In evaluating evidence, the trial of fact is not required to *202 accept as dispositive those inferences that are consistent with the defendant's innocence...The trier may draw whatever inferences from the evidence or facts established by the evidence it seems to be reasonable and logical...This does not require that each subordinate conclusion established by or inferred from the evidence, or even from other inferences, be proved beyond a reasonable doubt...because this court has held that [triers] factual inferences that support a guilty verdict need only be reasonable...notice the constant drifting of sentences with .... WTF
[A]s we have often noted, proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt...nor does proof beyond a reasonable doubt require acceptance of every hypothesis of innocence posed by the defendant that, had it been found credible by the trier, would have resulted in an acquittal...On appeal, we do not ask whether there is a reasonable view of he evidence that would support a reasonable view of the evidence that supports the [trier's] verdict of guilty...Furthermore, in our process of review, it does not diminish the probabative force of the evidence that it consists, in whole or in part, of evidence that is circumstantial rather than direct...It is not one fact, but the cumulative impact of the multitude of facts which established guilt in a case involving **350 substantial circumstantial evidence. Internal quotations omitted. State v Butler, 296 Conn 62, 76-77, 993 A 2d 970 (2010) They are not supposed to cite cases that came AFTER my case - because it shows they are manufacturing their f*king opinion.
Section 53a-181 (6) provides: "A person is guilty of breach of the Peace in the second degree when, with intent to cause inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk therof, such person...creates a public and hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act which such person is not licensed or privileged to do. For purposes of this section, "public place" means any area that is used or held out for use *203 by the public whether owned or operated by public or private interests...The trial court concluded that the state failed to prove that the condition created by the defendant was either public or hazardous. We disagree. It is clear to us that, when the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict of guilty, the jury reasonably could have concluded that the cumulaltive force of the evidence established that the defendant recklessly created a condition that was both public and hazardous. Accordingly, we conclude that the court abused its discretion by granting the motion for a judgement of acquittal. The court abused its discretion by going along with the jury, not setting the aside their verdict; then granting my motion for acquittal and then flipflopping again by supporting the damn verdict - full 360 degree circle!
And my other motions were not objected to by the prosecutor! This motion may not have been either on paper because my motion was that strong!
With regard to the public nature of the condition created by the defendant, the state presented evidence that, although the package was addressed to the president of the University, it was opened by Wendlyn, his secretary. Moreover, by the defendant's own admission, she was aware that the president had an "open door policy" and encouraged students to visit his office. With regard to the hazardous nature of the condition the state presented expert testimony Sure, GOOEY substance is expert! That polymeric adhesives, like those used to glue together the items inside the package, can cause contact dermatitis "in many cases" based on the aforementioned reasons, we conclude that there is a reasonable view of the evidence that supports the jury's verdict of guilty. Accordingly, the court abused its discretion by setting aside the verdict of the jury.
They lied again!!! They are trying to cover up the fact he failed to set it aside after the verdict was given!
The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded with direction to reinstate the jury's verdict and to proceed with sentencing.
All citations
124 Conn App 197 4 A 2d 347
It is all legal malpractice!
==============================================================================
I will do one more and have to take a break...
10. ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC v Bradley
Superior Court of Connecticut
Housing Sessions at New Haven
January 24, 2025
Not reported in All Rptr 2025 WL 314658
AND I SURE AS HELL NOTICED MY CASE AGAINST THEM IS NOT ON RECORD!
2025 wl 314658
ONLY THE WESTLAW CITATION IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
UNPUBLISHED OPINION, CHECK COURT RULES BEFORE CITING
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT
HOUSING SESSION
AT NEW HAVEN
ANSONIA STATE STREET, LLC
V
ANNE BRADLEY
Docket No. NHH-CV24-6024196-S
January 24, 2025
The REAL memo of decision was just an order for me to be evicted in 5 days! My appeal validates that!
I had all the documents scanned in - that's why they got their federal Mafia to steal my flash drives out of my purse. I hate everything about living in this corrupted place! $3,000 discrepancy on my bank account; never resolved and they stole the bank activity notebook again amount of my apartment. My main phone number doesn't work because they once again stole the sim card, leaving the phone with malware on it!
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AFTER TRIAL
Alayna Stone, Judge
*1 Plaintiff, Ansonia State Street, LLC brought a summary process action for nonpayment of rent against Defendant Anne Bradley seeking to recover possession of the premises despite failing to pay rent on August and September 2024. Defendant filed an answer disagreeing with the allegations and raising the special defense of payment. The case was tried on January 13, 2025. Plaintiff was represented by counsel. The property manager for Plaintiff testified and submitted evidence. Defendant testified and submitted evidence.
The Court fully considered and weighed all of the testimony and evidence received at trial; evaluated the credibility of the witnesses; assessed the weight, if any to be given specific evidence; has drawn such inference, that it seems reasonable and logical; reviewed and considered all the relevant pleadings, evidence, and law, as well as balanced the equitable positions of the parties.
The court makes the following factual findings:
Plaintiff purchased property commonly known as 360 State Street in November 2022. At the time of the purchase, Defendant was residing at the premises pursuant to a one-year lease agreement from 2013π΄ that automatically renewed on a month to month basis upon the operation of the lease.
π΄That is a f*king lie! The Section 8 contract is not month-to-month! If there is no contract, there is no lease. I stated that firmly in court and in pleadings and they keep pushing the lies! I also presented proof that that Ansonia State Street was subsidized monthly!
BTW, the Wiggin And Dana law firm teach Appellant's that it's a waste to enter judicial opinions in their appeal!
OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE THEY FRAUD THE DAMN OPINIONS OVER AND OVER AND CAN'T GET AWAY WITH IT IF YOU ADD THEM TO YOUR BRIEF! WHAT DO YOU APPEAL? THE OPINIONS, OF COURSE!
At the time of the original lease and through current, the total amount is $932. Because Dendant receives assistance from Section 8, she only pays a portion of the rental amount. Her portion of its rent is determined annually after she completes an annual recertification. Previously, her portion was $198. In January 2022, Defendant's portion was determined to be $264. Defendant has continued however, to make payments of $198 per month, for a shortfall of $66 per month.
On September 13, 2024, plaintiff had served a notice to quit for nonpayment of rent on August 2024 and September 2024. With a quit date of October 18, 2024. Defendant remains in possession of the premises.
DISCUSSION
Summary process is a special statutory procedure designed to provide an expeditious remedy..It enables landlords to obtain possession of leased premises without suffering the delay, loss and expense to which under the common-law actions, they might be subjected by tenants wrongfully holding over their terms "Polansky v Polansky, 144 Conn App 188, 191 (2013)
To prevail on a claim for nonpayment of rent, Plaintiff must establish the following essential elements:
1) A rental agreement
2) that Plaintiff is the lessor or owner of the subject premises;
3) the address of the subject premises;
4) the amount of rent due to plaintiff from defendant;
5) when the rent was due to plaintiff;
6) the date of the nonpayment;
7) the service of the notice to quit, as well as its service date and termination date and;
8) that defendant is still in possession. CGS 47a-15a et seq
The only element that is disputed in this case is the amount of rent that was due to plaintiff. Kyle Huckle, the property manager for the plaintiff credibly testified that the Housing Authority of New Haven pays $668 of the $932 due for rent, leaving the balance of $264 as Defendant's portion. His testimony was corroborated by a recertification letter received by plaintiff indicating that defendant's portion became $264 as of January 2022.
Although Defendant contends that she has paid her rent in full and on time every month, and proficed receipts of her $198 payments for July, August, and September, her testimony also demonstrates that she knew or should have known that her rental portion waas $264. Specifically, Defendant testified that every month that she made a rental payment she would ask for, and receive a ledger to confirm that her payment she would ask for, and receive, a ledger to confirm that admitted to evidence shows that beginning January 2023, when plaintiff began listing the Section 8 and tenant portions separately, Defendant's portion was $264 per month.
Defendant also testified that she had not received the recertification letter from Section 8 because she does not receive mail at her apartment. There was no testimony however, that she has her mail forwarded to a post office box or that she provided the Housing Authority with a change of mailing address form when she decided to longer check her mail at the premises.
Yes, that is what she stated. Defendant's failure to pick up her mail does not resolve her of the obligation to be aware of her tenant portion. For August and September, 2024, Defendant was required to pay $264 per month. She paid $198 per month. Accordingly, plaintiff has established all of the elements for nonpayment of rent and Defendant's special defense fails.
The document was frauded! I was ordered out on a Friday and did not know it because they tricked it, waiting for me to check the case, then issuing the order! I had to file appeal the fourth day, Monday! One day before the asshole marshals would force me out and steal the last of my possessions! My motion for Stay was denied!
They also refused to take my rent for February and March! I set a check on the damn desk in the office when Kyle Huckle refused it! They tactically and without due process (since I appealed) did this to disrupt - to corrupt!
The Court hereby enters judgment of possession in favor of plaintiff. Balancing the equities, the Court will stay of Execution until March 31, 2025, with use and occupancy payment $264 due by the 10th of the month for February and March. There was no stay of execution to March 31! She ordered me to be out in 5 days strategically on a Friday afternoon after these cyber morons knew I checked the status of the case! It was not uploaded until after I checked the status around 2pm - yet the chief clerk times it as around 10 am - not even calling me! I only Had Monday to appeal! And I appealed! Talk about frauding records! I motioned for extension of time also; and the motion was denied! She's no judge, no attorney - just a fraudulent vagabond puppet for Elites! Having no clue why she says things - just doing what her cybermaster tells her! - posted 9/4/2025
All Citations
Not Reported in Atl Rptr, 2025 WI 314658
She is not a judge; she is obviously not an attorney!
THE NOTICE TO QUIT DEFINES THE CASE! NONPAYMENT OF RENT FOR AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER! I paid hte same damn amount in July - and as stated in court, they did not accuse me of nonpayment in July! It was not a month to month lease! She failed to acknowledge the HAP Contract between the landlord and the Housing Authority!
She is a freaking fraud all the way around! Allowing a woman 20 years older than her to preside and say she was her!
Notice to Quit:
I have to resume this later. it is 3:05 pm and I had no sleep last night and was so anxious to get this all typed; if antying else, to clear mmy head for the doing the brief. She is a freaking fraud! The law specifically states the notice to quit defines the case. Nothing else can be brought up! In fact, her opinion in trial court deviates from this nefarious opinion. Both are nefarious!
I motioned for stay of Execution; it was denied! She nefariously ordered me me out from a Friday, in 5 straight days! Sneaking in the order after they see I checked the status of the case by spying on me!
I appealed!!! I will resume this later.
BTW, Exhibit A was just advertisement - there was no complaint attached - no validation of their billing - which is shear fraud!
==============================================================================
I am so tired of all this corruption!
I missed Scotty Kilmer 's Livestream Q&A today π€
==============================================================================
π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄π΄
My Comments from other social media
https://youtu.be/KWiay9HLuG8?si=r63hnl8IHNm8d2nB
A prominent attorney by the last name of Mawhinney wrote for WESTLAW and I was impressed with what I knew about him from what his widiw-wife shared with me. The llegal system has been hijacked by Nazi followers who have a big plan to hijack the country using satanic practices as their base to go by. It excuses their DECEPTION. Now more than ever, lawyers are often liars. I go through hell because I am against corruption. I am a peaceful, law-abiding person in a state where, ie, the Secretary of State told the attendees of the Women's Permanent Commission on the Status of Women OCSW - to use their children as owners of their *
business and they won't have to pay taxes! She went in to spread her corrupted cheat at UCinn Law School PLUS engage in pushing the Sandy Hook Shooting FRAUD for Barack Obama who stole over one trillion dollars from the economy - the Alex Jones trial was a sham to launder crime money because if you search for William Aldenburg Alex Jones trial - DAVID WHEELER impersonated him right at trial - he impersonated him at the Sandy Hook Shooting even - and Obama got FBI to refuse to arrest him and he continued to commit this federal offense - enough times to be out in prison for life just for that! Judges don't even necessarily have a law license even here! They are obviously wired and told what to do - rigged by the technocracy!
Attorney Mawhinney had been raked through the coals in Connecticut. I was devastated when I read up on that case! He obviously was subjected to this legal MALPRACTICE due to his upbringing. His grandfather was an upstanding man, former DA in a very corrupted place - Syracuse, NY. I knew his wife-widow , Anna - and was impressed with what she shared and how proud of her husband she was for standing up to crime. He passed away from a heart attack. Yet the Mafia had a stronghold there and if the politicians and govt leaders like mayors etc would have joined forces they could have eradicated this organized crime. She certainly was a woman if great ethics as well as prominence. Their family was very close as well. I am sure this grandson -attorney did nothing wrong. The elites wanted to get rid of him for standing up to crime by not participating, I'm sure.
==============================================================================
My typing is being switched around by some bastard hacking my blog! I will fix this before this is completed.
Not only is it illegal for the state to appeal when my appeal was being processed; but I was acquitted! Acquittals cannot be appealed!
In this matter, the defendant, Anne M. Bradley, was found guilty by a jury of breach of peace in the second degree in violation of General Statutes 53a-181 (6). The defendant thereafter moved for a judgment of acquittal, which the trial court granted on July 7, 2008. The state then filed a motion...
I also emphasized in court that when a person is charged breach of peace, they have to be in a public place. In this case, since they said Dr Kaplan was the victim, I would have had to have been at his office. I MAILED A PACKAGE. THE INVOLVES THE FED'S. THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE PACKAGE. THEY HAD IT FOR THREE DAYS! THEY DID NOTHING but conspire and conjur up a way to entrap me! Breach of peace requires a person to be a public place! I argued that at trial court! I argued that the charging me at Voire Dire was criminal by the judge, whose sonny-boy was fired by me for not doing a damn thing for me when I was victim in the car accident - following the crimes of Attorney Fredrick Kendall when I was slammed into by a state sander truck on a sunny day and the roads were bare, as so described by Kendall himself when tormenting me why I did not get out of his way! He was a murderer tied to organized crime! My father wanted to help me and I said, "Dad, he will get you murdered!" My mother should have stepped in and revoke her hiring him and also tell the attorney off for entering my room when I was sick and out of it with a severe head injury telling me to sign papers! I had no sense of control over the issue! I was traumatized from all of it! People had to whisper - so now freaking YouTube puts ads on my account with people whispering to humor their sociopathic selves!
Update 9/1/2025. This phone is at 18% charge so I need to charge it before resuming my typing. I will return here in about an hour. - 7:36pm 9/1/2025
It's 9:17pm - I've been goofing off. I was typing JOSEPH ALEXANDER JAMES case, which is what judge bafoon used to let his conspiring prosecutor to appeal with. I'll come back to this yet feast your eyes on theππ© on that case if you have time.
Opinion:
The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court (AC 20149) is denied.
Reason: Nonya business!
All Citations:
295 Conn 917, 990 A. 2d 867 (Mem)
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
