CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS PLACER COUNTY GOVERNMENT OFFICALS INDIVIDULS & FACTS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT CAN NOT BE DISPUTED PER EVIDENCE. Misconduct Abuse of the Judicial Proceedings Here is a Itemized Summery Discription of Factual Events That took Place over A (2) year Period. The defendant residing outside Placer County Region. Was Arrested on 4-17-12 for a incedent that took place in 2010 by Det. Chris Glaspell at his Residence without a Warrant, dispite several prior atemps to locate defendant over a 3 month period. Defendant was working and not home most of the time Det. Glaspell was aware of this and the location of defendants work. In stead A DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF A WARRANTLESS ARREST WAS CONDUTED, by the patrol unit the detective dispatched to transport me. No laws that abridge the constitutional rights of its citizans shall be inforced. The Public Defender that was assigind by the courts to me for this matter was Erik Randall Beauchamp, the (DDA) was William David Marchi. During Court Proceedings William had Det Glaspell contact Erik to get me to submitt to a DNA sample. Erik asked me and I sad no, Erik told me it would be in my best interest that was his advice to me, as my Public Defender. Then on 8-15-2012 in the Am I met with Erik at the Placer County Sheriff’s Office. We went inside where we met J.S.Davis the Tech doing the dna extraction. During extration she took (4) referance swabs instead of (1) swab. I questioned her as to why (4) and not (1) she said it was proceedure. The following court appointment Erik Beauchamp was absent & I needed him. Because William told the Court he needed moore time because of dna comparisan results the Defendant had requested. The substitute attorney could not object and told me to inform erik. When I informed Erik he said he was not happy with the DA but never corrected the matter. This is a Federal Due Process Violaton against the Defendant. Then Erik asked me to waive my rights at the hearing I told him I would not do so. He got mad and said he would waive them for me. Then at the next hearing William & Erik did not show and the sub attorney told the court it was going to be a stipulated continuance. I told him that is not what me and Erik decided so he informed the court. The Judge then set Preliminary Hearing for the Next week when I came to the hearing both the DA & my Attorney were telling the Judge they were not prepaired and had no ideal today was preliminary. Later when I checked the case file it said it was the defendants falut because he changed his mine why would they blame me. After that they added a new case saying the same place was victimized twice. Also Jeffery Claytom Moore took the Procecution over. Then the (DA) begain to waive my rights because of good cause per presiting the Judge. After Multible times telling my Attorney I did not want to waive my rights Erik Beauchamp started waiving my rights knowing how I was against this. The Court in the proceedings have also failed to look into the case file despite open court transcripts by the presiding judges acknowledging my contitutional violations. Even after (2) years the court still continued the court proceedings. The court in the proceedings also held unconstitutional proceedings by holding court without prior informing the defendant or attorney until after continuing proceedings were granted. Per my attorny as he sent me a signed letter stateing what happened and when the new court date was. .
This complaint and/or review was posted on HolySmoke.org on 20:35 pm, July 10, 2017 (CST) and is a permanent record located at: https://www.holysmoke.org/scam/district-attorneys-office-review/.
The reviews & complaints posted about District Attorney's Office was submitted by a member or guest on this website. Any and all opinions and information are published as is. HolySmoke.org does not edit or remove any aspect of the report and is simply a consumer grievance free-speech platform. As such, HolySmoke.org cannot be held liable for the complaints and reviews posted about District Attorney's Office as per Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Be an Informed Consumer
An informed consumer is capable of making sensible decisions, gains insight about a business prior to an interaction or transaction. Our newsletter provides resources and information that informs you, the consumer. of such things as consumer rights and protection.