Make your own free website on Tripod.com

Moses Shepard

3926 North 13 Place

Phoenix, Arizona

 

IN THE SUPREME COURT

OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

 

IN THE MATTER OF:

 

PETITION TO AMEND Rule 31,

Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court and

TO ADD Rule 32 and Rules 76 through 80, Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court

Supreme Court No.

R-02-0017, R-02-0027, CV-02-0121-PR

 

REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON THE STATE BAR’S PROPOSED RULE CHANGE, MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES, AND, IN

And Related

PETITION FOR SPECIAL ACTION

against the STATE BAR OF ARIZONA

THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR EN BLOC VOLUNTARY RECUSAL OF THIS SUPREME COURT DUE TO DISQUALIFICATION ARISING

And Related

PETITION TO REPEAL Rules 31 – 74

of the Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court

AND MOTION TO SUSPEND THE RULES

FROM LACK OF NEUTRALITY / CONFLICTS

OF INTEREST UNDER JUDICIAL CANONS 1-5

 

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

And Related Pending

APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

from the United States Supreme Court

 

 

                Pursuant to Rule 28(E), Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court, a request for a public hearing is hereby made regarding the State Bar of Arizona’s proposed rule changes regarding the “unauthorized practice of law” [sic].  Also, pursuant to Rule 26, Arizona Rules of the Supreme Court, this Court is hereby moved for good cause shown and in the furtherance of justice, to suspend the operation of its rules in this particular case.  Specifically, this Court is moved to voluntarily recuse itself as a whole so that said public hearing can be held before a group of non-bar members that have never graduated from nor attended any law school approved by any mandatory bar throughout the world because this Court is obviously disqualified to consider the questions raised by it’s own bar because each judge is a member of that bar.  If this Court proceeds without recusal, or acts in secret with no public hearing, its integrity and independence will be called into question under judicial Canon 1, it will not avoid the appearance of impropriety under Canon 2, it will not be acting impartially under Canon 3, it will be engaged in extra-judicial activities in conflict with its judicial obligations casting reasonable doubt on each judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge under Canon 4, and it will be engaged in inappropriate political activity under Canon 5 by siding with its own bar.  See the Black’s Law Dictionary definitions for “political questions,” “justiciable controversy,” “political,” and all other related pertinent authorities.

 

                                                Respectfully submitted this 30th day of September, 2002.

 

                                                                                                ________________________

                                                                                                Moses Shepard

                                                                                                3926 North 13 Place

                                                                                                Phoenix, Arizona

 

Original and six copies filed with the Clerk of the Arizona Supreme Court on this 30th day of September, 2002, and a copy mailed, telefaxed or hand-delivered to:

 

Bob Banwyck, Assistant Executive Director – Legal

State Bar of Arizona

111 West Monroe, Suite 1800

Phoenix, Arizona 85003

 

By: ___________________________