File a False Lien - Go To Jail (Ronald Hoodenpyle)

[The Observer]

Denver Post

September 17, 2010

Man Sentenced to Prison for False Lien against IRS Agent
By Yesenua Robles

A man from Colorado Springs was sentenced to a year in prison today for filing a false lien against an IRS employee.

Ronald Roy Hoodenpyle, 68, was indicted by a federal grand jury in Denver on Jan. 6, 2009. This June 17, after a three-day jury trial, Hoodenpyle was convicted.
According to a release from the U.S. Attorney's Office, during the investigation Hoodenpyle filed the lien against the property owned by an IRS revenue officer after the IRS had filed liens against Hoodenpyle's property.

The IRS had indicated that Hoodenpyle owed more than $1,160,000 to the IRS.
The false lien then filed in Jefferson County by Hoodenpyle, stated that the IRS officer owed Hoodenypyle more than one million dollars.

The government presented evidence during the trial that showed Hoodenpyle filed the false lien in retaliation for the IRS officer doing his job in filing the liens agains Hoodenpyle.
Hoodenpyle is currently free on bond, but will have to report to prison before Oct. 29 to serve the year sentence, after which he will have to serve two years on supervised release.

[fortinbras]

18 USC § 1521 was enacted Jan. 7, 2008. It makes it a felony to file "any false lien or encumbrance" against a federal employee on account of his official duties.

The section itself has a caption referencing "a federal judge" and the statute that contained it was the Court Security Act, but the section is written to protect anyone on the federal payroll and has already been used in cases of bogus liens against IRS employees, FBI witnesses, federal prosecutors, and a federal probation officer.


I might add that, prior to this section's adoption in 2008, bogus liens against IRS employees were prosecuted as attempts to "corruptly influence" or impede the administration of the revenue laws.

[notorial dissent]

Either way, not a good ending at all, and they still keep right on doing it.

[fortinbras]

The first prison sentence under the new law was earlier this year, to one of the original Montana Freemen.

Another Freeman got nailed under different laws last year. Russell Dean Landers, who claimed all sorts of impressive titles for himself, and wound up in Montana because he was being chased by law enforcement from other states (and tried to persuade his fellow Freemen to give up their own lives rather than let him be arrested), tried something truly slapstick: He was going to file a flock of liens against everything the warden owned, on the grounds that his name was copyrighted or somesuch, and then threaten the warden that he would foreclose on all his property unless the warden let him out of prison. A lesson to be learned: Don't use an FBI agent as your outside errand boy. Landers is now assured of 19 more years without worrying about the rent or groceries.

Last year, not long after the Landers case was publicized, someone who tried a similar stunt on his warden, the Bureau of Prisons regional director, various corrections officers, and the like, found himself sent to solitary confinement, at which point a judge -- did I mention that he also tried threatening a judge with these liens? -- told him that he had no grounds to sue to get more congenial accommodations. Robert CONWAY v. Warden Cameron LINDSAY (MD Penn., cv-07-145, July 6, 2009)

[Famspear]

The first prison sentence under the new law was earlier this year, to one of the original Montana Freemen.

Another Freeman got nailed under different laws last year. Russell Dean Landers, who claimed all sorts of impressive titles for himself, and wound up in Montana because he was being chased by law enforcement from other states (and tried to persuade his fellow Freemen to give up their own lives rather than let him be arrested), tried something truly slapstick: He was going to file a flock of liens against everything the warden owned, on the grounds that his name was copyrighted or somesuch, and then threaten the warden that he would foreclose on all his property unless the warden let him out of prison. A lesson to be learned: Don't use an FBI agent as your outside errand boy. Landers is now assured of 19 more years without worrying about the rent or groceries.

Last year, not long after the Landers case was publicized, someone who tried a similar stunt on his warden, the Bureau of Prisons regional director, various corrections officers, and the like, found himself sent to solitary confinement, at which point a judge -- did I mention that he also tried threatening a judge with these liens? -- told him that he had no grounds to sue to get more congenial accommodations. Robert CONWAY v. Warden Cameron LINDSAY (MD Penn., cv-07-145, July 6, 2009)

Ah, we may think of filing fraudulent liens against federal government personnel as a pretty stupid move, but this was really Conway's diabolical way of assuring himself some exclusive, private living arrangements in his own gated community. Of course, suing the warden was just a nefarious way for Conway to cover up the fact that this is what Conway really wanted all along. Gosh, these criminals are soooo smart, they outwit the evil government every time!

[Gregg]

sounds to me like you're channeling Lee Harvey

[Famspear]

sounds to me like you're channeling Lee Harvey

Or Pete Hendrickson, or Irwin Schiff, or Kent Hovind, or Oscar Stilley, or Lindsey Springer......

All suffer from delusions of grandeur, and all except for Harvey have ended up in the same place -- the Federal Bureau of Prisons. I hope Harvey doesn't end up in the same place, too (and he probably won't, if he's too small a fish to be worth tossing in the frying pan).

[Gregg]

sounds to me like you're channeling Lee Harvey

Or Pete Hendrickson, or Irwin Schiff, or Kent Hovind, or Oscar Stilley, or Lindsey Springer......

All suffer from delusions of grandeur, and all except for Harvey have ended up in the same place -- the Federal Bureau of Prisons. I hope Harvey doesn't end up in the same place, too (and he probably won't, if he's too small a fish to be worth tossing in the frying pan).

Maybe, but I know he won't because on the off chance they come after him he'll fold like a cheap lawn chair and cry like a little girl with a skinned knee.

[wserra]

Some people are too bleedin' stupid to realize when they get huge breaks. In a perfect world, fate would not waste scarce breaks on common idiots.

Hoodenpyle was pro se. He filed the usual TP raft of gibberish pretrial, such as this "First Notice of Fault and Demand for Payment". The court ignored him. Trial began on August 17, 2009. On August 20, 2009, Hoodie didn't show. Standby counsel informs the Court that he is ill, and files a half-assed doctor's note, written on plain paper rather than letterhead, stating that Hoodie "is to be excused for four weeks due to a medical condition". The judge declares a mistrial - huge break #1. Four days after he is too ill to continue, Hoodie starts again with the gibberish. In all, during that four-week period during which he was supposedly too sick to come to court, Hoodie files four nonsensical documents, culminating in his magnum opus - a "Notice of Final Determination and Judgement in Nihil Dicit", in which he claims that the govt owes him $364,000,000.00.

At this point, most of the judges before whom I practice would have hauled Hoodie in, demanded to know how such an ill man could write and file all this stuff, and quite likely have revoked his bond. Judge Krieger simply ignores him. Huge break #2.

Being somewhat skeptical that ol' Hoodie is really ill, the govt moves for an independent physical exam. A hearing is scheduled for November 5, 2009. Hoodie doesn't show. The court issues a warrant, but vacates it when Hoodie turns up a week later. Huge break #3. The court orders the exam; no report appears in the docket, but the case continues - meaning that Hoodie appears physically OK. Over the next few months, fifteen or so more gibberish filings. Court ignores him.

Retrial begins June 15, 2010. Hoodie convicted of sole count June 17. As reported in this thread, Judge Krieger gives him one year - and leaves him out on bail to voluntarily surrender to the designated facility. 18 USC 1521 carries a max of ten years. Huge break #4.

And Hoodie is probably ranting about govt tyranny.

[wserra]

And Hoodie is probably ranting about govt tyranny.

While living in a van, under a bridge, down by the river?

More true than you may realize.

Back in May of 2008, Colorado state courts foreclose on Hoodie and his wife and order them out of whatever palace they were living in. Hoodie says, "I'll show them - I'll bring 'An Action in the Common Law' against 'em in federal court". And he does, docket 08-cv-1031 (DCO). After filing the "complaint", Hoodie promptly moves for a stay of the foreclosure. Since he doesn't bother with such niceties as addressing the obvious Rooker/Feldman issue - or, for that matter, even serving anyone - the motion is denied. A month or so later, the "suit" is dismissed, with prejudice, on the obvious grounds (including failure to state a claim, both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction, and the minor detail that the house is in his wife's name and not his).

At least now he has a place to stay.

[wserra]

Observer titled this thread as concerning the consequences of filing bogus liens. With all due respect to the estimable Observer, I suggest that this thread really shows how "sovereign citizen" types only know one principle: "I'm owed a living".

Hoodie's problems began because he didn't pay either taxes ("I'm entitled to the services government provides without having to pay for them") or his mortgage ("I'm entitled to use someone else's money to buy a house and then stiff them"), because he is (in the words of his complaint in the above civil action) "a native-born American". Shortly after that case is dismissed, he seeks (docket 08-cv-1296) to adjudicate 31 pages of gibberish without paying the fee - not because he is poor, but because he has "a natural right" to do so. The Court threw him out the day he filed.

He then files the same gibberish again (docket 08-cv-1401), once again arguing he need not pay. Same result, same day filed.

He does it again (docket 08-cv-1710), this time claiming forma pauperis (instead of a "natural right" to use other people's money), winding up in front of a M-J who had not seen him before and who actually grants him forma pauperis status. Unfortunately for Hoodie, he winds up in front of the same D-J who had thrown him out the last two times and who does so again.

He then files again - all this happens within a few months - this time a purported Bivens action against an IRS employee (probably the same one against whom he later filed bogus liens). Docket 08-cv-2285. He once again convinces a M-J to let him proceed forma pauperis. Dismissed.

Finally, he sues the trustee who sold his house following foreclosure (docket 08-cv-2377). Dismissed, Rooker/Feldman.

It must be somebody's fault that Hoodie is on the street. After all, it can't be his.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Call me suspicious - Colorado Springs? Van Pelt?

Perhaps a suitor?

[bmielke]

Call me suspicious - Colorado Springs? Van Pelt?

Perhaps a suitor?

Then my name is also suspicious.

[The Observer]

It must be somebody's fault that Hoodie is on the street. After all, it can't be his.

Certainly can't be his fault after all of those appearances. All I can say is that he has worked very hard at trying to get jailed on a more permanent basis and keeps getting released back to the street.

Perhaps we could get him a hearing before JRB.

[Gregg]

He should have used common law I tell ya!

[JamesVincent]

How many times do you need to post the same thing? Fingers itchy? I think that paper is proof of the fastest server Ive ever seen. The document was posted to be served Jan 15 and was served and the Affidavit of Service was returned the 16th. Damn thats good.

[LPC]

Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow.

Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow.

Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow.

Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow.

Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow.

I'm sorry, could you please go a little slower.

[ashlynne39]

How many times do you need to post the same thing? Fingers itchy? I think that paper is proof of the fastest server Ive ever seen. The document was posted to be served Jan 15 and was served and the Affidavit of Service was returned the 16th. Damn thats good.

I have no comment on Merrill's posting because honestly I"m not that interested. I will say this though. I filed a lawsuit a few months ago for a client and service was made the next day by the constable. I've also had some same day service happen recently. I can see where it would be longer for a company where service might have to be made through a registered agent. But I've seen some pretty fast service.

[JamesVincent]

Huh. Everytime Ive had to have something served by any process its been 2-3 days. Only time it was quicker was the sheriffs department serving my ex one of the multiple protection orders Ive had against her and that took about 5-6 hours. Well, as that was the only cool thing I noticed on the documents, Im done commenting on them now.

[David Merrill]

Take a close look and tell me how fair you think this is. You have to pay careful attention to the date on the summons, and the date on the service of the summons. – And especially the date approved on the summons by the clerk of court!



Some of you simply lack the attention span to get this so I am going slow. The foreclosure hearing was scheduled for the 22nd but look at the date on this secret foreclosure hearing!



Poor Ronald Roy! He demanded a that Deutshe Bank bring the original note to the foreclosure hearing and when he got to the hearing the clerk of court informed him that he must not really care much about his home because he missed the very important foreclosure hearing held in secret on the 16th, the same day by the way, that Deutsche Bank was served with the subpoena duces tecum!!

Poor Ronald Roy! You might wonder what would drive a man to negative averment and maritime liens – and putting liens on IRS agents and such!

Just so nobody accuses me of hiding links, here is some related information to indicate how Duetsche Bank is. You might especially get a look at the witness list! Of course that will bring out the best of denial around here.

To better comprehend though, you should look at that Doc 70; I mean the real one from PACER of course (you got that Wesley?).

http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/8563 ... roughc.jpg

To understand get a look at the traditional Foreclosure Notice, Paragraph 2.


Regards,

David Merrill.


P.S. Moderator; Editing the posts is very difficult for me. Please delete the four posts above this. I noticed that I had made another error. Please restore my ability to edit posts.

I tried to present is slowly for the slower and uniniterested. What people don't seem to get is that they held his foreclosure hearing early, in secret!