Reno's Appeal

[bmielke]

About a week before he was to leave to go to Iraq, knowing that he could not take the guns with him overseas, and not certain if he would be making it back, gave them as gifts to his younger brother, whom at the time was still a police officer. A few days before the arrest, we (Reno, Lee and myself) along with other officers took the guns out to the firing range to ensure his brother that they were in operational condition.

In Tennessee, and I assume this is true other places, possession pretty much determines ownership of a gun. If I buy a gun and give it as a gift to my sister, it is her gun. If she then gives it back to me to hold for her, it is my gun, if I then give it back to her, she goes out and joins a militia protesting the government cover up of unicorns and the gun gets confiscated when in her possession I think it would be her gun even though I "owned" the gun twice it is still "owned" by her when she was arrested.

I think if Reno had control of the firearms they were his, unless there was some kind of contract. In fact if my sister and I were trading a gun back and forth I would insist that we did a bill of sale each time so that if something happened it would be very clear whose gun it is. If Reno did that I think it still is pretty muddy because they are family.

Honestly other then the .50 BMG's nothing on that list is worth a lot of money with the possible exception of the H&R 16GA if that's a O/U it could be worth something, some of the AK's may not be 922r compliant making them illegal, the others are cheap, the Mini 14 and 10-22 are nice but on the low end in the price arena, the P22 is also nice but .22's are never worth that much, the CX4 is a $800 gun new so a used one would probably be in the $600 range, the L1A1's are FAL copies I usually see them for $800 a piece. I think there are about $10,000 of guns on that list and that's assuming that .50BMG's are both Semi-Auto's and would bring a good price, but honestly you don't see many on the market and if it isn't Barrett they don't really sell, everyone want's a Barrett.

[bmielke]

About a week before he was to leave to go to Iraq, knowing that he could not take the guns with him overseas, and not certain if he would be making it back, gave them as gifts to his younger brother, whom at the time was still a police officer. A few days before the arrest, we (Reno, Lee and myself) along with other officers took the guns out to the firing range to ensure his brother that they were in operational condition.

Is there any sort of licensing associated with the guns? If so, that might do more to determine their ownership.

Some states require paperwork when ownership of guns is transferred from one party to another and if there is no paperwork showing ownership transferred away from Reno, he could still be considered the owner.

Again, depends on the state.

See http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/ that use to be a table that was easy to use. Now it is a stupid interactive map. In Texas there is no licensing to own, Reno was from Texas. Outside of the north east most places do not require any kind of permit to purchase a gun.

[grixit]

what am i suppose to believe? what am i suppose to do? my life is in the hands of complete strangers!

Yes, it's called "imprisonment".

[notorial dissent]

my lawyer call on 04/27/10 0900
the second issue that he wanted to talk to me about was the status of the my criminal appeal. it turns out everything that i thought i knew about the appeal was wrong.
And it has taken our genius here how long to finally figure this out? Not that he really gets it even now
what am i suppose to believe? what am i suppose to do? my life is in the hands of complete strangers!
And who was responsible for that little bit of brilliance that brought this all about??? Oh that’s right, sitting in his jail cell whining about where he is now.

The light may have finally come on, but it is awfully dim, and much too little and much too late to mitigate what has since happened.

[Demosthenes]

Reno update posted by Donna.

Oh Kay Everyone!

i just read my attorney's reply to the government's rebuttal; and i have to hand it to Mr. Gordon, he really showed a little backbone with the government's claims of what was fact in the case by busting their lies right on the spot. Nipped them right in the bud he did.

the first part was under the first part he tells the courts that the government "misstated" a couple of facts... in legal/ court room talk that is damn near calling someone a liar when on the stand for a regular witness, but when you tell it to the government, well, they know that they lied too and know that they are being called on it hence they hear, "you are a liar and a fat mouth!"

he (mr. gordon) calls them on their acting like the "or" and "AND" statement in the indictment are no big deal.

he calls them on their claim that in the video ( that is just audio and was made by Casey, a friend of D. Riley, admittedly ) that no where was the words "volunteer security" used as the government say it was.

he calls them on their claim that "armed bodyguard" cannot be found either in the testimony, video or surveillance and what there was of video/ surveillance can there ever be any actions that would merrit those actions as being an "armed bodyguard."

he also calls them on their assertion that Riley's emails to me are infact my emails when they were sent by Riley and no where did i express Riley's comments in return. infact they were mostly one way emails to me from Riley and Riley's comments even support my testimony that i was purchasing the carbine for my own use and ownership.

finally in part one, he clears up the governments vague and including language of all three of us were together doing everything together and shows that my part AND convicts show other wise time and time again.

Part II he (mr gordon) calls them out on how the government trys to confuse the issue of the felony sentence being applied to my misdemeanor conviction. he re asserts the brief we filed the first time.

Part III, is the terriorial jusrisdiction, he writes" in its brief the government has belittled mr gonzalez's territorial jurisdiction argument by misstating it. the government argues only that the court had subject matter jurisdiction."

he re asserts the proper argument of our territorial jurisdiction challenge. and writes, "mr gonzalez urges this court to undertake a specific territorial jurisdiction analysis, and not be misguided by the governments misunderstanding of the issue." ... again, "they" know better, so they know that we are calling them a liar and a fat mouth once again...

thats all i got for now

laters...

reno

[Demosthenes]

he calls them on their claim that in the video ( that is just audio and was made by Casey, a friend of D. Riley, admittedly ) that no where was the words "volunteer security" used as the government say it was.

By way of background, Reno posted a blog entry on his MySpace page back on June 10, 2007.

A couple of days later, Brown supporter Casey Lee Cobb recorded an audio/video file of Reno's blog entry, complete with quasi-hispanic accent. "Hello everyone... For those that do not know me, I am Cirino Gonzalez; aka Reno." Casey refers to himself as Reno and never clarifies that he is Casey reading another man's words.

When he was on the stand, a deputy marshal testified that it was Reno's voice on the tape. He was wrong.

When Reno was on the stand, he testified that, while it might not be his voice, he did indeed write the words that were read on the tape made by Casey.

I have a copy of the original MySpace blog entry in which clearly states that his role at the home was to act as "volunteer security." Here's the entire MySpace entry posted by Reno during the standoff (emphasis mine).

Sunday, June 10, 2007

If not me, then who? If not now, then when?
Current mood: productive

Hello everyone...

For those that do not know me, I am Cirino Gonzalez; aka Reno.

I am the manager for this sits e that was created by Anthony. I blog on here being that I stay with Ed and Elaine. I am volunteer security for them and their friends here...

Many people are concerned that this will turn out to be another Rudy Ridge or Waco... Well the truth be known, I fear it too. NOT this time! I am here for this one! The people of this country will not be fooled or tricked by the main stream media in believing that our "supposed" all powerful, federal government can do no wrong.

Take note "feds;" that the people know the truth this time around. The story of these people has reached out to the world... that's right the world! Canada, England, China, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, and many more others...

Even our troops in Iraq are learning about it. Last year while I was in Iraq the troops were passing around the dvd of Arron Russo's America: freedom to fascism. The people are waking up...

The dots are starting to connect. People are speaking out to their friends... Little pockets of dissent are forming. Both within the military and amongst the civilians.

We are learning the about the lies you cannot keep covered without closing your eyes and saying the pledge to the flag as loud as you can... blindly as you can! "...to the REPUBLIC! for which it stands!..." not Democracy... so why is "our" country spreading democracy?

How has a country that boast of its freedom accept the practice of free speech zones? Where have you drawn your line in the ground and said not this time? ONLY to be pushed back again and again and again.

How can a one of our greatest cities sleep at night knowing that the whole world understands the lie that has been held up before us and we are told to forget the real world, focus on our explanation that makes no sense in the world of science. 911 was an inside job!

Dr. Ron Paul speaks the truth and never gets air time; While the "Butcher of New York Giuliani" gets praise for harping on terror threats that may come... backed up with no real evidence.

Speaking of no evidence; a simple question was asked a long time ago, "are the federal income taxes a law?" followed by a simple request, "show me the law!" Yet for all the spin and words coming out of our medias dirty mouths was there ever an answer uttered... "there is no law to be found and displayed"

Simple as that. Yet the U.S. Marshals will continue to carry out their orders to bring down Ed and Elaine; to shut them up! and shut them up good!

How could any self respecting cop and even security guard wear their uniform today knowing that there was never a law given as proof to the crime that Ed and Elaine Brown case was charged with...

I know what I would be saying, "this is not right, this cannot be allowed to happen!" This sorry excuse for a trial was unjust and flies in my face of INTEGRETY!

This federal government that so many sheeple pay protection money to out of fear was never meant to become this crooked and corrupted.

WE the people ARE the government! Our voice is our power! Our will be done so long as no one else gets hurt.

Personal responsibility is "the way forward," not an all power mad police force. They must be held to the lawful laws of the land just the same as we are! AND jury nullification must be taught and restored to make our courts fair again for the common man and woman.

...if this does not shake you awake, then perhaps your pocket book will perk up with this info... The Federal Reserve is no more government owned than Federal Express!

-IT IS A PRIVATE CORPORATION!-

The Federal Reserve gets paid to make money out of thin air! Hold it for one second! Think about it. The government ie. we the people are paying the federal reserve to make money for us out of thin air.

Then when we borrow this money, we the people via our federal government "deciders" are charged interest on the money borrowed for a war and other killings we never asked for.

Now some of you maybe thinking that is right, you pay someone to make something for you... you pay interest on money you borrowed.

Get this, right NOW as it was before, our constitution provides for us to make our own money and interest free to boot.... DOES THAT MAKE ANY SENSE TO ANYONE OUT THERE? To give this power and money making ability to a private bank with the power to control us?

The new world order is coming and many of us see it everyday.

A few refuse to believe it... but in the end they will most likely jump on the wagon!

Last night a new friend of mine said something to me I just had to quote her:

now i am going to have to go V for Vendetta style on you..."If you think the way I think, and you feel the way I feel..." then you should know exactly what I am thinking

Heather


We know what that means... and you know what that means...

I used to lay in bed at night and ask myself, "if not me? then who? if not now? then when?"

I have had enough of the killing. If you haven't then guess what... you should be happy soon. No more children are going to died on my watch. The all powerful federal government MUST be checked with every patriot's body. This "police state" MUST be stopped. Personal responsibility is YOURS.

"You don't get strong doing a weak mans work"

Reno

8:28 AM - 1 Comments - 2 Kudos - Add Comment

[.]

You don't get strong doing a weak mans [sic] work

No, but you do get imprisoned for being an idiot.

[wserra]

Although "appeal deemed submitted" does sound like "oral argument waived."

Not as of yesterday:

In light of the new information provided by appellant Gonzalez's counsel, the motion to reinstate oral argument is granted. Argument will be heard May 5, 2010, with the consolidated appeals 08-2450 and 08-2056. The three appellants have been allotted a total of 25 minutes of argument, to divide as counsel see fit.

Translation: "Awright, awright, we'll hear you. Take 8.3 minutes. Our time is valuable."

Hey, I've received less.

[wserra]

he re asserts the proper argument of our territorial jurisdiction challenge. and writes, "mr gonzalez urges this court to undertake a specific territorial jurisdiction analysis, and not be misguided by the governments misunderstanding of the issue." ... again, "they" know better, so they know that we are calling them a liar and a fat mouth once again...

Here is that section of the reply brief in its entirety:

III. Territorial Jurisdiction

In its brief the Government has belittled Mr. Gonzalez’s territorial jurisdiction argument by misstating it. The Government argues only that the court had subject matter jurisdiction. GOV’T BRF. at 54. For criminal jurisdiction generally, there must be not only personal and subject matter jurisdiction, but territorial jurisdiction as well. See generally, Richard T. Ford, Law’s Territory (A History of Jurisdiction), 97 MICH. L. REV. 843 (1999); State v. Legg, 9 S.W.3d 111, 114 (Tenn. 1999) (“It is elementary that before a court may exercise judicial power to hear and determine a criminal prosecution, that court must possess three types of jurisdiction: jurisdiction over the defendant, jurisdiction over the alleged crime, and territorial jurisdiction.”

Mr. Gonzalez does not focus on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Rather, his argument goes to territorial jurisdiction, which is separate and must also be present before federal authority exists in a place. Mr. Gonzalez urges this Court to undertake a specific territorial jurisdiction analysis, and not be misguided by the Government’s misunderstanding of the issue.

Rino does not exactly understand the import of an experienced appellate lawyer submitting a point to a Court of Appeals in which the only authority cited is a law review article and a state court decision. It goes like this: "Please don't sanction me. I'm only doing this at the behest of a difficult client."

[notorial dissent]

Wes, all too true, but then again, that has been Rino's problem from day one, his grasp of reality is too tenuous to be measured. Otherwise he wouldn't have gone off into the dark as far as he did, or come up with some of the blithering idiocy that he has been spouting.

I do feel sorry for this current lawyer, he truly does have a fool for a client, who has an even bigger idiot in his father helping to dig his grave that much deeper.

I'm impressed they gave them 8 minutes, I still can't believe that even the most imaginative of tap dances is going to get them very far. I guess time will tell, but the comedy just keeps on coming.

[Nikki]

They don't have eight minutes to make their case.

The time also includes their answers to questions from the bench such as: "Sir, what were you thinking when you filed such a patently frivolous argument and why should we not aither sanction you or refer this case to your local Bar Association for possible disciplinary action?"

[notorial dissent]

Nikki, again, all too true, and as you point out, I would hope the court might just address that little point along the way, not that there will be anything like a satisfactory answer forthcoming.

I will assume that since they didn't originally grant oral argument, that they couldn't see there was anything that needed clarifying either from the record or the petition, and the fact that they "generously" granted a whole 8 minutes in the end, that they still don't see that there is any controversy. Maybe just my jaded view of the whole thing, but I suspect pretty close to the mark. Either way, I don't think Rino's lawyer is going to have a good day of it. And of course, it will be all his fault.

[VanMeters Revenge]

Ed and Elaine Brown Supporters Oral Argument for Appeals (audio)
http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/files/audio/08-2300.mp3

[grixit]

Reno's lawyer made two arguments

1) My inability to understand the difference between "exclusive" and "overlapping" somehow invalidates my client's conviction.

2) I caught a judge acting like a judge! That's an error of fact.

Sad because an alternative to argument 2 would be to assert that the judge overreached. It might not work but it wouldn't have been outright denied.

[notorial dissent]

So he is going with the “I am an incompetent idiot and I don’t know how court is supposed to run” defense then?

[grixit]

Not sure it's actually a defense.

Now Riley's laywer, on the other hand, seemed to be arguing that both foisting a lawyer on Dogwalker at one point and letting him go pro se at another, constituted denial of assistance of counsel. But it might have been something else.

[Paladin]

Retired justice Souter still behind a bench
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/news/750 ... h.html?i=1

“He’s incredibly bright and insightful,” said New Hampshire attorney Sven Wiberg, the lawyer who was asked to defend his argument to Souter. “He cuts right to the heart of things.”