|
|||||||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|||||||
|
Death By Lethal Subjection Contents Death By Lethal Subjection Obstruction Of Justice Criminal File 1 Criminal File 2 Criminal File 3 Criminal File 4 Criminal File 5 Criminal File 6
|
|
CRIMINAL FILE 1 David T. Sholes Attachments to Section 12 Habeas Corpus Petition GROUNDS ALLEGED AS TO ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS ENDING IN GUILTY PLEA AND SENTENCING GROUND ONE David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, In That His Trial And Appeal Attorneys Rendered Deficient, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, And Further Engaged In Highly Prejudicial Actions To harm Sholes And His Rights. GROUND TWO David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of Law, Equal protection, And Fair legal proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, In The manner And procedures By Which His Guilty Plea Were Taken, And its Terms Were Erroneous And Impermissible As A matter Of Law. GROUND THREE David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal protection, And Fair legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, And Indiana Code 35-35-1-2 And 35-35-1-3 Were Violated And Not Followed, In The manner And procedures By Which Sholes' Guilty Plea Was Taken And his Plea Agreement Accepted By The Court. GROUND FOUR David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of law, Equal Protection, And Fair legal proceedings Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, Because His Guilty Plea and Plea Agreement Were Not Voluntarily, Intelligently, and Knowingly made, In That Sholes Was Pressured, Tricked, Coerced, And Misadvised By Court, prosecutor, And Counsel As To The Same. GROUND FIVE David T. Sholes Was Denied Due
process Of law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Fifth,
Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When Sholes,
In Accepting The Guilty Plea Agreement, Acted Without Awareness That He Still
Faced The Death penalty Under its Terms, And Acted Without Being Adequately
Informed By His Counsel That he Did Still Face The Death penalty Under GROUND SIX David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of law, Equal protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, In That Sholes' Guilty Plea Was Not Knowingly And Intelligently Entered Into Because Of Sholes' Unfit Mental And Emotional State, Because He Was Psychiatrically impaired By A Pre-Existing Mental Condition Which He Had Previously Been Receiving Treatment For Prior To The Offense, And Because Defense Counsel Prohibited Sholes From Receiving Continued Treatment And Therapy For Said Pre-Existing Condition. GROUND SEVEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, In That Sholes Was Incapable Of Laying, And Did Not Lay, A Sufficient Factual Basis And Admission Of Guilt To The Charged Offenses, To Justify The Acceptance Of The Guilty Plea And A Finding Of Guilt To All Charged Offenses. The Trial Court Erred In Finding That A Factual Basis Existed For And In Accepting The Plea To All Offenses Charged. The "Facts" Sholes Testified To Were Prompted Directly By His Counsel And Consisted Only Of Deliberately Planted Memories And Rehearsed Facts, Since Sholes had Little-To-No Direct Personal Recollection Of What had Happened To Give Rise To The Criminal Offenses To Which He Was Pleading Guilty. Some Key Facts Which Sholes Testified-To From His Planted Memories/Rehearsed Statements, Were Directly Refuted By A Surviving Victim in The Course Of Sholes' Guilty Plea/Sentencing Proceedings, And The Court Was Fully Aware Of This And That Sholes had Indicated That He Was Incapable Of Remembering What Had happened Earlier In The Pre-Trial Proceedings And In Examination/Questioning. The Court And Prosecution Was Further Fully Aware That Sholes Was Highly Intoxicated By Alcohol And Drugs At The Time Of The Offense, And Had Went Into An Alcohol/Drug-Induced Coma Minutes After The Incidents Involved, All Which Were Fully Established By Emergency Medical Technician And Hospital Reports Available To The Court And The Prosecution. Based On All These Circumstances, Sholes Simply Lacked Sufficient Factual Recall Of The Incidents or Intent To Commit The Offenses At The Time Of The Incidents, To Be Able To Plead Guilty To having Knowingly And Intentionally Committed Each And Every One Of The Charged Offenses, And The Court And Prosecution Erred In Allowing Him To Do So And in Accepting The Plea, And Participated In letting A man Plead Guilty To Things He Could Not Recall. GROUND EIGHT David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, And The Court Violated The Applicable Sentencing Provisions Of The Indiana Code, In The manner And Terms of The Court's Sentencing Of Sholes. GROUND NINE David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, Under The Terms Of His Guilty Plea Agreement And In His Guilty Plea And Sentencing Procedures, And Suffered Prejudice, In The manner The Agreement And The Court Allowed or Disallowed/Used or Failed To use Aggravators, Mitigators, And Evidence Of Mitigation. Further, The Court Further Specifically Erred In Aggravating (And Finding That Said Aggravator Outweighed Any Mitigators) On The Basis Of A Totally Erroneous And Invalid Aggravator (Death Of A Fireman Acting In The Course Of His Duties). GROUND TEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, And Suffered Grave Harm And Prejudice, When The Prosecuting Attorney Engaged In Prosecutorial Misconduct, Misrepresentation And Concealment Of Evidence, Deliberate Prejudicial Leaks Of Information To The press/Media And Public, And Engaged In A Conspiracy To Deprive Sholes Of His Constitutional Rights And Bring About his Guilty Plea And Conviction. GROUND ELEVEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendment To The United States Constitution, And The Prosecutor Engaged In Gross And Highly Prejudicial Misconduct Affecting Sholes' Right To Fair Proceedings And Trial, When The Office Of The Indiana Attorney General Advised And Threatened Sholes Defense Counsel To Drop Any Attempt To Investigate or Present Sholes' Intoxication/Impairment Defense. GROUND TWELVE David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When The Wabash County Sheriff Deliberately Made False Statements To Defense Trial Counsel, Which Misrepresentations Resulted In Sholes And his Counsel Acting To Sholes' Grave Harm And Prejudice. GROUND THIRTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, When His Defense Counsel Entered Into An Ethical Impropriety And Conflict Of Interest, And unavoidably Became Biased And Prejudiced And Incapable Of Fairly Representing Sholes' Personal Best Interests, By Virtue Of Representing The Interests Of Victims (Contrary To The Interests Of Sholes) In a Related Civil Action Stemming From The Incidents Which Gave Rise To Sholes' Criminal Matter. GROUND FOURTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, His Right Against Self-Incrimination, And His Right To Have Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When The State Of Indiana Introduced Into The Record Through A Pre-Sentence Investigation Report, A Prejudicial Psychiatric Evaluation Which Went Beyond Simply Reporting To The Court On The Matter Of Sholes' Competency And Which Contained Statements And Admissions Made Without Proper Legal Advisement of Sholes' Rights And How The Information Taken From Sholes Would Be Used. GROUND FIFTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When He Was Not Afforded And Provided The Full Panoply of "Death Penalty Case" Processes, Procedures, And Protections By The Trial Court Under The Applicable Statues Of The Indiana Code Pertaining To "Death Penalty" Cases, Neither Initially And During The Course Of Pre-Trial Proceedings, Nor At The Time Of His Guilty Plea And Sentencing (Despite Facing The Death Penalty Initially And Still Facing It At The Time Of The Guilty Plea). GROUND SIXTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of law; Equal Protection; His Right To Confront And Cross-Examine All Witnesses; His Right To Be Sentenced On The Basis Of Relevant, Accurate, And Properly Presented Evidence; And His Right To Fair Legal Proceedings, Including Sentencing, Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution. The Court Accepted, Filed, Considered, Used, And Acted Against Sholes In His Guilty Plea And Sentence Enhancement, On The Basis Of Highly Irrelevant, Improper, Prejudicial, And Unsubstantiated/Unsubstantiable Letters And Petitions From Members Of The General public Who Were Not Victims In The Case, Some Altogether Outside The Jurisdiction Of The Court Or The State Of Indiana, Expressing Uninformed Opinions About The Case And Advocating Harshness Towards Sholes. The Court Specifically Made Mention Of, Considered, And Used The Petitions And letters In making Its Decision On the Guilty Plea And Sentence. The Court Further Denied Sholes Due Process Of law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When The Judge Used Personal, Philosophical, And Political Opinions Of Himself And Society In Accepting The Plea And Rendering Sentence. GROUND SEVENTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And A Fair Proceedings Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When Special Judge Hunt Made Misstatements And Misrepresented The Plea Agreement, In Addressing Sholes At The Guilty Plea/Sentencing Proceedings. GROUND EIGHTEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings, Under The Sixth And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, And Applicable Sentencing Statues of The Indiana Code, When The Court Accepted A Plea Agreement Forbidding Sholes To Present Any Mitigating Evidence (Despite The Terms Of Years Charges Being Open To A Sentencing Range On The Part Of The Judge), And Forbidding Consideration Of Mitigating Factors, And Weighing Of Aggravating And Mitigating Factors. The Court Further Failed Itself To Hear, Consider, Weigh, Or Set Forth Its Consideration And Weighing Of All Relevant Mitigating And Aggravating Factors As Required By law, When It Sentenced Sholes To An Enhanced Sentence Of Life Without Parole. GROUND NINETEEN David T. Sholes Was Denied Due Process Of Law, Equal Protection, And Fair Legal Proceedings Under The Fifth, Sixth, And Fourteenth Amendments To The United States Constitution, When Special Judge Hunt Knowingly Participated Simultaneously As Judge in Both Pending Civil Legal Proceedings Against Sholes For Damages Arising Out Of The Deaths And injuries He Caused, And In Criminal Prosecution Of Sholes For The Exact Same Deaths And Injuries. Judge Hunt Engaged In Judicial Misconduct And Gross Ethical Violations, And Could Not Avoid Bias And Prejudice Against Sholes, In Doing So. Criminal File 6
|