CASE NUMBER

SUPREME COURT*

MALINDA NICOLE Di ROSA

PETITIONER

V.

STATE OF LOUISIANA

RESPONDENT

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF

HABEAS CORPUS

FROM THE

26TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, BOSSIER PARISH, LOUISIANA

IN CASES CRIMINAL DOCKET NUMBERED: 172,621; 172,622; 172,623

MALINDA NICOLE Di ROSA

IN PROPER PERSON

C/O 318 LAKESHORE PKWY.

NEW ORLEANS, LA 70124

XXX - XXX - XXXX

*To be construed as a reference to the same Supreme Court created by Article III Section 1 of the United States Constitution. Name and / or address correction demanded.

Comes now into court Malinda Nicole DiRosa, a citizen of the State of Louisiana, to date an uncontested fact in criminal cases numbered 157,313 and 157,314 on the Docket of the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court State of Louisiana, Parish of Bossier. In those cases Malinda Nicole DiRosa did, from the very first opportunity, challenge the jurisdiction of the court, the cause of action, right of action and standing of the Plaintiff with well reasoned arguments and facts plus proof of misconduct and fraud. In those cases, the judge did ignore all challenges and did allow the district attorney to ignore court orders for the production of information and documents and did unlawfully and without jurisdiction and with full knowledge that the Petitioner did not understand the language being used, having evicted her interpreter and next friend, did defy every law of man or God, and proceed to conviction as the record in those cases clearly shows.

Now, they are at it again. Again, by demand for dismissal for want of jurisdiction of the court and lack of cause of action, right of action and standing of the Plaintiff in these cases and constructive notice of treason, conspiracy and fraud, the Petitioner did notice the court of its lack of jurisdiction and lack of a valid charge. (Exhibit A)

There can be no doubt that the State of Louisiana has been invaded and the Sovereign Citizens of the State of Louisiana subjugated as is historical fact and admitted by the Louisiana Bar Association, among others, in "The Dubious Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment" Tulane Law Review Vol. 28, 1953.

Nor can there be any doubt that the invaders of the State of Louisiana did install a puppet government, an occupational government, which continues to this day. This is fully briefed in the FORMAL ACCUSATION OF TREASON AGAINST THE STATE OF LOUISIANA ON THE TESTIMONY OF TWO WITNESSES TO THE SAME OVERT ACTS (Exhibit 3 of Exhibit A). Unfortunately, this document was originally mistakenly sent to the highest inferior court that congress may from time to time ordain and establish and was returned by the treasonous conspirator who clerks for that court (Exhibit 4 of Exhibit A)

Nor can there be any doubt that the occupational government of the conquered State of Louisiana has, under color of law, stolen all of the vehicles of the conquered people of the State of Louisiana by an illegal bill of credit as is fully briefed in Exhibit 1 of Exhibit A. This issue was brought before the Louisiana Supreme Court (Docket numbers 2007-KH-131 and 2007-KH-866) who, not only refused to rule, but, as it has been proved is also unable to rule as that court is improperly set with citizens of a foreign government, aliens in the State of Louisiana, co-conspirators in the invasion of the State of Louisiana. This is briefed in Exhibit 2 of Exhibit A. There can be no doubt that the Citizens of the State of Louisiana are unrepresented and their interests uncared for and that this Petitioner is being persecuted by this court of the conspirators for daring to claim her unalienable rights.

This is even evidenced by the time line. This Petitioner was arrested and incarcerated on charges based on a known invalid lien scant days after the return of the formal accusation of Treason. The record in criminal cases numbered 157,313 and 157,314 on the Docket of the Twenty-Sixth Judicial District Court State of Louisiana, Parish of Bossier do show conclusively that the petitioner was the victim of harassment and fraud by the occupational government which brought the fraudulent charges. Now, again under color of law, with the pretense of a legitimate government, acting fraudulently under the name of the United States, this occupational government is going to repeat the abuse.

Nor is this an isolated incident. My interpreter, next friend and father Michael E. DiRosa, also a Citizen of the State of Louisiana and unschooled in the law, has been awaiting his illegal trial for over four years and has been confined in little better than house arrest for these years in cases numbered F1525159, F1523230, F1678532, F1681551 on the docket of the First Parish Court, Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, another federal admiralty court. Nor, has there been any activity in these cases since October, 2008. "He who does not know that a freeman is detained in his own house is not in bad faith; but as soon as he is advised of the fact he becomes in bad faith."

The question also arises as to what valid laws have been passed since the overthrow of congress in 1867. Can a band of conspirators overthrow congress, invade 10 States and, at the point of a bayonet, change our national constitution and still be called a legitimate government of the United States? This was not a cunning coercion that removed our rights it was an armed invasion strictly forbidden by our Constitution.

The Petitioner does notice this court that she is unschooled in the law. It has been a herculean task of due diligence by my interpreter and next friend that has deduced that the One Supreme Court in which the jurisdiction of the United States shall be vested is called simply the Supreme Court and not the Supreme Court of the United States or the United States Supreme Court. If this is not the One Supreme Court in which the of the judicial power of United States shall be vested, I demand to be informed.

Considering the forgoing and indisputable evidence the Petitioner does move the one supreme Court in which the judicial power of the United States shall be vested to accept its duty and obligation, mandated by our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, to end this tyranny of the invading state as is more fully stated in the Formal charge of treason (Exhibit 3 of Exhibit A.) The first step is to accept jurisdiction of these cases, and stop the 26^th Judicial District Court from committing the worst the worst error a court can commit. There can be no doubt that it is his intent as shown in Exhibit B. To take no action is an action. Time is of the essence in this matter.

"And in a writ of error to a Circuit Court of the United States, the whole record is before this court for examination and decision, and if the sum in controversy is large enough to give jurisdiction, it is not only the right, but it is the judicial duty of the court to examine the whole case as presented by the record; and if it appears upon its face that any material error or errors have been committed by the court below, it is the duty of this court to reverse the judgment and remand the case. And certainly an error in passing a judgment upon the merits in favor of either party, in a case which it was not authorized to try, and over which it had no jurisdiction, is as grave an error as a court can commit." Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393

"It will grant it on application of one committed for trial in the circuit court on a criminal charge; 4 Cra. 75; 3 Dall, and where the petitioner is committed on an insufficient warrant; 3 Cra. 448; ... also for the purpose purpose of inquiring into the cause of the restraint of the liberty of prisoners in jail under or by the color of the authority of the United States, and all persons who are in custody in violation of the constitution or laws of the United States; 128 U.S. 289" Bouviers Law Dictionary Vol I Pg 486-488

It has been decided since Roman Law.

"A person ought not to be detained in bad faith for any time; and so no delay should be granted to the person who thus detains him" in other words, a writ of haveas corpus should be returnable and heard instanter."Bouviers Law Dictionary Vol I Pg 486-488

I Michael E. DiRosa, father, translator and next friend of Malinda Nicole DiRosa do hereby certify that I have accurately translated the position of Malinda Nicole DiRosa into a form suitable for this court, to the best of my ability and do further certify that the above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.

I Michael E. DiRosa, father, translator and next friend of Malinda Nicole DiRosa do further certify that Malinda Nicole DiRosa did authorize me to sign her name on her behalf as distance and time makes no other option possible. She does also certify that the above is true and correct to the best of her knowledge and belief. If anyone does doubt the word or intent of these Sovereign Citizens of the State of Louisiana, all they have to do is ask. This action has been done openly and notoriously and we will repeat these claims to anyone who will listen.

Certified this 2nd day of July, 2009

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I Michael E. DiRosa do hereby certify that I have sent a true and correct copy of this document to the clerk of the 26^th Judicial District Court. One copy for the court and one copy for the district attorney. I did not send the exhibits as the court already has the original and the district attorney has also been served with the exhibits. However, if either party would like another copy we will be happy to send them one. I also sent them the note to the clerk in the interest of completeness. This true and correct copy was sent by entrusting them into the hands of the United States Post Office, properly addressed, certified mail, return receipt requested. This 2^nd day of July, 2009

Michael E. DiRosa

c/o 318 Lakeshore Pkwy.

New Orleans, Louisiana 70124