Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

329th Judicial District Court

Criminal Division
Judge Randy Clapp
Wharton, Texas

Case No 16263

STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff,


v.
SHIRLEY PIGOTT, Defendant.
_________________________/
May 27, 2008

I. MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE:

DEFENDANT Shirley Pigott moves this Honorable Court to enter an ORDER FOR
PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE of a valid warrant authorizing the search of my private
financial information held in the custody of Toyota Financial Services by the office of the
District Attorney of the County of Wharton, Texas, on or about October 6, 2007.

II. I PRAY THIS BE GRANTED, BECAUSE,

a. The privacy of the financial records of DEFENDANT Shirley Pigott are


protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution,1 and

b. In the absence of a valid warrant issued by the judiciary, communication with


Toyota Financial Services for the purpose of determining the amount of the
remaining loan toward the purchase of the 2005 Toyota Prius was unlawful,2 and

c. This Honorable Court is under the jurisdiction of the laws and constitution of
the United States, and the laws and constitution of the State of Texas, and

d. This Honorable Court operates under the Rule of Law.

1
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be searched or seized.
2
We have recognized that the principal object of the Fourth Amendment is the protection of
privacy rather than property, and have increasingly discarded fictional and procedural barriers
rested on property concepts. See Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 266 ; Silverman v. United
States, 365 U.S. 505, 511 .

329th Judicial District Court


Criminal Division
Judge Randy Clapp
Wharton, Texas

Case No 16263

STATE OF TEXAS, Plaintiff,


v.
SHIRLEY PIGOTT, Defendant.
_________________________/
May 27, 2008

I. MOTION TO ENTER INTO EVIDENCE

A. A True and Correct Copy of the CD (video) of the events surrounding the arrest of Defendant
Shirley Pigott by Officer Alfred Ochoa on the evening of September 29, 2007 and early morning
of September 30, 2007. The video was made in the course of the officer's employment duties at
the Texas Department of Public Safety.

B. A True and Correct unaltered Copy of the work schedule of Officer Alfred Ochoa for the
month of September, 2007, in the course of his employment by the Texas Department of Public
Safety, as stood on September 1st, and at weekly intervals thereafter, and after any change.

C. A True and Correct unaltered Copy of the work schedule of Officer Daniel Terronez for the
month of September, 2007, in the course of his employment by the Texas Department of Public
Safety, as stood on September 1st, and at weekly intervals thereafter, and after any change.

D. A True and Correct unaltered Copy of the photographs made in the offices of Dexter Eaves
and David Benning Smith of the cell phone of the Defendant Shirley Pigott showing the schedule
of several uncompleted phone calls made to her home on the evening of September 29, 2007,
demonstrating that, at the time the phone calls were attempted, she was not within range of
service.

E. A True and Correct Inventory of the contents of Defendant's car on the evening of September
29, 2007, at the time of her arrest, with specific note as to what was alleged to have been
contraband.

F. An affidavit by Alfred Ochoa stating at what time on September 29, 2007, he knew the
identification of the defendant and at what time he knew the defendant was a physician.
G. An affidavit by Alfred Ochoa stating at what time he knew, on September 29, 2007, the
officer responding to his call for backup would be Daniel Terronez.

H. An affidavit by Alfred Ochoa describing how he contacted Officer Terronez on September 29,
2007, what was said by both parties, when contact was first attempted, when it was finally made,
and how long it took Officer Terronez to arrive on the scene after contact was made.

I. An affidavit by Daniel Terronez stating at what time contact was made with him by Officer
Ochoa, how contact was

I. MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE:

DEFENDANT Shirley Pigott moves this Honorable Court to enter an ORDER FOR
PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE of a valid warrant authorizing the search of my private
financial information held in the custody of Toyota Financial Services by the office of the
District Attorney of the County of Wharton, Texas, on or about October 6, 2007.

II. I PRAY THIS BE GRANTED, BECAUSE,

a. The privacy of the financial records of DEFENDANT Shirley Pigott are


protected by the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution,
b. In the absence of a valid warrant issued by the judiciary,
communication with Toyota Financial Services for the purpose of
determining the amount of the remaining loan toward the purchase of the
2005 Toyota Prius was unlawful,2 and

c. This Honorable Court is under the jurisdiction of the laws and


constitution of the United States, and the laws and constitution of the
State of Texas, and

d. This Honorable Court operates under the Rule of Law.


1
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon
probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the persons or things to be searched or seized.
2
We have recognized that the principal object of the Fourth Amendment is the protection of
privacy rather than property, and have increasingly discarded fictional and procedural barriers
rested on property concepts. See Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257, 266 ; Silverman v. United
States, 365 U.S. 505, 511 .