c

 

 

 







[header]

__________________________


c  



Alleged defendant, Me (hereinafter ´Iµ, ´meµ, or ´myµ), respectfully requests this Court
to dismiss CITY OF FINDLAY·S alleged complaint pursuant to Ohio Rules of Civil
Procedure, Rule 12(B)(5) insufficiency of service of process/no service of process; or, in
the alternative, pursuant to Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(B)(4) insufficiency of
process, C1 and C2 supra—




 





On Saturday, February 20, 2010, a Findlay Municipal Officer with badge #861
(hereinafter ´the Officerµ) arrested me and issued Uniform Traffic Ticket #BR549
(hereinafter ´ticketµ)— The ticket charged an alleged violation of Findlay Municipal Code
§ 333—03b, ´speed 4-22-09—µ To this date, I have been served neither summons nor a
verified complaint as stated in my affidavit incorporated herein as Exhibit ´A—µ


 


 






c
 















 
 
 !



Ohio Traffic Rule 20— Procedure not Otherwise Specified states as follows:

´If no procedure is  

 prescribed by these rules, the Rules of Criminal
Procedure and the applicable law apply—µ

When the traffic rules are silent regarding relevant procedures, the Ohio Criminal Rules
may be invoked—

"


c
 





 
# 













 
 
 !



Ohio Criminal Rule 57— Rule of Court; Procedure Not Otherwise Specified states in
pertinent part:
 ´(B) Procedure not otherwise specified— If no procedure is  
 prescribed by
rule, the court may proceed in any lawful manner not inconsistent with these rules of
criminal procedure, and 
 look to the rules of civil procedure and to the applicable
law if no rule of criminal procedure exists—µ

Where the Ohio Criminal Rules are silent on specific procedures, this court ´shall,µ look
to the Ohio Civil Rules of Procedure or the applicable law—

$
c

#

 


%!

Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12 Defenses and Objections--When and How
Presented--by Pleading or Motion--Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings states in
pertinent part:

´(B) How presented— Every defense, in law or fact, to a claim for relief in any pleading,
whether a claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, shall be asserted in
the responsive pleading thereto if one is required, except that the following defenses

 at the 




&


&
  : (1) lack of jurisdiction over the
subject matter, (2) lack of jurisdiction over the person, (3) improper venue, (4)
insufficiency of process, (5)   

 

 , (6) failure to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted, (7) failure to join a party under Rule 19 or
Rule 19—1— A motion making any of these defenses

 be made before pleading if a
further pleading is permitted—µ

Ohio Traffic Rule 3 and Ohio Traffic Rule 7 are vague regarding appearances because
multiple interpretations may be taken from the same rules— Ohio Traffic Rule 3 and
Ohio Traffic Rule 7 are vague because the rules do not sufficiently inform me if a
personal appearance is mandatory or if I may appear by motion— An appearance is not
limited to appearing in person unless the rules so state— One may appear by motion as
per the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure— Moreover, one may make an appearance through
an attorney·s representation— The Traffic Rules do not provide specific procedures
regarding appearances or how appearances may be made— Ohio Traffic Rule 20, C1
supra, and Ohio Criminal Rule 57(B), C2 supra, provide that where a criminal or traffic
rule do not provide specific procedures the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure may be
invoked— Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(B) provides a specific procedure for
appearances where the traffic and criminal rules are silent—

Therefore, I am not required to appear personally and may appear by this motion in
satisfaction of my agreement to appear—
'
( 

)
  




 !

Ohio Constitution, Article IV, §20 Style of process, prosecution, and indictment states as
follows:

´The style of
 process 
 be, ´The State of Ohio;µ all prosecutions 
 be carried
on, in the name, and by the authority, of the state of Ohio; and all indictments shall
conclude, ´against the peace and dignity of the state of Ohio—·µ

In this case, it is mandatory for process to be styled ´The State of Ohio,µ verbatim,
because the word ´shallµ is used— Moreover, it is also mandatory that this attempt at
prosecution be carried on and under the authority of the state of Ohio because the
word, ´shall,µ is a mandatory one, whereas ´mayµ denotes the granting of discretion—

Therefore, the style of process and any attempt at prosecution must be carried on and
under the authority of ´The State of Ohio—µ

*
c

+  


)



!

Ohio Revised Code §2935—17 requires in relevant part that:

„ offender be named;
9 the offense committed be described;
V peace officer must personally appear before an authorized person and under
oath or affirmation, attest to the validity of the accusation by signing the jurat;
 contain the signature of said authorized person for verification—

The ticket cannot be an affidavit because the Officer did not appear personally before an
authorized person and under oath or affirmation and sign the jurat— Moreover, the ticket
is not an affidavit because the signature from said authorized person is absent— The
ticket cannot be an affidavit because it was not created under the authority or in the
name of the State of Ohio nor was it styled ´The State of Ohio,µ C4 supra— Moreover, the
ticket is not an affidavit because the Officer solely created the ticket alongside the road—
Moreover, Ohio Traffic Rule 3 is devoid of any Procedural Due Process of Law
protections—

Therefore, the ticket is not an affidavit—

,
c

+  


)


  
 !

Ohio Criminal Rule 3— Complaint states as follows:

´The complaint is a written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense
charged— It shall also state the numerical designation of the applicable statute or
ordinance— It 

&




 before any person authorized by law to
administer oaths—µ

Ohio Traffic Rule 20, C1 supra, provides that where a Traffic rule does not provide
specific procedures the Ohio Criminal Rules may be invoked— Ohio Criminal Rule 3
provides specific form requirements and substantive procedures that comport with Due
Process of Law where the Ohio Traffic rules are silent— The traffic rules provide for the
formatting of the ticket book and nothing else— The ticket is not a complaint because it
fails to charge all the essential elements of the offense to wit: ´speed 4-22-09µ does not
fully apprise me of the charges being lodged against me—

Moreover, the ticket is not a complaint because it was not created by and through the
authority of the state of Ohio nor was the ticket styled ´The State of Ohio,µ C4 supra—
Moreover, the ticket is not a complaint because it was not made by the complainant
under oath or affirmation before someone authorized by law to take an oath in the state
of Ohio— Moreover, the ticket is not a complaint because said authorized person·s
signature, for verification, is missing— Moreover, the ticket is not a complaint because
the Officer is not authorized by law to create complaints— Moreover, the ticket is not a
complaint because the Officer solely created the ticket alongside the road—

Therefore, the ticket is not a complaint—

-
. 

# 
&
 

 !

Ohio Traffic Rule 6— Summons, Warrants: Form, Service and Execution states as follows:

´(A) Form— The form of summons and warrants, 



), 
 be as
prescribed in Criminal Rule 4—
(B) Service and execution— Summons, 



), and warrants 
 be
served and executed as prescribed by Criminal Rule 4—µ

In this case, process must be served in accordance with Ohio Criminal Rule 4 because
the ticket fails to provide procedures determinative of proper Procedural Due Process
of Law related to form, service and execution of a summons and complaint—

Therefore, at the direction of Ohio Traffic Rule 6, I may look to Ohio Criminal Rule 4
relating to the aforementioned issues—
/
c

+  


)


 !



Ohio Criminal Rule 4— Warrant or Summons; Arrest states in pertinent parts:

´(A) Issuance—

(1) Upon complaint— If it appears from the complaint, or from an affidavit or

affidavits filed with the complaint, that there is probable cause to believe that an
offense has been committed, and that the defendant has committed it, a warrant for
the arrest of the defendant, or a summons in lieu of a warrant, 
 be issued by a
judge, magistrate, clerk of court, or officer of the court designated by the judge, to
any law enforcement officer
 0
&

 to execute or serve it—µ

The ticket issued is not a summons because a judge, magistrate, clerk of court or any
person designated by the judge, did not issue it— Moreover, the ticket is not a summons
because the Officer is not authorized by law to serve a summons, as he is a complaining
witness ?
a party to this alleged action— Moreover, the ticket is not a summons because
the Officer, an employee of the Executive Branch, solely issued the ticket alongside the
road devoid of Judicial Branch involvement— Moreover, no legitimate complaint was
filed from which a lawful summons could be served upon me—

Therefore, the ticket is not a summons—

1

c
%

#




+  


)!



Ohio Traffic Rule 10— Pleas; Rights upon Plea states as follows:

´(A) Pleas— A defendant 

 plead not guilty, guilty or, with the consent of the court,
no contest— All pleas may be made orally— If a defendant refuses to plead, the court
shall enter a plea of not guilty on behalf of the defendant—µ

I am not required to plead to the ticket because ´mayµ connotes possibility, choice, and
not compulsory, imperativeness— Moreover, I am not required to plead to the ticket
because no summons or complaint was lawfully served on me— Moreover, I am not
required to plead to the ticket because there is no pending case—

Therefore, I am not required to plead to the ticket—

 (
 

The Ohio Traffic Rules describing the form and permitting issuing procedures of the
ticket to a single Executive Branch Officer do not provide sufficient procedural and
substantive protections that satisfy Due Process of Law— The ticket is not a complaint
because it lacks procedural and substantive protections that comports with Due Process
of Law— A prosecutor scrutinizes evidence and then determines if a complaint or
information should be filed to secure Justice— The Officer is not authorized to solely create
and file complaints— I am not able to create and file complaints when/if I witness
someone violating the law and neither is the Officer— Moreover, it is the sole province of
the Judicial Branch and not the Executive Branch to issue summonses; the ticket is not a
summons— Therefore, absent the existence of process to serve, service of process cannot
be achieved— Without service of process, I have not received notice of any charges against
me—

2
#




I pray that this matter be dismissed, without prejudice, for the aforementioned reasons—

Respectfully Submitted,

____________________________________
Me




 



I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this Motion to Dismiss has been delivered
to Mark C Miller, prosecuting attorney located at 222 Broadway, Room 104 Findlay, Ohio
45840 by hand delivery this 4th day of March 2010—
 c

 

 

 





[header]

__________________________




 

(

On this the 4th day of March 2010, came on to be heard Defendant·s Motion for Court to
Dismiss the proceedings in the above entitled and numbered cause, and the Court,
having reviewed the said motion and the arguments as well as the evidence thereon
submitted, 34 the defendant·s motion and, (2 this case dismissed without
prejudice—

_____________________________________________
Municipal Court Judge, Hancock County