• American Military Poverty Law Project
• Free the Sailor:
  • Case Chronology
  • Who's Who
  • Legal issues
• Californians Against Voter Fraud
• Public Corruption Watch
• Judicial Accountability Watch Service (JAWS)

Pursuant to Frap 27, title 5 USC 701-6, US Constitution, Article 1, Sec. 8, Clauses 13-14, 10 US Code ss 813/1814, title 32 subsections 720.6/709 Steven R. Nary US Navy sailor/Petitioner/ appellant’s files this motion to vacate the illegal San Francisco local state court judgment of October 28, 1999 by local San Francisco court judge Kevin Vincent Ryan as in excess of and beyond its jurisdiction, in that:

1. that the San Francisco local court, its judges in the case-- Lenard Louie, McBride, Munson, Ann Bouilane, Ms. Lee Baxter, Kevin McCarthy, Richard Kramer, Jack Berman, Robert Dondero Kevin Vincent Ryan, and the local San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan, as well as his ‘at will’ employees, Peter Cling, John M. Farrell and others never sought nor received, pursuant to to title 32 Code of Federal Regulations ss 720.6/ 720.20/ 10 US Code ss 814, the mandatory prior written permission of both the US Secretary of the Navy, then John Dalton, and later Richard Danzig.

• ***Secondly, these same local judges and prosecutors never sought or received the Executive authority of Governor Pete Wilson either prior to March 29, 1996 or afterwards , that of Governor Grey Davis to assert ‘In Personam jurisdiction over petitioner/appellant US Navy sailor Steven R. Nary:
• ***As certified by Alan Carlsen, the Chief Clerk in the local San (1) ` Francisco court, pursuant to title 32 CFR ss 720.6, then California’s Governor Peter Wilson never gave his executive permission nor knew anything about this case. General Bozeman ,the keeper of military records for the state of California also knew nothing nor had any records regarding this case as certified in the Chronology at page Chronological page 0150 and 0151.
• ***May 1999, the local state court had faxed notification from The Judge Advocates Office of the US Navy, that was sent via fax to US Representative Marion Berry, the Nary family’s congressman Sept. 27th 1999 Pre Voir Dir Hearing in Kevin V. Ryan’s Dept. 21--see exhibit.
• ****Testimony on the Lack of Jurisdiction issue @ pages 115 to 116 line 4 Hotchkiss’s testimony agreeing with Steven Nary’s challenge to Hallinan’s assertion of jurisdiction over a federal military person @ page 136 line 2 through to page 137 line 6
• Note: Although the wrong word was used ("extradition"), at page 116 and elsewhere in the transcript on the morning of 9-27-1999-- which is an out of state delivery by proper authorities, the ‘removal' of Steven Nary from armed marine guard locked confinement on board the USS Carl Vinson on March 28- 29-1996m,, was still an ILLEGAL DELIVERY, even though the ‘out of state delivery word 'extradition’ was used; this didn’t change the fact that the whole process was rampantly illegal: it was also a gross due process violation. Further, despite having this state case #165558, twice in their courts,- -July 1996 and January 2000, the California State Court Judges: Strankman, Swager, Stein and Marchiano, and California State Supreme Court Justice Ronald George ignored the notification in the (2) pleadings ordered by then federal district court Judge Legge: that the (local) and state courts address the jurisdiction issue. This federal constitutional and military status issue was timely, properly and repeatedly raised before local San Francisco judge Lenard Louie, illegally assigned their local case #165558 to local Judge Kevin Vincent Ryan in September 1999;over two months after the state case was removed to the jurisdiction of the 9th federal Court of Appeals July 25, 1999. Legge repeatedly stated in his decisions that “the jurisdiction was with that (9th) Federal Appellate Court.” Note that Legge didn’t remand the case back to the local state court. Thus the 10-28-1999 judgment is void ab initio
• ****. Prejudice: local state court judge Ryan was put on notice by a declaration @ chronological page 0489 from attorney Theo Philips, a disinterested spectator in Ryan’s courtroom during the demonstration against sailor Nary that Ryan permitted. Although everyone present witnessed the open jury lobbying and tampering in that courtroom, and outside of that courtroom, Dept. 21, 3rd floor, 850 Bryant, San Francisco. Neither Ryan, his bailiff, or the attorneys present did anything to stop the demonstration, or protect the rights of the sailor/defendant who was there, dating from Monday April 1, 1996. Note that the petitioner/appellant sailor was in that courtroom through a fraudulent impersonation of the executive authority of Governor Peter Wilson as well as the prior and continuing authority of the Secretary of the Navy, then John Dalton. (3) This judgment was also obtained by the fraudulent representation as illustrated in the book for title 32 Code of Federal Regulations ss 720.6 --see exhibits-- in the federal form for ‘Delivery’ of alleged federal military offenders to local civil authority. Specifically, on Friday, March 29, 1996, Peter Cling, an ‘at will employee’ of San Francisco District Attorney Hallinan fraudulently impersonated the executive authority of then Governor Pete Wilson by claiming that “he,” Peter Cling, had authority to bind the state of California to an agreement with the US Navy; see exhibit.
• ****Not only guarantee the return of sailor Nary to the Navy, if Nary was found ‘Not Guilty.’ (omitted by Ryan-Hallinan from trial exhibits)
• ****But to guarantee sailor Nary’s return without expenditure to the Navy, or to pay his expenses to return to the Navy base.
• ****Cling, as an ‘at will’ employee of Hallinan in no capacity had the authority to represent that “he, Cling” could bind the state of California to any agreement. Cling couldn’t even bind the City of San Francisco to any agreement with anybody. Or any governmental entity. In a San Francisco District Attorney case ‘Lee v Hallinan city/County of San Francisco 98-16487/98-16701 Memorandum, this federal appellate court has already defined the status of an assistant district attorney as’at will’ employee Note: Judge Ryan and D. A. Hallinan/ etc. Prosecutors Peter Cling and John M. Farrell concealed this ‘ Delivery Agreement’ from the lists of exhibits that they used in this illegal case. In May, 1999,When (4) Bruce Hotchkiss received congressional notification faxed from Congressman Marion Berry and Navy Judge Advocate’s Office -- see exhibits -- Hotchkiss also gave copies of these documents (i.e., Delivery Agreement falsified by Cling, faxes from JAG and Congressman Berry, to the legal researcher and liaison to the Navy Inspector\ General’s Office, contact person Commander Adams USN. Both Governors Wilson and Davis, as late as March 15, 2002, have stated that their executive authority was never sought nor given. Or that they knew anything--as required-- about this case and its violations.
• Both California State Attorney Generals never had their permission sought. Deputy Attorney General Ribson even volunteered that his office knew and quoted the proper mandated procedures and the relevant mandatory title 32 Code of Federal Regulations that apply to this case; @ certified chronological page 0261 for seven years, petitioner has quoted these mandatory federal military regulations that apply to these type of situations. Indeed, Bergstrom, the San Francisco policeman, who illegally entered a federal military compound, without the prior authorization of the base commander, area commander, ship’s captain etc. stated at transcript page @32, that “ I have absolutely no authority on a US Ship.”
• But for over three and a half years, March 29, 1996 to on or about December 2nd, 1999, both the San Francisco District Attorney and (5) ` his local judges at 850 Bryant, openly displayed their prejudice and against the federal military sailor and his rights to the disclosure of his assailant’s HIV/ AIDS/ VD/ TB / HEPATITIS status: This was also exculpatory evidence because of the petitioner/s repeated assertion of his right not to be raped. Instead, local prosecutor and local court up through the state appellate courts but ignored the
• ***repeated certified notification of Dr. Philip Dreisbach at c certified expert with a Diplomate American Board of Internal Medicine and Medical Oncology-- and his wife,Jeanette Dreisbach of the Desert Hematology Oncology Medical Group Inc. , Rancho Mirage, California, about the concealment of the dead assailant’s AIDS/ HIV/ TB/ HEPATITUS status, at chronological pages @ 042,0043, 0072 . To date, over seven years later, the perpetrator’s medical status is still illegally concealed from the victim and his medical volunteer advisors. On April, 1, 1996,The District Attorney/local courts permitted Juan Pifarre’s corpse to be burned, his ashes dumped into San Francisco Bay instead of being returned to Argentina, his land of citizenship.
• Additionally, petitioner/ appellant never received medical care for his broken hand sustained in fighting to prevent unwanted male rape. Petitioner/appellant sailor had to remove his own cast, “piece by stinking piece. The local prosecution and the local courts through the state appellate courts ignored the issues certified in the transcript of
• ***Illegal conditions of confinement illegally imposed on the 18 year old-- 3 1/2 years of violations of the petitioner/ appellant/ sailor’s constitutional rights of access to fresh air, sunlight and outside exercise,according to mandated federal jail/prison standards of one hour per day. Mrs. Edith Nary put local judge Munson on notice @ chronological page--@0045-0046 & certified chronological p. 0324.
• ***All of the local state court judges, state appellate judges up to and including the California state supreme court, twice had these issues and violations of constitutional magnitude before them. Military petitioner/ appellant repeatedly raised his claims as ‘federal civil and federal military, by specifically citing both statute and substance of said claims as federally mandated.
• *** Local and California state appellate and California Supreme Courts had fair opportunity to correct all of the violations of the local court-but instead , for three and half years, ignored all of these violations-see Clerk of Court’s certified transcript at Chronological point/ page 042-043, extract of the local state court case.#165558.
• ***The state appellate court decisions of August/ October 1999, as was as the appeal of the 16 years to life, did not cite, as federally mandated, one example of US Supreme Court or federal civil or military law, statute, regulations etc. pursuant to Packer v Hill, 291 F.3RD 569(9TH CIR 20020 @ page 578 Petitioner/ appellant Sailor Nary cites all of the above events, which were never responded to by D. A. Hallinan, Sheriff Hennesey, State Attorney General Lockyer, regarding Hallinan and the local judges.
• ***On April 28, 2000, in response to a letter from Mrs. Edith Nary, State Attorney General Lockyer’s office responded that “Please be advised that the Attorney General’s Office represents the State of California in criminal appellate cases.” Yet when properly and timely served, after the illegal sentence of 11-28,1999, Lockyer’s office never defended the jurisdictional and separation of powers etc. violations committed by Hallinan and the local judges in this case . Petitioner also cites COSS v LACKAWANNA COUNTY DIST. ATTY. 204 F.3RD. (3 CIR 2000)@ page 466 , this extra legal `proceeding should have never been held . For seven and a half years, this state proceeding was of and continues to be an ongoing violation of constitutional magnitude.
• ***Complying with federal judge Legge’s order, petitioner/appellant sailor filed the habeas corpus applications with the local, state and state supreme court, certified at chronological pages @ 0231 and 0316.. extract of local state court case#165558. However, none of the local state judges, Ms. Lee Baxter, Robert Dondero and Kevin V. Ryan, who had notice certified at chronological pages ever held the federally mandated statutes for a “full, fair, (8) and separate hearing(s) under 28 US Code subsection 2254. certified at chronological pages @0323, and 0465 and 0497. When petitioner/ appellant/ sailor tried to assert his federal due process rights , All these local judges issued were paper denials of those federal rights but no federal law or relevant federal court decisions to justify their erroneous decisions and denial of due process. These local judges were not overruled by their appellates.
• ***The local state court also displayed rampant prejudice against the US Navy, the US Marine Corps, the State of Texas, and by inference, the US Department of Defense’s policy on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ Local state court Judge Ryan permitted deputy prosecutor John Michael Farrell, to inject his prejudices and prosecutorial misconduct into proceeding by writing on Ryan’s courtroom blackboard for Ryan’s jury and his audience, such inflammatory words as”faggots.” Farrell also repeatedly referred to“Fag”, “gay people in that community(US Carl Vinson)”. This conduct is certified at transcript pages 1317, 1318, as well as the insertion of “ homophobic, Gay Panic into that illegal trial @ certified transcript page 1609 extract of local state court case#165558. Finally, given the serious constitutional violations, quoting COSS V LACKAWANNA COUNTY DIST. ATTY. 204 F.3RD. (3 CIR 2000)@ page 466 ,this state case#165558, the ‘judgment’ acquired in excess of jurisdiction should not have been upheld in the state appellate courts, division 1, San Francisco, which had the certified transcript issues and exhibits before them for state appellate review.
• Further, this judgment rendered in excess of jurisdiction is in violation of the US Supreme Court’s black letter law decisions in Tarbel and Perpich. It is also void ab initio because there was never a “delegation of Authority” from the Military Service Secretary ( Dalton or) Danzig, nor from the State of California’s executive authority, Governors Wilson and Davis prior to the removal from a federal military enclave, on the morning of Friday, March 29, 1996 ; or even afterwards in the three and half years, from April 1, 1996 to the illegal local state court trial in October, 1999. Nor any delegation of authority ever sought by San Francisco District Attorney Terence Hallinan.
• Petitioner/ appellant/ Navy sailor has sought administrative relief from both the US Navy and the F BI; their response--”resolve the case in the civil federal courts. “ -- see exhibits. Accordingly, after over six years of seeking federal administrative relief, petitioner/Appellant US Navy sailor Steven R. Nary is not barred by the Administrative Procedures Act, title 5 US Code ss 701 through 706.
• Petitioner/appellant/ Navy sailor petitions this court that after seven and a half years of ignored violations of constitutional magnitude that this court expeditiously ***Vacate the local state court judgment #165558 of 10-28-1999 and sentence of 16 years to life--11-28-1999 (10) ***Vacate the California State Appellate Court Division One’s affirmation of #165558, the state appellate court decisions First Appellate District Division One, A08976O, and the state supreme court’s denial of review,which was not based on any of the mandatory federal military or US Supreme Court decisions such as ‘Tarbell ( 1871) and/or Perpich ( 1985) etc. the US Congress’s plenary authority, which is black letter law, under Article 1, sec. 8, clause 14, “the power to make Rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.....”
• ***Vacate the illegal judgment acquired by extrinsic fraud (use of the bogus Delivery agreement to get Nary off the USS Carl Vinson cvn, in a federal military enclave)that fraud was also exemplified by the’omission’ from the ‘local state court’s admission of ‘exhibits.’
• ***Order California State Attorney General Lockyer to release Steven R. Nary US Navy Apprentice Airman, from the confines of the California Department of Corrections and expunge all records of a conviction.
• ***Order California State Attorney General Lockyer to release Steven R. Nary US Navy Apprentice Airman, from the confines of the California Department of Corrections and expunge all records of a conviction.
• ***Order the Secretary of Defense/ Donald Rumsfeld/ Secretary of the Navy Gordon England to restore Steven R. Nary to his federal military status with all rights, to full due process, an administrative hearing as well privileges, financial payments/ back pay and federal military veterans benefits that have been granted petitioner/appellant sailor by the plenary authority of Congress, which under the constitution regulates,governs and has long established mandatory procedures, codes, regulations and statutes applicable to subordinate state civil authorities to protect as well as punish all federal military personnel.
• Chief Justice Earl Warren in Chappell v Wallace has stated that Our citizens, do not give up their civil rights just because they put on a military uniform.
• But in this local state of California case, this case is not only erroneous but a usurpation of clearly stated federal and US Supreme court black letter law.
• “Decisions of the United States Supreme Court rendered by written opinions, as the above quoted, Tarbell ( 1871) and ( Governor Perpich v US Department of Defense 1985) are binding on all courts, state and federal. The Court’s holding is stare decisis and cannot be overruled except by the ( US Supreme) Court itself. ....”
• In cases of federal supremacy over federal military personnel, and compelling the various military services and service secretaries to follow their own regulations, such as in this case title 32 Code of federal Regulations subsection 720.6 etc.. , the US Supreme court has to date never overruled itself in these constitutional matters and conflicts.
• Petitioner/ appellant/ federal military person, Steven R. Nary asks this federal appellate court expeditiously follow the US Supreme Court’s stare decisis and vacate the California courts decision`

  Respectfully,

  Signed (signature)
  Steven R. Nary
  Date: 11-1-2002