Dr. Malachi Z. York

These reasons are coming from attorney Adrian Patrick's oral argument brief [VIEW NEW VIDEO]  COINTELPRO Our Constitution [read this] Government Key Witness Recants Her Testimony Ques: Why is the government still holding Dr. Malachi Z York-EL with these FACTS from there lead witness? Ans: Because, Abigail recantment proves the government targeted Dr. Malachi Z York-EL and the pretrial transcripts backs her testimony, No EVIDENCE, Agents didn't audio tape or video tape the alleged victims statements and more. (Government Conspiracy) What happens when Black people can no longer recognize white racism? [read moor]   Dr. Malachi Z York-El caring ways   please read this [read] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ______________________________ Appellate Case No. 04-12354 ______________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, -vs- DWIGHT D. YORK, Defendant-Appellant, ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia Macon Division ______________________________ CORRECTED OPENING BRIEF OF APPELLANT Attorney Adrian L. Patrick Attorney for the Appellant 1044 Baxter Street Athens, Georgia 30606 (706) 546-6631 REDACTED VERSION United States of America v. Dwight York Appellate Case NO. 04-12354 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS The undersigned counsel of record certifies that the following individuals have an interest in the outcome of this case: Richard S. Moultrie, Assistant U.S. Attorney Verda Colvin, Assistant U.S. Attorney Dean S. Daskal, Assistant U.S. Attorney Maxwell Wood, U.S. Attorney Honorable C. Ashley Royal, United States District Judge Honorable Hugh Lawson, United States District Judge Manubir S. Arora, Defense Attorney Harry Jean Charles, Defense Attorney Benjamin A. Davis, Defense Attorney Edward T.M. Garland, Defense Attorney Leroy R. Johnson, Defense Attorney Jonathan Marks, Defense Attorney Adrian L. Patrick, Defense Attorney Matthew M. Robinson, Defense Attorney i -ii- Frank A. Rubino, Defense Attorney Stephanie Thacker, Dept. of Justice Kathy C. Johnson, Co-defendant Dwight D. York, Defendant Identifiable alleged victims exist in the instant matter, including; (Ha.E), (Hu.E), (S.E), (K.E.), (K.E.), (M.F.), (K.H.), (R.H), (E.H),(I.J.), (C.L.), (K.L.), (Sa.L.), (Sal. L.), (N.L.), (H.M.), (K.M.), (Q.M.), (A.N.), (D.N.), (S.P.), (A.T.), (S.T.), (H.W.), (Su.W.), (S.W.). I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the preceding list is a complete list of all parties having an interest in the outcome of this case. By: Attorney Adrian L. Patrick STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT Defendant-Appellant, Malachi Z. York (Dwight York), respectfully requests oral argument in this case, as he believes that it would assist the Court in analyzing the legal issues raised herein.   STATEMENT OF ISSUES I. The Appellant Was Denied a Fair Trial and Due Process Due to the Trial Court’s Denial of His Motion to Sever Disparate Counts II. The District Court Erred in Denying Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss The Rico Claims (Counts One, Two, And Twelve) III. The District Court Erred in Denying the Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment and Allowing the Jury Trial to go Forward on an Indictment that was Returned by a Tainted Grand Jury IV. The District Court Erred by: A. Denying the Appellant’s Motion for Mistrial after the Government Exceeded the Scope of the Court Ordered Limitation of the Rebuttal Witness’ Testimony B. Not Allowing the Appellant to Call His Own Rebuttal Witness to Rebut the Government’s Rebuttal Witness V. The Evidence was Insufficient to Prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt that the Appellant Committed the Acts Alleged in Count 1 (1), Count 1 (2), Count 2 (B) (1) Racketeering Act 1, Count 2 (B) (2) Racketeering Act 2, Count 2 (B) (3) Racketeering Act 3, Count 2 (B) (4) Racketeering Act 4; Count 3 (A) and Count 3 (B) Conspiracy, Count 4, Count 5, Count 6, Count 7, Count 8 - Transporting Minors in Interstate Commerce to Engage in Unlawful Sexual Activity VI. The District Court Erred by Denying the Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss Count 2 Racketeering Act 3 and Count 6 Essentially Ruling that the Government could Base a Federal Violation on a Georgia Crime which was No Crime at all at the Time of its Alleged Commission VII. Post trial Counsel, Jonathan Marks, was Ineffective for Withdrawing the Appellant’s Motion for New Trial and Motion for Judgment of Acquittal without Properly Informing and Receiving the Express Permission of the Appellant VIII. The District Court’s Denial of New Counsel’s Motion For Extension Deprived Appellant of a Fair Trial And Due Process of Law 2 IX. A. Appellant’s Sixth Amendment Right to a Jury Trial was Denied When He was Sentenced Based upon Facts Not Reflected in the Jury Verdict B. Appellant’s Sentence is Void because Appellant was Sentenced under Federal Sentencing Guidelines that have been Ruled Unconstitutional as Applied in This Case X. The Use of the 2002 Version of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Instead of the 1993 Guidelines Violated Ex Post Facto Clause of the United States Constitution The Government didn't prove their case. [read the file] STATEMENT OF THE CASE The instant appeal involves the criminal case charged against the Appellant, Malachi Z. York. (The government alleges his name is Dwight D. York [Doc. 158]) This case arose in the Middle District of Georgia. As discussed below, York was convicted in the district court and is currently incarcerated in federal prison. Ques: Why is the defense attorney writing in this brief that the Appellant's name is Malachi Z York and not Dwight D York ?  Don't you think that attorney Adrian Patrick researched these two names before he wrote this brief, so he would be committing a crime by Perjuring himself. So the name game that the government is playing has been EXPOSED and Rev. Dr. Malachi Z York need to be freed from this TORTURE.