ADDITIONAL TRAVEL CASE LAWS A person driving an automobile cannot be stopped to see if he or she is licensed to drive unless there is reasonable suspicion the person has engaged in criminal conduct. Delaware v Prouse, (1979) 440 US 648, 59 Led2d 660 The Right of a citizen to Travel upon the public highways and to transport one’s property thereon, either by carriage or automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will but a common right which he / she has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Thompson v. Smith 154SE 579: “No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.” Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105 “If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262 “Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle, 50 Cal. App. 3,step 1, 123 Cal.Rptr. 636,639. “Speeding, driving without a license, wrong plates or no plates, no registration, no tags, etc., have been held to be “non-arrestable offenses” (Cal V. Farley, 98 Cal. Rep. 89, 20 CA 3d 1032. The Right to Travel; The Right to Mode of Conveyance; The Right to Locomotion are all absolute rights, and the police cannot make void the exercise of Rights. State v. Armstead, 60 s. 778, 779, and 781: “A state cannot impose restrictions on the acceptance of a license that will deprive the licensee of his constitutional rights”. Ruckenbrod v. Mullins, 102 Utah 548, 133 P.2d. 325, 144 ALR 839 There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of the exercise of a constitutional right. Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 945 (9th Cir. 1973) Spevack v. Klein, 385 U.S. 511 (1967) GARRITY v. NEW JERSEY, 385 U.S. 493 (1967) BOYD v. U S, 116 U.S. 616 (1886) MALLOY v. HOGAN, 378 U.S. 1 (1964) . “No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.” Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105 Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities. Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1. A judge ceases to sit as a judicial officer because the governing principle of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and rationale for that of the agency. Additionally, courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that of the agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or hearing arguments, presentation, or rational. ASIS v. US, 568 F2d 284. The State is prohibited from violating substantive rights. Owens v. City, 445 US 662 (1980); and it can not do by one power (eg. Police power) that which is, for example, prohibited expressly to any other such power (eg. Taxation / Eminent Domain) as a matter of law. US and UT v. Daniels, 22 p 159, nor indirectly that which is prohibited to it directly. Fairbanks v. US 181, US 283, 294, 300:
Posted on: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 20:53:03 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015