Judge Explains EXACTLY What's Wrong With The Sovereign Citizen RIGHT TO TRAVEL Defense! Pro Se FAIL!

本站添加: 2026-06-03

[00:00:00]Hey guys and welcome to today's video.

[00:00:02]Today we have a couple of hearings to cover from a sovereign citizen with the last one being a sovereign citizen bench trial where the judge explains exactly what's wrong with the sovereign citizen right to travel defense. So let's begin.

[00:00:16]>> Um so judge we are ready um but based on my advice of Mr. Fuller um I believe he does not wish for me to represent him anymore. I'm not comfortable making certain arguments that he wishes for me to make. Um, and obviously he has a right to present his own defense. Um, I don't believe he wishes to have a new public defender assigned unless I'm mistaken.

[00:00:41]>> Um, so I I'm not sure that a conflict hearing would be necessary.

[00:00:46]Um, but I I would defer to the court.

[00:00:49]>> Okay.

[00:00:51]>> Mr. Fuller, um, obviously you understand you do have the right to an attorney.

[00:00:56]you have qualified for the public defender and one was appointed to you. I can't force you to be represented by an attorney if you if you don't want an attorney. But I can't appoint somebody else without a special conflict hearing. Um I can't just appoint another public defender or an alternate defense council um without a special hearing. But if you are representing or if what Mr. Hoffman has indicated is correct that you just wish to represent yourself.

[00:01:35]We don't need a hearing.

[00:01:37]>> I represent myself. This been going on too long.

[00:01:39]>> It's been going on a long time.

[00:01:41]>> It has been.

[00:01:42]>> And you say it's May 14th.

[00:01:43]>> Well, May 14th is the court trial. Are you prepared to go to trial on that day?

[00:01:49]>> Okay.

[00:01:49]>> At what time? And but here I I need and I know I asked you before when we set this you've set this matter for a court trial. So you understand are you specifically waving your right to a jury trial in this case?

[00:02:02]>> Yeah.

[00:02:03]>> Yes. Okay. And you understand going forward if you're representing yourself that you'll be held to the same standard as an attorney would be in terms of the um rules of evidence and the rules of procedure.

[00:02:16]>> Yes.

[00:02:17]>> Okay. And um Some of these charges do carry the possible penalty of jail.

[00:02:28]You understand that?

[00:02:30]>> Yes, ma'am.

[00:02:31]>> Okay. Um and or fines. You understand that?

[00:02:34]>> Yes.

[00:02:35]>> Okay. Um >> do you have any and I have to give you this advisement and make this inquiry.

[00:02:42]Do you have any legal training?

[00:02:44]>> My family is a bunch of lawyers.

[00:02:46]>> Okay, great. And um I have to ask you this. How far have you gone in school?

[00:02:51]>> College.

[00:02:51]>> Okay, perfect. And are you, and I'm going to ask you these questions again on the day of trial, are you under the influence of any drug or medication or alcohol that would affect your understanding of these proceedings today?

[00:03:03]>> No.

[00:03:03]>> Okay. And um you've do you wish to further consult with uh the public defender before going forward?

[00:03:12]>> No.

[00:03:13]>> Okay. And um you do understand that criminal law is a complicated area of law and um as I said earlier, you will be held at the same standards as an attorney. Um and some of the arguments that you Mr. Hoffman does have any attorney has an obligation to zealously represent a client, but they also have an obligation to the um to the court to put forth um sound legal arguments, which is I think where the breakdown was here. Um >> do you understand you do have the right to remain silent and that anything that you say at trial can be used against you?

[00:03:54]>> Yes.

[00:03:54]>> Okay. And um are you asking that I appoint council and we'll set a conflict hearing or not?

[00:04:01]>> Not.

[00:04:02]>> Okay. Um you understand that by representing yourself you do run the risk of not uh properly presenting your case?

[00:04:12]>> Yes.

[00:04:13]>> Okay. And um you understand that you have the right to uh confront any witnesses and cross-examine them at trial, but inappropriate questions will not be permitted. So it may be that you ask a line of questions that the district attorney objects to. If it's a legal objection and there are grounds for that objection, I would sustain the objection and that would be the end of it. So it may be a little frustrating for you.

[00:04:39]>> Okay.

[00:04:39]>> Do you understand that?

[00:04:40]>> Yes, ma'am.

[00:04:41]>> All right. And you also have the right to have witnesses um testify on your behalf. You can have them subpoenaed uh if you go down to the self-help center in room S101.

[00:04:53]>> Okay. Okay. But it looks like Okay.

[00:05:16]And and there was an endorsement of witnesses in the 6283 case uh to be um Talia Spanelli from the Carter Springs Police Department. Is that correct?

[00:05:34]And in 22T10889, the witness uh is Zachary Forester from the Card Springs Police Department. So there are witnesses in file. All right.

[00:05:51]We will see you on May 14th at 1:30.

[00:05:54]>> Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

[00:05:54]>> All right. Thank you, Mr. Fuller.

[00:05:56]>> Thanks, sir.

[00:05:58]>> Right. So that's the end of the I wanted to include this hearing because it really highlights two major mistakes that he made. First, he fired his attorney to represent himself. Now, you should never do that, especially if the only legal training you have comes from bad information on the internet. And second, he fired his attorney only 6 days before trial, which would be hard for a real attorney to prepare for and next to impossible to present a legitimate defense for someone that's dumber than dog [ __ ] And I guess we can throw in a third major [ __ ] move by asking for a bench trial instead of a jury trial. Since a judge is going to be well-versed in the actual law, while you might be able to sway a jury of your peers that don't know the law like the back of her hand. So now we had to bench bench.

[00:06:48]>> Mr. Fuller appears um prosay having uh terminated the representation of the um public defenders office and having represented to the court that he intends on proceeding without counsel. Is that correct, Mr. Fuller?

[00:07:04]>> Yes, ma'am.

[00:07:04]>> All right. And Mr. Fuller. The last time that we were in court, I went through the Abuo advisement 889.

[00:07:18]Um, on the record, are you still intending to proceed uh without counsel today?

[00:07:23]>> Yes, you are.

[00:07:24]>> And and you've um on the record, you had previously waved your right to a jury trial. Um, and that is still your intention?

[00:07:32]>> Yes, all right.

[00:07:41]So what's going to happen? Um Mr. Fuller, it is the people's burden of proof to prove um beyond a reasonable doubt that uh the charges against you, the allegations against you. In 22T10889, the um unlawful display of license plates, the registration violation.

[00:08:05]Hang on.

[00:08:08]Now, those are both class B traffic infractions.

[00:08:12]And then the driving after revocation prohibited is a class 2 traffic offense.

[00:08:16]The possible penalty of 10 to 90 days um in jail. And then um in 22T let's see in 22T 6283.

[00:08:43]It's the signal lamp violation which is a class B traffic infraction. the driving without a license, a class A traffic infraction. The unregistered vehicle, a class B traffic infraction, the no insurance, um, which is a class one traffic offense, and the driving after a vacation prohibited, which is a class two traffic offense. The insurance has a mandatory $500 fine. Um, and the class two is a >> I had insurance, >> possible penalty. It's it's up to them to approve. If you have insurance now and you want to show >> Yeah, I had it. Well, then okay then you'll have to that you can present that in your defense.

[00:09:21]>> Um okay.

[00:09:24]All right.

[00:09:29]And date of offense of July.

[00:09:36]So July 22nd of 2022 was the date of offense in 22T6283 November 29th 2022 and 22T 10889. So, what's going to happen is that people will call their witnesses.

[00:09:50]Um, you'll have an opportunity to cross-examine their witnesses. All right? Because you're representing yourself. As I indicated before, you are held to the same standards as an attorney in terms of um improper questioning will not be permitted. Um, and you follow the rules of procedure and uh rules of law.

[00:10:11]After the people have arrested, you'll have an opportunity to present your case. You have the presumption of innocence.

[00:10:19]Um, you have the presumption of innocence.

[00:10:23]Uh, you don't have to testify on your own behalf. Okay? If you don't testify on your own behalf, I can't consider that as any type of negative. Um, but you do have the uh right to testify if you want to. You can also just uh make argument if you choose to make argument. Um if you do testify on your own behalf, the people will be uh able to cross-examine you. Uh if you've been convicted of a felony, the people can disclose that felony. It can only be used as it bears upon your credibility. Um the same thing with any of their witnesses. If you're aware of any felony convictions that you can disclose to the jury. All right. um $1,000.

[00:11:13]>> Do you have any questions before we go?

[00:11:15]>> No, ma'am.

[00:11:15]>> In the next section. So, in the next question, the officers who pulled him over. Most of it's just procedural and they do play his body cam, but we can't see it and it was extremely difficult to hear. So, I'm going to be on the body cam part.

[00:11:30]>> We can raise the lights, your honor.

[00:11:32]>> Thank you.

[00:11:34]You know, the people would move to admit people's exhibit one, the body worn camera at this time.

[00:11:40]>> Any objection? Lawful objection.

[00:11:45]Any objection to them admitting body warn camera. So admitted >> exhibit one. Officer Spanelli, the footage we just watched, was it at or about 33000 Afternoon Circuit?

[00:12:05]>> So, I had observed the traffic offense on Afternoon Circle and pulled um Mr. Fuller over on South Shelton near Valley High.

[00:12:16]>> And is Mr. Fuller in the courtroom today?

[00:12:18]>> Yes, he is.

[00:12:19]>> Can you identify him with a piece of clothing he's wearing? Yes, he's the gentleman in the light or medium blue t-shirt, two gold earrings.

[00:12:27]>> Thank you. And at any time did he present proof of insurance?

[00:12:32]>> Uh, no.

[00:12:34]>> To you yourself?

[00:12:36]>> No. No.

[00:12:37]>> At any time, did he present proof of registration?

[00:12:40]>> No.

[00:12:40]>> At any time, did he present proof of his license?

[00:12:44]>> No.

[00:12:46]>> How did you check if he had a license?

[00:12:49]Um, so I was able to find him in our law enforcement databases using the information that he did provide to me. I obtained a digital photograph of Mr. Fuller who matched the person that's sitting in front of me right now. And then I was able to get his date of birth to run through our Department of Records.

[00:13:11]>> Your may approach the witness.

[00:13:12]>> You may um, show Mr. Fellow what you're going to show her though, please.

[00:13:17]>> What is this?

[00:13:25]I'm showing this been premarked as people's exhibit two.

[00:13:34]Officer Spanelli, does exhibit 2 purport to be a certified vehicle record from the Colorado DMV?

[00:13:46]Um, >> first and second page.

[00:13:52]>> First and second page >> let me ask it this way. Is there a cover or is there the second page? Is there a signature that says um the attached documents are true and correct uh complete with a seal?

[00:14:06]There is a seal on it and I certify it says I certify that the attacher true and correct copies is maintained by the Colorado Division of Motor Vehicles.

[00:14:18]>> Do those records relate to the defendant Daryl Fuller?

[00:14:22]>> In what manner are you asking?

[00:14:23]>> On the first page, is there a name that says >> there is a name? Yes. And the date of birth that I uh located for him. Yes.

[00:14:32]>> Okay. Thank you. Uh, your honor, the people would move to admit under Colorado rules of evidence 9024 self- authenticating document the DMV records of defendant David Fuller.

[00:14:49]>> Any objection?

[00:14:51]>> I'd like to see it.

[00:14:53]>> That's with my question. Do you'all have a copy for him?

[00:14:56]>> Cuz uh >> I can print it out right now.

[00:14:58]>> Okay. They're going to print one out for you and I'm going to give you a minute.

[00:15:02]my DMV record.

[00:15:03]>> Um, >> good. He went out here.

[00:15:05]>> Well, Mr. Rupuller, just review what they've tendered.

[00:15:09]>> I believe we're waiting on a possible objection.

[00:15:12]>> Any objection?

[00:15:13]>> Yes, I got an objection. You got this child support in here. They had to pay me back all this money. Why ain't that in here?

[00:15:19]>> That it's it's the a record. I'm assuming when a driver's license is suspended for child support regardless of >> there with no drivers >> whether or not it's but your driving privileges are suspended for failure to pay child support and so that's reflected on the department of motor vehicles uh report and that's why it's there I'm so admitted >> on the last five pages of the DMV record what is what are the three words at the top of the page >> um it's proof of service >> thank you and at the very bottom of the of the box there. There should be a signature box. How many of those have been signed? It >> appears that two have been signed and three have not.

[00:16:01]>> Thank you. You know, I'll let the record reflect that the defendant has been served proof of service that the license has been revoked.

[00:16:10]>> And that's part of that DMV packet in exhibit two.

[00:16:13]>> Yes, your honor.

[00:16:14]>> That objection.

[00:16:15]>> There's no license. I I I understand that you're admitting that you don't have a driver's license.

[00:16:20]>> I turned my license in in 1999.

[00:16:22]>> I understand that years ago.

[00:16:24]>> I understand.

[00:16:24]>> You can't charge me for not having a license.

[00:16:27]>> Yes, he can.

[00:16:28]>> No, we can't.

[00:16:29]>> M Mr. Fuller, Mr. Fuller, you and I are going to talk about it and we're going to You'll have your opportunity. Okay.

[00:16:35]>> See, he's trying to bury me in court.

[00:16:38]You just buried yourself in court. And on the record when you said you turned your license in and didn't have one to begin with, to me that sounds beautiful of guilt.

[00:16:49]>> Well, Mr. Fuller, >> that's false.

[00:16:51]>> Mr. Fuller, I understand your objection.

[00:16:54]It is overruled.

[00:16:56]>> Um, so it it's admitted as part of the packet in exhibit two.

[00:17:07]>> No further questions, your honor.

[00:17:10]Mr. Fuller, do you have any questions um for Officer Spinelli?

[00:17:13]>> Yes, sir. Do >> okay. If you'll stand at the podium, sir, just so I can pick up on the on the record. Thank you, sir.

[00:17:19]>> What law requires individual to get a license?

[00:17:24]>> Your honor, objection. Uh >> that's constitutional.

[00:17:27]>> No, >> she is not an expert in the law. So, >> well, she wrote no ticket for >> No, Mr. Fuller.

[00:17:31]>> Well, I'm going to tell you this like to see.

[00:17:33]>> But no, no, no.

[00:17:34]>> There is no law. Mr. Fuller, we're going to follow procedure. And so you've asked a witness a question.

[00:17:41]>> She cited you.

[00:17:43]>> She cited you on your ticket under the Colorado Revised Statutes 424 215 42 101 subsection one 231 at sec. Wait a minute. And and that those are the laws that she cited. Okay.

[00:17:59]>> But the law I'm violating is my constitutional right.

[00:18:02]>> Well, wait. And that's your ar that's an argument and it's not properly before this witness. I'll give you an opportunity to make argument when it's your case and chief. Okay.

[00:18:12]>> Okay.

[00:18:12]>> Your question.

[00:18:13]>> See the reason why I asked that question, Yann, I don't carry a lot. I don't use a license.

[00:18:17]>> I understand.

[00:18:18]>> She wrote me up for a license I didn't have. How can she write me for something >> fuller? Because I just explained to you.

[00:18:23]>> That's not a good explanation. Y >> I understand that. But the laws in the Colorado Revised Statutes, >> but it does not supersede the Constitution in my >> Wait a minute. Wait a minute. You and I, you're going to I'm going to allow you to make that argument on the record. And at the end of the trial, I'm going to rule, but she cited you according to what is contained in the Colorado Revised Statutes.

[00:18:43]>> Um, and so that's a question properly before her, but the legal or constitutional argument is not properly made in front of this witness. So, do you have any other question?

[00:18:52]>> So, she can't answer why she wrote me a ticket without a license.

[00:18:56]>> She Well, she could she could answer that. She >> It's not required under any arguing.

[00:19:04]We're not arguing. That's not a state law.

[00:19:05]>> You can answer the question as what to what she cited you for.

[00:19:09]>> Okay.

[00:19:09]>> She can >> please answer that question.

[00:19:11]>> Okay. So, Officer Spinelli, what did you cite Mr. Fuller for?

[00:19:18]>> Uh, need a copy of the It It may be helpful just to have a copy of the full part of it. If you can show Mr. Fuller what you're showing her just to refresh her memory.

[00:19:31]>> Okay.

[00:19:31]>> Okay.

[00:19:36]Okay, that's >> It is tiny.

[00:19:39]>> It is tiny.

[00:19:40]>> Okay. So, not fair to us elderly people.

[00:19:43]>> Right. On that day, sir, I did uh cite you for not having your lamps as required. Um your license for drivers is required. Drove a vehicle without a valid driver's license.

[00:19:58]um failed to display registration and compulsory insurance. Uh and those are the citations that they Yeah, compulsory insurance.

[00:20:09]I'm sorry. It is tiny.

[00:20:12]And that's what I cited you for that day.

[00:20:15]>> Okay. You said you stopped me for a lamp. Why did you tell me uh my tag didn't come back to anything that you recognized? Well, uh, I did stop you for the signal lamp violation, >> but when we got there was no lamp out.

[00:20:29]When when I went to go pick up my car, there was no lamp out.

[00:20:32]>> Yeah. I'm going to file this claim in the [ __ ] that didn't happen folder. I'm just telling you the facts.

[00:20:38]>> You know what? You will have an opportunity to testify, but you're asking her why she pulled you over. And so her answer was you had a tail lamp out.

[00:20:48]>> But she didn't say that at first. She said my tag didn't come back to nothing.

[00:20:51]She recognized, right?

[00:20:55]>> I we did say that during the the course of our conversation, >> but you never even said that a light was out to me.

[00:21:04]You never even told me that. I didn't find that out till you wrote it on the ticket.

[00:21:11]So why would you make up a statement that you stopped me for a lamp being out and the lamp was not out? Objection, your honor. Badgering witness.

[00:21:23]>> Sorry.

[00:21:24]>> Sustained.

[00:21:25]>> I have no further questions.

[00:21:28]>> All right.

[00:21:30]Any redirect?

[00:21:31]>> No, your honor.

[00:21:32]>> All right. Officell, you may step down.

[00:21:34]>> Thank you. Back to >> um Okay. Back to >> Yes. And you are free to go.

[00:21:39]>> Thank you.

[00:21:42]>> All right. Any other witnesses?

[00:21:44]Um, your honor, would you like us to call for the next case or should we rest? I >> I >> I believe Mr. Fuller's arguments are the same for both cases.

[00:21:58]>> Yes.

[00:21:59]>> All right. So, we'll call uh >> we'll call the in 22T10889 and then Mr. Fuller, I'll allow you to speak um to address both and any argument that you make. Okay. All right, sir.

[00:22:14]>> You know the people call officer Zachary Forester to the stand.

[00:22:22]>> Come on up to the well and raise your right hand for me, please.

[00:22:26]>> Um, wait a minute.

[00:22:29]>> Okay. Well, it's been a while. Do you solemnly swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

[00:22:37]>> Thank you, sir. Have a seat in the witness stand.

[00:22:39]>> Do you have body warn camera footage of this as well? Yes, okay.

[00:22:43]>> It's not him.

[00:22:44]>> Well, we'll see on the body worn camera.

[00:22:48]>> I know I've changed a lot in the last four years.

[00:22:50]>> No, that's not him at all. There's a black guy to stop me.

[00:22:56]>> Okay. You're not at this time that people would move to ex uh admit people's exhibit one for case number 2210889.

[00:23:10]>> And that's the body warn camera. Yes, your honor.

[00:23:12]>> Any lawful objection, Mr. >> He didn't stop. I never seen him at the track.

[00:23:18]>> He that was his body. He testified that that was his body warn camera >> and him didn't have a conversation.

[00:23:24]>> He issued He signed the citation.

[00:23:27]>> Um he signed the citation. Objection overruled.

[00:23:31]>> So what did he what did you stop me for?

[00:23:33]He don't know. He wasn't dead. He showed up afterwards.

[00:23:36]>> You're you're going to be able to ask him. He issued the citation. So, um, and then go ahead, >> Officer Forester, at any time did the defendant, um, >> but that's exhibit 1 in 22 T10889.

[00:23:51]>> Yes, your honor. Yes. Um, officer Forester, at any time did the defendant, um, furnish proof of registration?

[00:23:58]>> No.

[00:23:58]>> Proof of a license?

[00:24:00]>> No.

[00:24:01]>> And did he have plates attached to the rear of his vehicle? To >> my knowledge, no. We took him off. See, he woke up. Yeah.

[00:24:12]>> Officer Forcer, were you the one that um ran the defendants name for DMV purposes?

[00:24:20]>> Yes.

[00:24:27]>> I'm showing the defense what's been pre-marked as people's exhibit 2 certified D US packet.

[00:24:35]>> Permission to approach.

[00:24:36]>> Yes.

[00:24:51]Officer Forester, take a look at page yeah number two.

[00:24:55]Does exhibit 2 purport to be a certified vehicle record from the car DMV?

[00:25:01]>> Yes.

[00:25:03]And does that second page with a have a signature and a seal certification from the DMV custodian of records?

[00:25:11]>> Yes, it does.

[00:25:12]>> Okay. Thank you.

[00:25:16]And on the first page, do the records relate to defendant Daryl Fuller?

[00:25:19]>> Yes.

[00:25:21]>> Go ahead and flip towards the back for me, please.

[00:25:38]And on the top of the page there, can you read the three words that are bold?

[00:25:42]>> Proof of service.

[00:25:44]>> Yes. And towards the bottom of the page, there should be a signature box. Can you tell the court how many of those proof of services have signatures on them?

[00:26:09]Three of them have signatures. The rest say refused to sign. Thank you, Officer Fuller. people would uh move to exhibit uh move to admit exhibit two under Colorado uh Colorado rules of evidence 9024 self- authenticating certified copies of public records >> Mr. Fuller any legal objection >> yes he wasn't there >> he wasn't there I never seen him a black sergeant and the other guy she might have been standing behind me but he never confronted me so he don't know >> and that's fine Mr. Buller. He is he testified that he was the officer that signed this testify.

[00:26:49]>> He testified that he was present.

[00:26:51]>> Tim, what what kind of >> testified that um that >> there was no proof of uh registration or a valid license that he himself ran your DMV record.

[00:27:08]>> That this was all his testimony. So I will >> do that. I can do that after the fact.

[00:27:12]this. He testified that he he ran that um while he was on scene, >> you know, >> and issued you the citation.

[00:27:21]>> Officer, the one that was dealing with me.

[00:27:23]>> I understand. I saw the that officer speaking to you. He >> never left my side, >> but Mr. Fuller come up to me.

[00:27:28]>> Mr. Fuller, >> anytime there's police involvement, you'll always find more than one officer. Each officer that is on scene is involved in the stuff.

[00:27:38]>> He did not stop.

[00:27:39]>> Objection overruled. I understand that he he did not pull you over first.

[00:27:43]>> Objection overruled. So admitted by the guard because any officer can cite you for the offenses alleged to have occurred. So that's not a valid defense in your case. It's called the fellow officer rule also known collective knowledge doctrine.

[00:28:00]>> No further questions your honor.

[00:28:01]>> Okay. Um exhibit two is admitted.

[00:28:07]>> All right. Mr. Fuller. Questions for officer Forester.

[00:28:14]>> What state statute requires a a person to have a driver's license?

[00:28:19]>> I do not know the statute off the top of my head, but I do know as a required statuction, your honor, that uh calls for the witness to be an expert in the law.

[00:28:27]>> Well, if he he does site, how do they know what to site? I guess the proper question would be how do you know what to site somebody for? Uh, we use reference guides for the exact statutes when it comes to driving under revoked or driving with or without a license.

[00:28:43]>> Is it illegal to drive without a license?

[00:28:46]>> Yes.

[00:28:47]>> Since when?

[00:28:50]>> I do not know the year, time, or date that it was illegal to drive.

[00:28:54]>> So, you telling me that free people have to wave their constitutional rights to get a license?

[00:29:00]>> Sorry, I don't understand your question.

[00:29:02]>> Okay. free people of the United States of America. I'm a military man. Okay.

[00:29:06]Now, we have the common law, the right to travel. You saying we don't. We have to go get your permission, >> Mr. Fuller.

[00:29:16]>> That's a fair question. Y >> ask him a question.

[00:29:19]>> Just ask him a question. What What law what statute requires me to get your license to travel upon the public road?

[00:29:27]>> What? Hand him to refresh his memory what he sided with.

[00:29:35]Show Mr. Fuller.

[00:29:37]That was the copy of the ticket. That was >> That's the ticket. I'm asking what what law >> that it's cited on the ticket.

[00:29:43]>> Okay. Thank you. Um it would be uh Colorado Revised Statute 42-2-2061A.

[00:29:56]>> Okay. And you know that revised statue and that. So you telling me I got to wave my right, my constitutional protected right. But you have a right to travel to get your license and that's a question. Now what what law requires me to do that?

[00:30:12]>> You were required to drive with a license.

[00:30:14]>> If I'm not required to drive Yeah.

[00:30:16]Driving I travel. I told you that. I told him that.

[00:30:19]>> Objection. Badger and the witness.

[00:30:21]>> Sustained to travel. You're right. do have a >> witness has testified that he cited you under 422206 subsection 1A of the Colorado Revised Statutes.

[00:30:34]>> He he is enforces the law >> and your your argument is a legal argument to the court, not to the witness. So you'll have to allow you to make your legal argument to the court.

[00:30:49]>> He still ain't answered the first question I had. He said he didn't understand it. What law? What statute?

[00:30:55]What statute requires me to go get your license and registration?

[00:30:59]>> Cited you that statute.

[00:31:02]>> That don't require me. That just what he charged me with.

[00:31:05]>> Under the law of the state of Colorado, under that law.

[00:31:11]>> Is it a law or a statute? You just said that.

[00:31:13]>> The same law.

[00:31:14]>> Okay. So, what statute requires me to go get your license?

[00:31:18]>> Got my 42. Title 42.

[00:31:21]>> What statute?

[00:31:21]>> I I can get it. I guess it to me.

[00:31:24]>> Print it out.

[00:31:25]So you you know >> 22101 >> so I got to wave my right to get >> Mr. Mr. Fuller you have a legal argument that you are dying to make to the court that is a US constitution versus state law argument. It is it is not this officer did answer your question. He told you the statute >> problem with him he did not stop me.

[00:31:52]He come up to the traffic. I was stopped on powers. We went to the behind the uh what was it? The uh what's called then he showed up. So what was I stopped for?

[00:32:03]>> What was the reason the officer stopped me?

[00:32:05]>> This is not a this there's been no >> He can testify against me, your honor.

[00:32:10]He should know what I was stopped for. M >> That's fair.

[00:32:13]>> Mr. Fuller, this is not there's been no request for a hearing for probable cause on this stop. Today is a trial as to whether or not you had unlawful display of your license plates, whether your vehicle was registered, or whether or not you were in fact driving uh after revocation prohibited.

[00:32:40]>> This is just what I don't understand, y'all. How can you replicate something that don't exist?

[00:32:45]>> I understand you don't understand that.

[00:32:47]>> You can't just sit here and start writing.

[00:32:49]>> Any other questions?

[00:32:50]>> Well, license that use.

[00:32:52]>> Yes, they can. And that's exactly why you're on trial.

[00:32:55]>> Any other witnesses?

[00:32:57]>> No, you are.

[00:32:58]>> All right.

[00:32:58]>> People rest.

[00:32:59]>> All right. Thank you, Mr. Fuller.

[00:33:01]>> This is your opportunity to testify on your own behalf.

[00:33:06]Um, you are not under no you are under no obligation to testify. You do have the right to remain silent. It is the people's burden of proof to prove to the court beyond a reasonable doubt that you met the elements of the uh crimes as charged.

[00:33:26]If you if you take the stand, we'll get your testimony. If you if you want to make argument as opposed to testify, then I'll I'll you can rest your case and I'll allow you to make an argument and then they can reply to that argument.

[00:33:41]rest my case mean if I found guilty?

[00:33:44]>> No. To rest your case means that you're leaving it up to the court to determine whether or not they met their burden of proof. But I'll But if you want to testify >> then. Okay. So, so if you're not going to testify, do you have any witnesses?

[00:33:59]>> No, I don't.

[00:34:00]>> Okay. So, if you're not going Wait a minute. If you're not going to testify and you have no witnesses, then you are arresting your case. However, I'll allow you to make argument. Okay. So I'm I'm not going to silence you. I'll allow you to make argument. But how it goes is the people will start and then you can make argument and then they'll have a brief opportunity to respond to them. I am going to set um time limits on everybody. So you each have 10 minutes total to argue to the court and then I'm going to rule. And when I rule, it's not a back and forth. It's not an argument.

[00:34:36]It is a final ruling. You can always appeal my ruling, but it it is not a back and forth.

[00:34:44]Um, closing argument to start your I believe the people have met all of the elements of all of the charges provided. Um, first driving effort revocation prohibited requires that the defendant in the state of Colorado out out at or about the place charged knowingly having had his license to drive revoked by the Department of Revenue based on a finding that he was a habitual traffic offender operated a motor vehicle in the state while the revocation prohibiting such such operation was in effect. We saw today on the body warn camera that the defendant in fact did not have a valid license to drive and we saw today in the DUR packets that he was served proof of service uh knowing that his license had been revoked. Second, registration. It is unlawful to commit any of the following acts under 423121A to operate or permit the operation upon a highway a of a motor vehicle subject to registration under this article or to possess or control a trailer coach or trailer that is not registered and does not display the number of plates issued for such vehicle. We saw we heard testimony and we saw that the defendant was cited and charged for not uh furnishing proof of registration to the officers when asked.

[00:36:08]Third, driving without a license under 4221011.

[00:36:13]requires that no person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway in the state unless such person has been issued a currently valid drivers or minor driver's license or an instruction permit by the department under this article we saw today on the body warn camera and heard the testimony of the officers that the defendant could not furnish such license and we've seen in the certified records that the defendant did not have a valid license at the time he was driving next insurance 424149 91. No owner of a motor vehicle or low power scooter required is required to be registered in this state. Shall operate the vehicle permit to be operated on the public highways of the state when the owner has failed to have a complying policy or certificate of self insurance in full force in effect as required by law. Again, we saw under the officer's testimony in the bottom one camera that the defendant failed to furnish insurance when asked by the officers and could not throughout the entire interaction.

[00:37:12]Next, single lamps and devices under 4242151 um states that to be operated on a road, any motor vehicle may be equipped and when required under this article must be equipped with a stop lamp or lamps on the rear of that vehicle. We saw today um under the from the testimony of the officers that the defendant's rear stop lamps were not operating and that was the reason of the initial stop leading to the other charges.

[00:37:42]And finally, number plates furnished to be attached except as provided in subsection 1 A2 of the section. The owner shall attach the number plates assigned to a self-propelled vehicle to the vehicle with one in front and one in the rear.

[00:37:56]Uh we saw we heard today from officer testimony that the second stop was in fact due to the fact that the defendant did not have a number of plates attached to the rear of his vehicle, nor were those plates registered to anything once he furnished them from the interior of his of his vehicle.

[00:38:16]>> Thank you, honor. That's all right.

[00:38:17]>> So that's the end of the process case.

[00:38:19]Now let's hear the defendant regurgitate all of the sovereign crayons in his entire entire adult life. You know, he's referring to driving. Driving is making the public road your place of business for profit or gain.

[00:38:30]>> Absolutely. Because I take a lot of notes.

[00:38:32]>> Driving is making the place of making the public a place of business for profit or gain. I never did that. Now, it says right here, private automobiles are not required by any law, code, or statute to be recorded.

[00:38:50]So, I don't know what he's >> Where you getting that?

[00:38:53]>> Where am I getting this? This is uh Chicago v Chicago motor coach.

[00:39:02]>> You have a site for that?

[00:39:04]>> A site as in I can show it to you. I can show you where I get it. Uh the the case law. Oh, I know what you're talking I understand what you're talking about now. Let me get it.

[00:39:20]Sorry. Um but see they all refer to driving.

[00:39:25]Driving is making the public road the place of business for profit. Again you you using the public road for profit.

[00:39:31]Traveling you don't it's not required under any law. You don't have to have a license registration or anything. in and uh yeah, Chicago v Chicago motor coach 16921.

[00:39:47]The use of the highway for purposes of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived of.

[00:40:00]They sitting there putting me in a CDL.

[00:40:02]I don't have a CDL anymore. Okay.

[00:40:04]Thompson B. Smith 154 SE579.

[00:40:08]The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highway and transportation and transport his property thereon either by carriage or by automobile is not a mere privilege which the city may prohibit or permit at will. But a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. See, I I I quit using the license in 1999. I never had this problem before. they still I come out here and these these uh prosecutors don't seem to understand the difference between travel and driving. That's two different things. So they want everybody to be drivers on the public road. So if you want me to get a driver's license, we got to set a contract and I got to get paid. That's what a that's what a driving license is for. That's why you got truck drivers, bus drivers, the the guys that drive the train, they get paid to be drivers. If you going to tell me I got to go and get a driver's license because you say so or the state says so, you got to pay me for that. That's a contract.

[00:41:02]And the only way you can tell me I can't do it is you got to lawfully amend the Constitution.

[00:41:09]Well, I got to wave that right. I have not waved my rights. I still got no right. But you got to amend the United States Constitution.

[00:41:21]>> Is that it?

[00:41:21]>> Nope. And you got Kit versus Delies 357 US16125.

[00:41:28]The right to travel upon the travel is a part of liberty which a citizen cannot be deprived without due process of the under the fifth amendment. Then you got satur versus delies 96 APC 287 225 2D 983 and 941. The right to travel is wellestablished common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government to it is recognized by the courts as natural rights and you know the states can't diminish my rights they're they oh you driving I have not driven a car lawfully since 1999 I've traveled in a car while holding the steering wheel and pressing the pedal with your own two feet because if you did then you were igniting the call.

[00:42:25]>> So you don't agree with that Y? You're shaking your head.

[00:42:27]>> I don't agree but go ahead. I'm >> but but that's federal that's state that's that's my right. See to to look for free people have the common the common common law and constitutional right to travel upon the roads and highways that are provided by the governments for that purpose. Licensing licensing of drivers cannot be required of free people because taking on the restrictions of their license requires the surrender of a an inalable right. So I'm not giving up my rights, but you telling me I got to go get his license. So you forcing me to give up that right? My rights cannot be diminished by by the state. It can't be diminished.

[00:43:11]and he's talking about I uh the state how's the state of Colorado going to tell me I ain't I I got a I never got a license from Colorado. I went to truck driving school out here went back home and then I never had a license in Colorado. So where are they getting this?

[00:43:32]That's called fraud cuz you can't revocate anything. You can't tell me they can't tell me I just can't use the public road. Nobody you you You can't You don't own a public road.

[00:43:50]No state government entity has the power to allow or deny passage on the highways, byways, nor waterways transporting his vehicle or personal property for either recreation or business. But by being held subject to only local regulations, i.e. safety, caution, traffic lights, speed limits, etc. Travel is not a privilege requiring license, vehicle registrations, forced insuranceances.

[00:44:19]That's Chicago v Chicago motor coach 337 uh ill 20016922.

[00:44:27]>> What's the year on that?

[00:44:29]>> 1929.

[00:44:31]>> 1929. No, it's been revised.

[00:44:35]>> It's been all the rules.

[00:44:36]>> It has. It has been over.

[00:44:38]>> They still been They still using We still use it.

[00:44:41]>> Right. Right. Well, it has been overruled. But go ahead.

[00:44:44]>> So, you telling me we got to go and get wave our rights to get your license?

[00:44:48]>> I'll tell you in a minute. I'm >> So, that's the waving. That's >> full argument. You have um eight n you have um >> Okay.

[00:44:58]>> Three minutes left.

[00:45:00]Miranda versus Arizona 834US 436 1966 where rights secured by the constitution are involved there can be no rule making or legislation which arbit arbitrates them though you over that one that been overruled no it ain't you use it now millus 230F 2D 486489 the claim and exercise of constitutional rights can be cannot be converted into a crime. So you can't tell me I got to go get your license and charge me. Oh, you driving without this? I don't drive. I travel everywhere I go. So you telling me I can't travel?

[00:45:40]I can't travel?

[00:45:41]>> No, I'm not telling you.

[00:45:42]>> Oh, why you shaking your head? You know, I'm not trying to be mean that, you know, you got the right to travel. You can't take that away. That's the common that is your basic common movement is travel. And you don't have to get permission from the state to travel. I don't I don't disagree that you can travel from state to state. Yep. That is a constitution >> and it doesn't require anything.

[00:46:08]>> Well, right. You don't need permission.

[00:46:12]>> License, a license is permission. What is it then, ma'am?

[00:46:16]>> Driving is different. Driving is a privilege. It's not a right.

[00:46:18]>> That's right. I don't have to have that privilege. Traveling is a right.

[00:46:22]Traveling is a right. And I suppose on your gear shift there's a T instead of a D.

[00:46:29]>> L I didn't hear you.

[00:46:32]>> I said I suppose on your gear shift there's a T instead of a D.

[00:46:37]>> Well, you got the right to travel. No license and registration is required.

[00:46:43]Right.

[00:46:46]You have a minute left and then I'll I'll give you my ruling and insight to you. My >> the fundamental right to travel is not a privilege. It is a gift granted by your maker and res restated by your founding fathers as unalable and cannot be taken by any man. The government made laws or colors of law known as private code secrets or statutes can't do.

[00:47:13]So you telling me that y'all can make a law and we got to we I got to go and give up my right to go get that giving up your go and get a driver's license.

[00:47:22]But you are giving up your privilege to drive if you don't. But that's on you.

[00:47:26]>> Not the state, not the state.

[00:47:29]>> I got one more. Freedom to travel is indeed an important aspect of a citizen's liberty which we first concern with the extent of any to do which Congress has authorized to curtail me.

[00:47:43]road Kent versus Delies 357 US1627.

[00:47:53]So you got a limit. That's a right. You can't take my life.

[00:47:58]>> And you are out of time.

[00:48:00]>> Thank you.

[00:48:01]>> You have seven reserved, Mr. Chalk.

[00:48:03]>> Thank you. My >> Thank you, Mr. Fuller. Sir, >> I I have a few cases here for the defendant if he so wishes.

[00:48:17]>> So, first your honor, the 10th circuit has consistently held that the fundamental right to travel applies only to interstate movement and not in intrastate travel. So, within a state may be regulated under McGra versus city of Oklahoma.

[00:48:35]Moreover, Colorado courts have repeatedly confirmed that driving is not a fundamental right. In Crocker versus Colorado Department of Revenue, one of the cases I just handed you, um the Colorado Supreme Court held that quote, "The right to drive an automobile on the state highways does not rise to the status of a fundamental right."

[00:48:56]Similarly, in Mayo versus National Farmers Union Property and Casualty Company, that's 3833P 2D54 1992.

[00:49:09]The court stated that household insurance exclusions um did not infringe on travel rights because they quote at most inhabited and quote decisions to travel together by automobile but imposed no constraint on separate travel by automobile or joint or separate travel by other means. Federal courts have agreed with the district court of Colorado in Meisman versus Fremont County in which noting that requiring driver's licenses is a valid exercise of the state's police power and that conditions precedent to granting a driver's license, car registration or license plates do not infringe on constitutional rights. And in that ruling they were citing Supreme Court President Belle v.

[00:49:53]Buren. That is 402 US 535 1971. And your honor, would you like three copies?

[00:50:02]>> I'm I'm fine.

[00:50:03]>> But Mr. Meisman was a a defendant in in this court as well on charges.

[00:50:09]>> Okay. So we ended the trial. Now let's hear the judge [ __ ] all over his dreams of not getting a license.

[00:50:17]>> Will we rest? All right. Thank you. So, I'm going to I'm going to we're going to go way back to this constitutional argument. Um, we're going to go back to the 10th amendment here, which uh provides for certain enumerated rights as belonging to the federal government, which your um stance is, Mr. Fuller. Um, but there are also powers. So, there are enumerated rights, there are also implied rights. Um, anything that's not enumerated or implied is reserved for the state governments, such as creating local governments, regulating interstate commerce, and that's within the state, creating and maintaining public schools, protecting public health and safety, regulating marriage and divorce, holding elections. Um there are also some exclusive federal powers and there are some concurrent powers um shared with the state. States have the authority under the 10th amendment to regulate the operations of motor vehicles on highways, public highways, public roads within that state. No, I'm not. This is my ruling.

[00:51:36]You've you've been asking where it all comes from. I'm telling you where this all comes from. So the state requirements pertaining to licenses, registration, insurance are a valid exercise of the state's police power and the authority of the state to enforce those statutes fall within the constitutional exercise of the state police power. And you are right.

[00:52:01]Traveling is a a right. Traveling between states is a right. But driving, it's a privilege. And this state, this state of Colorado has the authority to enact laws regulating driving, including a license registration, uh, insurance, license plates, how they are displayed, and those are rightfully enacted by the state and necessary for public safety.

[00:52:41]and in order to respect uh the operations upon the highway of all motor vehicles. So, it's not something everybody has to have, right?

[00:52:54]Everybody has to have a driver's license. It's a comprehensive scheme for licensing and regulating motor vehicles.

[00:53:01]Now, I went way back to 1914 to Henrik v. state of Maryland, which is still good law and probably cited in all the cases that uh that you've cited. And the Supreme Court said a state may rightfully prescribe uniform regulations necessary for public safety and in order uh in respect the operation upon its highway of all motor vehicles, those moving in interstate commerce as well as others. And to this end, it may require the registration of such vehicles, the licensing of their drivers, charging therefore reasonable fees graduated according to the horsepower of the engines, a practical measure of size, speed, difficulty of control.

[00:53:48]This is but an exercise of the police power uniformly recognized as belonging to the states and essential to the preservation of the health, safety, and comfort of their citizens. So you remember when I said some of the powers reserved for the state uh the protecting the public health and safety. So that is from our constitution of the United States allows the states to enact laws that protect public safety. And these regulations with regard to licensing and registration and insurance and the like um does not constitute a direct and material burden on interstate commerce.

[00:54:30]>> Damn. The judge cited a 1914 case that destroys the sovereign citizens right to travel without a license argument at its