request for Lindsay's fax to RJC Clifton of 3/5/13

RE: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?

From: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Sent: Wed 7/17/13 2:53 PM
To: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com)
21 attachments
7 8 13 6 19 13 stamped first pt ex 1 in 61383 0204 65630 71437
63341 67980 72675 Notice Motion Request global resolution
handwritten on dockets.pdf (2.1 MB) , 1 11 13 correct formatting 0204
067980 1048 12420 email to Lindsay RBL.pdf (292.1 KB) , 1 17 13
0204 email to Lindsay 067980.pdf (744.0 KB) , 1 17 13 email that
was also faxed to fbl@robertbrucelindsay.com Lindsay 0204
067980.pdf (159.6 KB) , 1 18 13 to 3 15 13 emails between Coughlin
and Lindsay 0204 AO12-01 063341 067980 065630 71437 printed
just from coughlin to lindsay.pdf (3.0 MB) , 2 21 13 0204 063341
067980 email to WCDA DDA Young and Lindsay update on
NNAHMS request for continuance of 2 25 12 Hearing in 063341.pdf
(164.9 KB) , 2 25 13 email from Lindsay's re update on NNAHMS
indicating DDA Young informed her hearing on 2 25 13 was
cancelled.pdf (190.0 KB) , 3 5 13 0204 0204 AO12-01 065630
067980 063341 Lindsay fax cover sheet for letter to Clifton seeking
continuance of 3 5 13 Show Cause Hearing in AO12-01, Pear.pdf
(404.4 KB) , 3 11 13 0204 071437 063341 Motion to Remove
Lindsay as Co-Counsel 2 25 13 OSC 2 1 13 DAS arrest.pdf (924.1
KB) , 3 12 13 0204 063341 071437 067980 AO12-01 Fax cover sheet
from RJC Lori Townsend to Lindsay's Office Minutes from OSC
addressed getting mental eval and Administrative Order, silent on
Bailiffs manufacture DAS missed check in.pdf (637.5 KB) , 5 23 13
0204 063341 ao1201 071437 Motion to Remove Bruce Lindsay, Esq.
as atty of record and notice of appeal of any orders purporting to
continue Admin Order RJC.pdf (710.8 KB) , 7 2 12 0204 RJC
eviction 1048 RCR12-067980 Case Summary Docket Lindsay
numerous continuances 6 14 12 5 Day UD Notice fraudulent and listed
Sparks JC NRS 40.253.pdf (378.5 KB) , 12 28 12 R Bruce Lindsay
$700 bill for representation in 067980 failed to move for competency
Docket 62337 Document 2013-21067
eval prior to 1 22 13 trial date in 065630.pdf (381.4 KB) , 5 16 13
0204 067980 Docket as of update since 4 1 13.pdf (361.1 KB) , 5 16
13 0204 063341 Docket as of OCR.pdf (1783.5 KB) , 5 16 13 0204
065630 complete as of.pdf (1501.0 KB) , 2 25 13 to 3 14 13 0204
071437 65630 63341 67980 all emails from Lindsay's
rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com address.pdf (2.1 MB) , 5 16 13 0204
71437 Docket as of OCR.pdf (303.5 KB) , 5 16 13 0204 067980
Docket as of update since 4 1 13.pdf (361.1 KB) , 5 16 13 0204
063341 Docket as of OCR.pdf (1783.5 KB) , 5 16 13 0204 065630
complete as of.pdf (1501.0 KB)
Dear Law Office of R. Bruce Lindsay,
I am writing to request a copy of the fax that was read to me over the phone
that your office sent RJC Judge Clifton on 3/5/13. Please note that on the
attached docket for that matter, therein is listed a 3/5/13 Order to Show Cause
Hearing.
Whether Mr. Lindsay was directly made appointed counsel pursuant to some
NCJC Canon 2 Rule 2.13 "Administrative Appointment" or not, he appeared
in the matter, and, therefore, was required to obtain an Order, in writing,
allowing his withdrawal, before his non-appearance at the 3/19/13 Trial in
RCR2012-065630 would be acceptable.
Further, as to being "reinstated" into DAS in RCR2013-071437, that would
imply Coughlin was ever instated into DAS in that matter to begin with, and,
given that such matter was only given a case number on 3/14/13, and the
alleged "reinstatement" was ordered on 3/11/13, such is not possible. Further,
for a criminal case matter such as RCR2013-071437 there needs to be a
charging document, and the associated probable cause sheet and arrest report,
or citation. Please provide that. Without that, there really is no "case" for Mr.
Linsday to be quadruple billing on. That is, getting paid four times to do
nothing once. A real 401K (4 times to do nothing ("0") once ("1"), 'kay?
Whether Mr. Lindsay agreed to appear on RCR2012-065630 in consideration
for some acquiescence on Coughlin's part to Lindsay partaking in such a 401K
approach to Administrative Appointments, on the condition that the global
resolution (resolving all criminal matters (ie, Lindsay has never been given
permission to appear in the matter of the 12/20/12 "Administrative Order
2012-01 In the Matter of Zachary Coughlin", no matter which case the RJC
shoehorns such into, then move it out of, then gives a new criminal case
number on 3/14/13, etc.) in which Coughlin has ever been a party in the RJC
in a manner which would result in Coughlin having no SCR 111(6) "serious"
offense convictions, and in accord with the 8/27/12 plea bargain deal
Coughlin accepted.
ON 3/14/13 Lindsay's Office wrote "I need to clarify with you that Mr. Lindsay was
appointed to the following cases in Court to wit;
RCR2013-71437 the contempt charges that you were reinstated into DAS and CCP
RCR2011-063341 petty larceny matter that you were already convicted on but again for the contempt of
court matters."
The thing is both Lindsay and the RJC/WCDA need to be clear as to what "contempt of court matters" fit into
which case, and in which "case" (as RCR2013-071437 is an example of the judiciary attempting to usurp the
executive branch's prosecutorial charging function) is any "reinstating" to DAS even possible (not to mention
that "reinstating" Coughlin into CCP when he was never placed in CCP in the first place is a logical fallacy).
RCR 12-067980 obstructing justice and resisting case that has been set for a pretrial on April 16, 2013.
Apparently the case that is going to trial on Tuesday 03-19-13, is Case No. RCR2012-065630 and as you
indicated the Judge specifically stated that no additional counsel would be appointed on this case,"
Hopefully, Mr. Lindsay is aware that there are other circumstances wherein he could appear as attorney of
record, beyond just being appointed by "Dave" (as Mr. Linsday referred to Judge Clifton in suddenly
explaining the welching on the "global resolution" that Mr. Lindsay and his assistant Diana Simms explained
to Coughlin that both RJC Judges Pearson and Clifton and the WCDA's Office DDA Young had agreed to,
when Coughlin queried Lindsay as to why, if there was a global resolution done, there was still going to be a
trial held on 3/19/13 in RCR2012-065630).
Further the 2006 LA Times article on Administrative Appointments and the problems associated therewith
in the judiciary in Nevada and the changes in Nevada law that such glaring consternation begat has become
exceedingly relevant in the context of Mr. Lindsay's appearance as attorney of record in these matters (the
excuse that Lindsay was only "appointed" in RCR2012-065630 for the 2/13/13 hearing on some alleged
Order to Show Cause (please provide a complete copy of the discovery, charging document, and rest of
the file in that matter) does not fly where Sims admits that Lindsay appeared as attorney of record in that
matter, and sent a 3/5/13 fax to the RJC addressed to Judge Clifton, baring the case number RCR2012-
065630 seeking a continuance of the 3/5/13 hearing on the Order to Show Cause (again, the entry in the
docket of RCR2012-065630 of a 3/5/13 Order to Show Cause hearing is extremely problematic for both
the RJC and Mr. Linsday, and is integral to the misconduct issues arising in the appeal of that matter in
CR13-0614).
Simply put, being court appointed is not the only manner in which Lindsay may appear in a matter, and once
he appears (as he did in RCR2012-065630, at least as early as the 3/5/13 fax to the RJC seeking a
continuance of the 3/5/13 Order to Show Cause Hearing listed in the docket therein (see NRS 4.240
docket entries in justice courts are prima facie evidence of fact) he is bound by the Rules of Professional
Conduct, which would apply to his failure to appear at the 3/19/13 trial in that matter, not to mention his
completely welching on the "global resolution", his failing to appear at any of the CCP hearings (despite his
express indication that he would), and his indicating to Coughlin both before, during, and after, the 3/11/13
Order to Show Cause hearing(s) that nothing more than a two week continuance as to any of the matters
being addressed was being ordered, and that a global resolution had been agreed to by the WCDA, which
Lindsay also indicated had been approved by both RJC Judges Pearson and Clifton (and the welshing on
that deal no makes extraordinarily suspect the RJC's contention that it need not proved the alleged
"contempt" or "probation violation" in RCR2011-063341 (which is an entirely specious charge, and the
RJC's now seeking to characterize such 2/1/13 arrest as one premised upon a warrant, when, clearly, the
Arrest Report and Declaration of Probable Cause by DAS Officer Wickman and Ramos reveals a listing of
NRS 211A.125, the warrantless arrest of a probationer statue (and where the "warrant #" box is crossed
out, and considering the docket in RCR2011-063341 clearly reveals the warrant issued on 1/9/13 was
clearly withdrawn on 1/10/13...meaning there was no "warrant arraignment" on 2/4/13, and the fact that
such DAS arrest occurred at 7:02 pm, as listed on the Arrest Report, makes such a wrongful arrest in
violation of NRS 171.136's restriction against warrantless misdemeanor arrests between the hours of 7 am
and 7 pm, not to mention that the alleged "probable cause" for such arrest is entirely suspect given the
multitude of issues respecting the specious allegations that Coughlin "failed to check in" with DAS on either
1/2/13 or 1/23/13...)
NRS 22.030 Summary punishment of contempt committed in immediate view and presence of court;
affidavit or statement to be filed when contempt committed outside immediate view and presence of
court; disqualification of judge.
2. If a contempt is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court or judge at
chambers, an affidavit must be presented to the court or judge of the facts constituting the contempt, or
a statement of the facts by the masters or arbitrator
Further, the extent to which then Chief Judge Sferrazza's 12/20/12 Administrative Order (now, allegedly, a
criminal case in RCR2013-071437) blatantly misstates Art. 6 Sec. 6 of the Constitution of the State of
Nevada (such authority is accorded to "District courts", not "Nevada courts", and further, as to the
11/28/12 Order by then Chief Judge Sferrazza in "ALL CASES ALL DEPARTMENTS" barring Coughlin
from fax filing with the RJC, citing to JCRRT 10 when JCRRT 2 clearly reveals that such local rules do not
apply to either landlord tenant matters or criminal cases, makes that Administrative Order, the 2/25/13
Order to Show Cause stemming from it, and Bruce Lindsay, Esq.'s 401K approach to "representation" all
the more dubious and deserving of consternation, particularly given that extremely blase attitude of all
involved with respect to ameliorating the damages done by such apparent misconduct, made worse by the
RJC's failure to provide Coughlin the 2/4/13 and 2/5/13 JAVS recordings he has request (law of the case
incident to the IFP Order on file therein makes the unattributed refusal by some RJC Clerk (likely Robbin
Baker) to process and provide such JAVS recording, extremely suspect, especially considering the import
of the CR13-0552 Petition for Writ of Mandamus that Coughlin filed to address the NRS 178.405
violations in RCR2012-065630, and concomitant, potential SCR 111(6) "serious" offense conviction
stemming therefrom).
Further the unattributed and dubious allegations in the 2/25/13 Order to Show Cause require someone put
such assertions in an affidavit under NRS 22.030(2)
03/05/2013: CANCELED Order 10 Show Cause (2:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: Pearson, Scott) Vacated (that is
the actual docket entry in RCR2012-065630)
Further, the extent to which the WCDA and RJC gave Lindsay continuance after continuance in RCR2012-
067980 where Coughlin was routinely denied any continuances he requested (and, especially where on
2/5/13, the WCDA and both Judges Pearson and Clifton violated NRS 178.405's mandatory stay pending
the outcome of a competency evaluation dictate...which is made all the more dubious given the RJC's
repeated failure to turn over the JAVS recording of those 2/5/13 hearings before Judge Pearson (the first
one at 8:30 am, where Judge Pearson entered an Order for Competency Evaluation requiring Judge Clifton
stay the trial in RCR2013-065630, and the second hearing, where WCDA Z. Young was somehow able to
summon Judge Pearson for an Emergency Hearing to Set Aside such Order, despite NRS 178.405 making
such Motion forbidden (and the State wants to whine about such order being garnered "ex parte" at the
2/5/13 8:30 am hearing, well...show up, State, don't rely on DAS Officers to commit the unauthorized
practice of law on your behalf (they are witnesses, they belong were witnesses belong, not at the
prosecutors table making argument).
Further, the email from Lindsay's office of 3/14/13 fails to acknowledge the appointment of Lindsay in
RCR2012-065630 (whether limited to the 2/13/13 Order to Show Cause hearing or not).
Further, the email Lindsay's Motion to Withdraw in RCR2012-067980 was not granted, making even more
problematic the fact that Lindsay threatened to murder Coughlin on 3/16/13 by asserting that he would "rip
each of your limbs off your body" to Coughlin over the telephone.
Luckily, there is still an argument that the RJC has jurisdiction over some of these matters given the tolling
motions Coughlin filed in these various cases prevented the RJC from being divested of jurisdiction to undo
all this damages done by it and R. Bruce Lindsay, Esq.
Please provide a complete copy of all of Coughlin's case files.
Of course, all of Coughlin's assertions are fully supported by Lindsay's own written correspondence to
Coughlin:
"Re: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?? From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com)
This sender is in your safe list. Sent: Wed 3/13/13 8:57 AM To: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Dear Zach: Thank you for the email. Please note that I am working on putting together three separate files
with case numbers and discovery . I will contact the court this morning and talk with them regarding the
upcoming court dates (especially tuesday) and then I will call you this morning."
"Re: proposal that might be your office some more money and resolve this whole thing.? From: Robert
Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in your safe list. Sent: Tue 3/05/13 11:03 AM To:
Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com) Zack I did not receive the email with the five page
attachment. I will be faxing the letter I read to you before lunch so I was hoping to get that attachments. From:
Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com> To: Robert Lindsay <rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>;
"zyoung@da.washoecounty.us" <zyoung@da.washoecounty.us>; "mkandaras@da.washoecounty.us"
<mkandaras@da.washoecounty.us>; "dwatts@da.washoecounty.us" <dwatts@da.washoecounty.us>;
"mcovington@da.washoecounty.us" <mcovington@da.washoecounty.us>; "plippar@da.washoecounty.us"
<plippar@da.washoecounty.us>; "plipparelli@da.washoecounty.us" <plipparelli@da.washoecounty.us>;
"jhelzer@da.washoecounty.us" <jhelzer@da.washoecounty.us> Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 9:14 PM
Subject: proposal that might be your office some more money and resolve this whole thing. Dear Mr. Lindsay
and WCDA's Office, I respectfully submit this in the hopes that a global deal..."
"Re: proposal that might be your office some more money and resolve this whole thing.? From: Robert
Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in your safe list. Sent: Thu 2/28/13 10:40 AM To:
Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com) Zach I don't even know where to begin. You have the right
idea here and then you just keep going on and on. Can you please contact our office so that we can make an
appointment to have you come in and go over all of the facts and documents. 324-3333 or 230-4697. The
sooner the better. From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com> To: Robert Lindsay
<rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>; "zyoung@da.washoecounty.us" <zyoung@da.washoecounty.us>;
"mkandaras@da.washoecounty.us" <mkandaras@da.washoecounty.us>; "dwatts@da.washoecounty.us"
<dwatts@da.washoecounty.us>; "mcovington@da.washoecounty.us" <mcovington@da.washoecounty.us>;
"plippar@da.washoecounty.us" <plippar@da.washoecounty.us>; "plipparelli@da.washoecounty.us"
<plipparelli@da.washoecounty.us>; "jhelzer@da.washoecounty.us" <jhelzer@da.washoecounty.us> Sent:
Wednesday, February 27, 2013 9:14 PM Subject: proposal that might be your office some more money and
resolve this whole thing. Dear Mr. Lindsay and WCDA's Office, I respectfully submit this in the hopes that a
global deal..."
"
Re: update on NNAHMS, request for continuance
of 2/25/13 Hearing in 067980
From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in
your safe list.
Sent: Mon 2/25/13 1:57 PM
To: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Zach: Please do not second guess me when I tell you I have things handled. There is no need for you to
cause more confusion. It does not help. You wanted the continuance I told you I would take care of it and I
did. You going into the court after the fact does not look good. Your next court date is for March 11,
2013 for the Order to show cause hearing and the Pretrial on the resisting arrest. In addition the other two
tpo violations are scheduled for March 6, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. I will be in touch with the Court to verify if the
DA actually filed charges. So relax and lets work together like we said we would.
From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com>
To: Robert Lindsay <rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 4:50 PM
Subject: RE: update on NNAHMS, request for continuance of 2/25/13 Hearing in
067980..."
"Re: update on NNAHMS, request for continuance of 2/25/13 Hearing in 067980?
From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in your
safe list. Sent: Sun 2/24/13 2:53 PM To: Zach Coughlin
(zachcoughlin@hotmail.com) Yes both of the cases have been continued. I will
call Robin in the morning and reset them for a couple weeks out. I explained to
Zach that you are doing everything possible to get on your feet and that you are
working with NAHMS as well as counseling etc. If you do everything required by
DAS over the next few weeks maybe when you go to court on the probation
violation it will work out so that the violation is dismissed or time served. Hang in
there your doing well, try to breathe and stay out of trouble ok!!! ...
From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com> To: Robert Lindsay
<rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 10:10 PM
Subject: RE: update on NNAHMS, request for continuance of 2/25/13 Hearing in
067980 Hi Diana, I am not sure I ever had your phone number beyond the one for
your office listed at http://www.nvbar.org/. When you wrote, below, "Zach I got a
call from Zach and your hearing has been continued. Please call me" Does that
mean my hearing in 11-063341 on the DAS Probation Violation (arrest of 2/2/13
alleging that I failed to check in on 1/3/13/ and 1/23/13, $500 cash bail posted)
Show Cause to show why my probation on a 180 suspended sentence should not
be revoked has been continued AS WELL? That's the hearing I really wanted
continued because, as specifically mentioned by Judge Pearson at a 2/3/13
Show Cause hearing on the morning of 2/3/13 (I was bailed out at 1 am and
found out about the hearing when I called the RJC to inquired about the start time
of my continued trial in a different case in 12-065630...that DAS hearing in
063341 was incorrectly noticed on my Jail Release papers for 2/5/13 or
something...At that 2/3/13 Hearing I got an Order for Competency Evaluation from
Pearson, then went and provided that to Judge Clifton at the resumption of the
065630 trial immediately thereafter, which, under NRS 178.405, required Clifton
to suspend the trial in 065630. Of course, he did not. He has demonstrated a
willingness to fail to apply the law as written in certain instances, invariably to the
benefit of the State. Somehow, Judge Clifton then allowed DDA a recess to go to
the counter and request and Emergency Hearing before Judge Pearson to have
that Order for Competency Evaluation entered an hour before in 063341 vacated.
DDA Young was successful in getting a hearing and having that Order vacated.
Judge Pearson was evasive during that hearing when questioned as to whether
he had extra-judicial discussions with Clifton (whom had just exited the Bench in
Courtroom D long enough for Judge Pearson to hold the Emergency Hearing to
Vacate his just entered Order for Competency Evaluation, which he claimed to
have been reviewing, unprompted, following his entry of that Order, in his
chambers, unprompted...)...."
"Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 16:37:16 -0800From:
rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.comSubject: Re: update on NNAHMS, request for
continuance of 2/25/13 Hearing in 067980To: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com Zach I
got a call from Zach and your hearing has been continued. Please call me From:
Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com> To: "rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com"
<rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>; "rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com"
<rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com>; "zyoung@da.washoecounty.us"
<zyoung@da.washoecounty.us> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 4:08 PM
Subject: update on NNAHMS, request for continuance of 2/25/13 Hearing in
067980 Dear Mr. Lindsay and DDA Young, I am writing to request from DDA
Young a stipulation to a continuance of the 2/25/3 Show Cause Hearing in
063341, which I understand may have been combined with 067980, so I am
copying Mr. Lindsay...."
"Re: sorry for the delay
From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com)
Sent: Wed 2/20/13 12:06 PM
To: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com); rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com
(rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com)...
From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com>
To: "rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com" <rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>;
"rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com" <rbl@robertbrucelindsay.com>
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2013 2:21 AM
Subject: FW: sorry for the delay
I need to see something out of your office soon. So far I got Bruce failing to file a
Motion for Order for Competency Evaluation and stipping to everything to make
DDA Young's routine easier...and generally seeming out of it, and he has
provided absolutely zero legal advice so far...zip...nothing. Please respond to my
written requests below. I need to know what your office is willing to do
immediately, otherwise its time to refund the $700.00Zachary Barker Coughlin
1471 E. 9th St. Reno, NV 89512 Tel and Fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
From: zachcoughlin@hotmail.comTo: rbl@robertbrucelindsay.comSubject: sorry
for the delayDate: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:45:21 -0800
Dear Mr. Lindsay,
https://skydrive.live.com/redir?resid=43084638F32F5F28%21118
Please find very relevant materials to the defense of this case attached and at the
above link. I have scanned everything therein for viruses and it is 100% safe and
virus free.
Sorry for the delay, I am not flaking on you, its just been hectic, i'll get to getting it
scanned and returned, very busy addressing a recent Order of the NNDB seeking
to disbar me, but I will get to it.
I don't want much, okay. Just a few simple things.If you get me this stuff, as far as
I am concerned, we are straight (assuming you don't pull a Jim Leslie and insist
on remaing on my case as long as possible to purposefully torpedo it....) There
was talk of Cape Fear with Leslie well before he moved to withdraw and got a
TPO, and now an EPO (though courthouse sanctuary doctrine makes the
"service" thereof rather suspect. Leslie was not all "terrified" back then...What
changed? Oh, that's right, he was finished puttin' in work for the County (ie,
makign sure I got convicted on both counts in 063341, thanks to his making the
NRS 171.136 (or trying to, at least, ...he failed) citizen's arrest arguments that
went completely over DDA Young head (or, more likely DDA Young just couldn't
stomach anymore of the farce and chose not to make such arguments to the
tirbunal). Can you serve the WCDA with request for discovery and subpoena the
RJC and WCSO for the following (assuming the won't just copy the stuff an
provide it all nice'n'easy like):
certified audio transcripts of the following hearings in the RJC:
1. 7/5/12 in RJC Rev2012-001048 hearing granting a default victory incident to a
6/28/12 motion to set aside the fraudulently procurred 6/27/12 Lockotu Order at
the rental where the 067980 arrest occurred.
2. 7/31/12 hearing in rjc rev2012-001048 before Judge Pearson (this was a
hearing noticed on 7/23/12 to address my Motion to Set Aside the 6/27/12
eviction Order signed by Judge Schroeder despite my 6/26/12 email and fax to
the RJC, SJC, WCSO, and City of Reno regarding my filign the Tenant's Answer
in the SJC, and the deficiencies in the 5 day notice. (please see the attached
police report by the RPD incident to the pretextual (and Soldal v. Cook Co
violating, not that it matters, this is nevada after all) arrest shortly upon my bailing
out on the 067980 charge in RMC 12 CR 12420(wherein the "approach" by the
RPD (to which RPD Sargent Sifre incidates some level of complicity between the
RPD and RJC in a recording only recently propound by the WCDA just 2 judicial
days before the 12/11/12 Trial stemming from the 1/14/12 misuse of 911 arrest in
rcr2012-065630 (a witness just sadly passed away unexpectedly 2 days after the
DA complete his direct examination of her, EComm's Kariann Beechler).
2.1 the audio transcript of the one hearing in REV 2012-075658 Zach Coughlin
vs Jeff Nichols. This is relevant to 067980 because its another eviction scenario
and establishes a pattern and practice by the RPD, WCSO and RJC to refuse to
uphold my rights while aggressively applying an overly rigid and formulaic
application of rules to me as a pro se tenant, and even going beyond that, some
might say, at times. Please, this one is important, I need it. A former WCSO
Deputy pu
3. I would like you to serve on the WCDA a request for discovery and also a
subpoena/FOIA (I know, NRS Open Records REquest) on ECOMM for any 911
calls, RPD Dispatch calls from civilians, or recordings between the RPD or wcso
or Reno sparks Indian colony Police or dispatch/ECOMM in any way connected
to me, Zach Coughlin, or suspected to be connected to me. I am not going to ask
for much more, if you get me all that, I'll be good, if not...I'll be tedious.
4. any and all recordings made by anyone (RPD, WCSO, Northwinds Staff,
bystanders, and especially Jeff Chandler or Ryan WRay or anyone else
associate with Nevada Court Services) of ANY interactions with me in any way
connected to Northwinds Apartments and my tenancies there (i had three rentals,
units 29, 45, and 71). Please have served a subpoena duces tecum on Nevada
Court Services directed to anythign (documentation, recordings, etc) related to
Zach Coughlin and serve a witness subpoena on NCS's Ryan Wray (might have
stopped working there, but still subpoena him please) as well as Jeff Chandler.
5. The RMC audio transcript of the (it woudl cost my $35 i don't have, and they
probably have to waive the fee for you, the RJC does when Leslie and the WCPD
request recordings) 7/5/12 unnoticed bail hearing in RMC 12 CR 12420 wherein
my bail was impermissibly raise from a bondable $1,415 to a cash only $3,000 for
charges that were plainly manufacture anyways.
6. the 12/3/12 Trial audio transcript in RMC 12 CR 12420.
7. the 12/18/12 audio transcript of the hearing in 067980 (the case you are on)
wherein Jim Leslie (without DDA Young there) was able to get some things
done...you likely are required to, or at least, might want to, have this anyways.... I
dont' necessarily need the hard copies (you can sign up for a free hotmail
account at www.outlook.com and skydrive them to me, its totally easy, or I can
pick them up, copy them, and deliver them to you...i just dont' have the money
and the court's nickel and dime me like crazy).
8. The 12/6/12 filing in the appeal of an associated RJC prosecution in rcr2012-
063341 (it is the Record on Appeal, basically, but I think they titled it "Notice of
Appeal" on the docket...and the RJC has failed to provide me a copy of it...not
even the brand new filings listing the index of documents included in that 12/6/12
filing (which is basically a Notice of Appeal). YES, IT is relevant to this case...it
goes to conflicts analysis to both the RJC (even across departments, especially
given some admission by Clifton as to looking over "submission on subpoenas"
from that 063341 case before Sferrazza, on the record in 065630...DDA Young is
an efiler and could easily email you that 20 mb or so 12/6/12 Notice of Appeal
(804 page) filign in CR12-2025 (the appeal of rcr2011-063341, the first of 10
arrest/incarcerations of me since 8/20/11).
Please subpoena Nevada Court Services Ryan Wray (he may not work there
anymore, but he was present at the scene of the arrest and, obviously, along with
Northwinds Manager Duane Jakobs (who testified on that 7/31/12 audio
transcript I am requesting you obtain and copy me on in rev2012-001048 about
the events in question in 067980) participated in attempted break in an fraudulent
Declaration of Service of the 6/14/12 5 Day UD Notice.
9. Lastly, please serve the RJC Custodian of Records a Subpoena duces tecum
for all records/fax logs/information/documentation related to any faxing of Orders
by RJC Judges to the WCSO between October 24th, 2011 and November 2nd
2011 (each fax has a job number, etc. I want a sequential printout or log of those
faxes as it goes to whether the RJC, in accord with its admitted policy, faxed to
the WCSO the two different ORders by Judge SFerrazza related to the Eviction (a
10/25/11 "Eviction ORder and Decision" and a 10/27/11 "Findings of Fact,
Conclusions of Law, and ORder for Summary Eviction". I need to know if and
when such items were faxed or transmitted to the WCSO...it is very relevant given
the same WCSO Deputy Machen conducted the lockout on 11/1/11 from my
former home law office, according to the locksmith, REno Carson Messenger
receipts, the transcript of th 6/18/12 criminal trespass trial in RMC 11 Cr 26405
(sworn testimony of Casey Baker, eSq. and Richard G. HIll, eSq.) demonstrates
that the WCSO's Office is being obstructive, as is the RJC (whom failed to comply
with my SCR 105(4)/SCR 119 properly issued and served supboena and
subpoena decus tecums of 10/30/12 in the formal disciplinary matter (espeically
consiering the 4/11/12 volunteering of information and documents by RJC judges
secretary Lori Townsend), and further specify the subpoena duces tecum is for
the "file stamped cover page" of any filign by Couglin in RJC rev2012-000374.
10. the audio transcript of the 8/7/12 TPO Hearing in RJC RCP2012-000287)
for Milan Krebs v. Zach Coughlin (Krebs was NOrthwinds Apts maintenance man
(the one doing the sawzalling to the metal door of unit 29 incident to the arrest in
067980...He testified under oath the matters of material direct relevane to the
defense of this case. This is a no brainer, and the fact that Leslie continuously
refused to obtain a copy of this hearing (again, the RJC waives the $35 fee for th
wCPD...so what was Leslie's excuse? That Northwind's Apartments sent him
some photgraphs of a microwave? Please. Jim Leslie is a joke. That might be
relevant to an evictio hearing, but not to a NRS 199.280 defense. What Krebs
testified to at that TPO extension hearing on cross examination is obviously
extremely relevant, particularly where there was extensive questioning directed to
the circumstances of the arrest in 067980.
11. Lastly, a subpoena duces tecum on the Custodian of Records for the Reno
muni Court and the Custodian of Records for the City of REno Marshals for any
an all documentation, marshal's reports, or recordings (Thompsons admitted to
makign at least on on or about 3/22/12) in any way related to Coguhlin (obviously,
there shoudl be an arrest report from the 2/27/12 direct contempt arrest wherein
Marshal Harley, as testified to by Judge Nash Holmes at my disciplinary hearing
on 11/14/12 via her hearsay of what Harley told her, has apparently alleged some
"disassemblign of a recording device and hiding a component of it in the restroom
during arestroom break that was begrudingly granted immediately after Holmes
began interrogating Coughlin about hwether he was "recording the proceedings"
and or whether he "had a recording device", upon which, alleged Holmes,
Coughlin immediately got "all squirmy and begged to use the restroom"....Okay,
lets see the documentation, marshal's report etc. for anything, but especially
including that. IF they move to QUash I want be copied on it (please copy me on
anything anyone sends you ever in any way related to me) as I have some
authority and opposition work I woudl like for you to at least consider incident to
any reply you may wish to file....this is relevant. RJC Clifton signed an ORder for
Competency eval on 2/27/12 at 1:31 pm...JUDge Nash holmes could nto be found
by her staff at that time, despite the traffic citaiton trial connected to Richard G.
Hill, Esq.'s office and the trespass arrest being schedule to occur then...both
HOlmes and Clifton were mysteriously transferred criminal cases involving
Coughlin on 2/27/12...both are lifelong prosecutors, formerly Holmes was Clifton's
boss from about 91 to 94 ish (not to mention Linda Gardner was a coworker (see
54844 and 60302), and Nash Holmes 3/14/12 grievance against Coughli nto the
SBN admits to communications with the WCPD about Coughlin.
12. please subpoena duces tecum the WCPD as to anything in any way related
to HOlmes admission regarding the WCPD in her 3/14/12 grievance...
13. Lastly, please serve a subpoena duces tecum on the custodian of REcords
for Richard G. HIll, ESq. and his former associates new firm in Kentucky, Casey
D. Baker, Esq's Baker and Baker or whatever tey call themsleves narrowly
tailored to any documentation, recordings, or information baring on when and if
their office provided the two different eviction ORders to the wcso office (Baker's
testimony at the 6/18/12 crimnal trespass trial (there is an oficial transcript at te
link) sheds some light on this vis a vis October 28th, 2011...and familiarzie
yourslef with the void/stale order concept incident to NRS 40.253's requirement
that the lockout be done "within 24 hours" of "receipt of the order"....by the
WCSO...the same deputy makign the arrest in 067980 conducted that lockout
and filed a fraudulent affidavit of service on 11/7/11 alleging to have "personally
served" me...which his supervisor was ofrced to admit, in writing, he did not, but
rather merely posted the order on the door (hill lied at the 6/18/12 trespass trial in
testying "they posted it to the door because you ran away" despite that being
completely false, and where HIll admits he was not even present that day, and his
associate completely failes to back up hill's baseless, defamatory accusation (one
of many by Hill).
And that's it. You do all that and provide a reasonable return and attempt to
counter all the bs MOtions to Quash sure to ensue, and we are straight. You can
move to withdraw and I will give you glowing review, I promise. Hell, I will even
draft all these subpoenas for your approval and the oppositions to the motions to
quash if you like, and provide the authority in support of them. But I need you to
issue the subpoenas and have them served, and get the recordings, etc....even if
they make you pay for them, none of this adds up to more than $200 (perhaps
you can file a notice of appearance, if an efiler on the cr12-2025 under some
justification that is is necessary to the defense herein or I would allow you to
appear as co-counsel provided you dont' insist on hijacking things..., but
obviously paying $1 page for all 804 pages hard copy from aint goign to work....
I really appreciate any help you can provide.
Sifre's admissions as to said complicity may provide a basis for your filing a
Motion to conflict out the rjc and the wcda's office (in addition to DDA Kandaras'
involvement in the turning over of my smartphone and data card to the City of
Reno Marshals and the RMC in 11 TR 26800, as admitted to by WCSO Hodge to
me, in front of local attorney Pam Willmore (I was arrested incidnet to a contempt
finding at the 2/27/12 trial before judge Nash Holmes, and it was not until after my
property was booked into my personal secured property and well after any time
for a "search incident to arrest" that the WC Jail released to the RMC and its
Marshals on 2/28/12 my property, which was returned 37 days later wiped of all
data incident to an Order of 3/30/12 that seems to have clearly be responsive to a
filing by me in NVB 10-05104 before Judge Nash Holmes and Washoe Legal
Services Exec. Director Elcano 1977 McGeorge SOL classmate, NVB Judge B.
Beesley....all three of whom testified at my 11/14/12 formal disciplinary hearing at
the SBN, despite SCR 105(2)(c) being desecrated in every way imaginable,
another Mirching to besmirch the judicial system in Nevada. DDA Kandaras is on
the NNDB and refuses to deny that she or David Hamilton, Esq. (Richard G. Hill,
Esq.'s best friend) were on my screening Panel. This IS revelvant to what you
are getting seven bones for, under a conflict or disqualification analysis (I would
like a reason why this case was transferred on 2/27/12 from Judge Lynch, same
day another case in the RMC was transferred to jUdge Holmes (the 1/12/12
custodial arrest for jaywalkign cuz richard g. hill said to cas in rmc 12 CR 12420.
7/5/12 in RJC Rev2012-001048 (this is the summary eviction from the very unit
#29 rental at Northwinds Apartment, 1680 Sky Mountain Drive that I was arrested
at on 6/28/12 in the matter you were assigned and contracted to handle for
$700.00). I did not attend the hearing because I was rearrested on 7/3/12 by the
Reno Police Department just blocks from Northwinds Apartments in RMC 12 CR
12420 (a custodial arrest involving three charges, one, a simple traffic citation for
failure to secure a load on one's vehicle (they allege an empty plastic storage tub
fell off my vehicle), two, no proof of vehicle insurance (despite RPD Officer Alan
Weaver admitting that I showed him a high resolution pdf of my then current
USAA auto insurance on a 4.7 inch smart phone screen...he said it had to be a
paper printout), and three, "disturbing the peace" based upon the criminal
complaint signed by Northwind's Apartments maintenance man, 23 year old Milan
Krebs (whom obtained a TPO against me from the RJC in RCP2012-000287 on
7/5/12 after the RPD fraudulently urged Krebs to apply for one incident to the
7/3/12 arrest, as further confirmed by the commentary by the same RPD Sargent
Sifre (only finally propounded to me following a 12/5/12 email from the WCDA
informing me of the availability of such discovery
please let me know, in writing, and with specifics, whether or not you will move, in
writing, to obtain the above indicated materials, and provide an indication of how
soon you will do so, with proof thereof. Sorry to have to ask for that, but time is of
the essence and I need to know if this is going to work out with you or not. If it
does, I will absolutely credit you for being a faithful defender of the Sixth
Amendment, and maybe more.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin1471 E. 9th St.Reno, NV 89512Tel and Fax: 949 667
7402ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com"
Sincerely,
Zachary Barker Coughlin 1471 E. 9th St. Reno, NV 89512 Tel and Fax: 949 667
7402 ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
PS:
"
Re: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?
From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in
your safe list.
Sent: Wed 3/13/13 8:57 AM
To: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Dear Zach: Thank you for the email. Please note that I am working on putting together three separate files
with case numbers and discovery .

I will contact the court this morning and talk with them regarding the upcoming court dates (especially
tuesday) and then I will call you this morning...."
"
Re: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?
From: Robert Lindsay (rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com) This sender is in
your safe list.
Sent: Wed 3/13/13 8:57 AM
To: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Dear Zach: Thank you for the email. Please note that I am working on putting together three separate files
with case numbers and discovery .

I will contact the court this morning and talk with them regarding the upcoming court dates (especially
tuesday) and then I will call you this morning.
From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com>
To: Robert Lindsay <rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases
Dear Mr Lindsay,
Would you please communicate with me a bit more with regard to what the
overall plan is, the contigencies, worst case, best case, etc. For instance, what
if no global resolution is worked out by 3/19/13, the trial date for 12-065630
before Judge Clifton...."
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 09:33:53 -0700
From: rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?
To: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com
Dear Mr. Coughlin:

I need to clarify with you that Mr. Lindsay was appointed to the following cases in Court to wit;

RCR2013-71437 the contempt charges that you were reinstated into DAS and CCP

RCR2011-063341 petty larceny matter that you were already convicted on but again for the contempt of
court matters.

RCR 12-067980 obstructing justice and resisting case that has been set for a pretrial on April 16, 2013.

Apparently the case that is going to trial on Tuesday 03-19-13, is Case No. RCR2012-065630 and as you
indicated the Judge specifically stated that no additional counsel would be appointed on this case, as you
had one appointed and they withdrew, you then requested to represent yourself. I believe this accurate.

Mr. Lindsay would like to schedule an appointment with you for Friday March 15, 2013 to go over these
matters. However, you need to make sure to take your medication and be in a rational state of mind when
you meet with him.

Also, Mr. Lindsay informed you that you were to provide a list of the medications that you are currently
taking as well as the name of the psychologist that will be performing the evaluation with and that you are
suppose to meeting with regularly.

Furthermore Zach: Please do not send me a large email I simply need you to pleas just follow the
instructions as outlined above and make an appointment with our office. I apologize for any confusion, but
as I specifically informed you a couple of days ago I needed to review our files and consult with Mr.
Lindsay before offering any information and have now done so.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation.

Diana Sims
Legal Assistant to
ROBERT BRUCE LINDSAY
From: Zach Coughlin <zachcoughlin@hotmail.com>
To: Robert Lindsay <rbrucelindsaylaw@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 4:29 PM
Subject: Notice of Appearances filed in which cases?
Dear Mr. Lindsay,
Would you please communicate with me a bit more with regard to what the
overall plan is, the contigencies, worst case, best case, etc. For instance,
what if no global resolution is worked out by 3/19/13, the trial date for 12-
065630 before Judge Clifton.
I like you personally, Bruce, and Diana too, but I am frustrated. Everytime I
go into court I don't know if I will be allowed to go home that day. I have
offered the County, the WCDA, etc., etc. everything I could think they want,
but no deals get done...the WCDA is shielding DDA Young from any emails,
faxes, voice mails from me (See the letter ADA Helzer recently resent), which
I think impermissibly attempts to absolve him of his obligations under the
RPC. I am very unhappy about what happened on 2/13/13 (not a huge deal,
but I am working on a brief to save my law license, and five days in jail
doesn't help). Its not clear to me what happened yesterday before Judge
Pearson. I can chill out, but how about seeking clarification as to what
occurred, and if, in fact, I am now subject to some 3 year probation requiring
me to check in with CCP, in addition, to checking in with DAS, every
week...how is that a good deal for me? Keep me out of jail? From what?
What was I in danger of going to jail over? An allegation of calling the
wrong number at the RJC to check the time for a hearing? Hardly colorable
for the RJC to assert a justification for 6 months in jail? What else? A DAS
probation violation? Well, did I have an email from DAS Officer Brown
excusing such violation? Was the arrest after 7pm in violation of NRS
171.136? I dont' like going to court, checking in with probation, giving
people my medical records. These are positives. Having limites on my ability
to travel, to move...Giving the RJC leverage to put me back in jail should I
point out how their various egregiously incorrect under the law eviction order
contributed mightily to a tremendously painful and unhappy 18 months of my
life. And you, so far, have always assumed I was wrong, and that they only
way is to give up any leverage I have, for....what? 5 days in jail for being late
to court (no consultation with you prior to appearing before Judge Clifton is
hardly "representation"...If some binding order issued yesterday from Judge
Pearson, its not as though I received any analysis from you before hand. That
is why I didn't agree to anything beyond a two week continuance, which I was
you confirmed in my initial phone call to you afterwards, then, later, you
changed your position and asserted something else...I think we need to work
together here, and that, if you really think about it, neither you nor I "agreed"
to any such consent Order that Judge Pearson for the WCDA may alleged
occurred. Further, any such Order was issued in AO12-01...which is not even
a "case", nor was it issued upon "a properly made motion"....as such, and CCP
Order is void...somehow I think we could influence Judge Pearson to adopt
that viewpoint to whatever extent he does not yet...But I am not even sure he
entered an order, or "rendered", etc...I need something in writing telling me
what, if anything, I am required to do to comply with any such "Order" should
it be the case that there is one. If there is, I want to file a motion to stay
probation, correct illegal sentence, notice of appeal thereto, etc., and the time
frame is extremely limited. Maybe Judge Pearson would rather "clarify"
things than have a Notice of Appeal filed divesting him of the ability to do so.
It seems you feel that going in to CCP would be a good thing, that it likely
wouldn't be three years in duration, would provide me an opportunity to sell
myself to Judge Pearson more, etc...But that's assumign stupid things don't
happen, like me being late to a check-in, continued issues with a Bailiff or
two, ADA Helzer telling DAS Officer Ramos to arrest me when he needs
leverage on something (if that is what happened), etc., etc. It just doesn't
seem that thought out to go, in two weeks, and enter some CCP Consent
Order to dispose of two rather dubious Show Cause Orders or Probation
Violations...Were were the witnesses yesterday? No witnesses, no
contempt...so that adds credence to the view that yesterday was more of a
status conference in which no orders issued, an certainly not a CCP obligation
for 3 years where the only discernible benefit to the client is getting an Order
paying for a Dr. Yasar evaluation when such an Order was already rendered
on 2/2/13 (Pearson has just failed to have a check cut...). I dont' need my
meds paid for by CCP, NNAHMS is doing that, and my future psychiatrist
visits are paid for too. So any consenting to an Order that anyone alleges you
did yesterday on behalf of your client would not be supportable much under a
theory that your client obtained much benefit from it...beyond a dubious
assertion that jail time was likely. At some point the RJC Judges have to
consider the PR on the horizon attendant to any jailing me for 6 months
incident to a RJC Bailiff detaining me just long enough for DAS to close its
doors on 1/23/13, upon which some suspect revocation of probation would
be based...
Will you please email me or fax me something in writing indicating, by case
number, which cases you are attorney of record for me on, and to what
extent? I have been told by your office and the RJC, and the WCDA's Office
that you are my attorney of record in 12-065630, for which the Trial is set to
occur on 3/19/13 at 8:30 am. If that is the case, I would like to meet with
you and prepare for trial, and your being listed as attorney of record therein
has now limited my ability to have subpoenas issued, to make filings, etc.
My understanding of the hearing yesterday before Judge Pearson is that it was
a combination hearing involving three separate and distinct matters:
12-067980, the case in which you are listed as attorney of record by the RJC,
though the Motion I filed on 12/3/12 therein has never been addressed by the
RJC
AO12-01, the "case" wherein the "Caption" reads "In the Administrative
Matter of Zachary Coughlin...Administrative Order 12-01" from which the
12/20/12 "Administrative Order 12-01" by then Chief Judge Sferrazza issued,
though service thereof I believe should be quashed, as, should be, the 2/25/13
Order to Show Cause that shares the same "caption", and
11-063341, the iPhone petty larceny conviction case currently on appeal in
CR12-2025 (where I was granted In Forma Pauperis status on 1/9/13 and
have an Order (see attached) requiring the preparation of some 15 hours of
trial transcripts).
I believe the AO12-01 of 2/25/13 is void for lack of jurisidiction and for the
other reasons set out in my various attached filings. Please note t
Please indicate whether you were compensated by anyone in any way for your
appearing in 12-065630 on 2/13/13 and how you came to appear at such
hearing, whether such hearing involved criminal or civil contempt, and
whether you are attorney of record on the appeal thereof (please see the
Notice of Appeal I filed in that matter on 2/25/13, within the 10 days under
NRS 189.010, as to the 5 day summary incarceration Order for some type of
contempt...I gather. Given you were late to court yesterday, I noted that you
were not taken into custody following the hearing and yourself subject to
such a Contempt Hearing). Please indicate when, and in exactly what matters,
and to what extent, you have complied with the local rules with respect to
filing a notice of appearance in any of my cases. I am sorry to come across as
so formal and technical, but there are significant consequences to me possible
in these various matters.
Given the proximity of the 3/19/13 Trial date in 12-065630 and your
statement to me on the phone today, that you could not speak with me about
any of the matters for which you are listed as my attorney of record, including
the case wherein there is a trial date on calendar of 3/19/13 at 8:30 am, I
believe it is necessary for a stipulation to a continuance be sought from DDA
Young and and Order granting such continuance from the RJC.
Additionally, I have my medication and pyschiatrist viists paid for by
NNAMHS. I have no interest in joining a CCP with the RJC, much less for 3
years. You indicated to me that nothing occurred in court at the combination
hearing yesterday (which,. from my understanding combined the Show Cause
Order of 2/25/13 incident to the 12/20/12 Administrative Order 12-
01...which I have called "case number AO12-01...and I object to such Order
be recharacterized at this point as being incident to 11-063341 (There was a
Show Cause Hearing, continued from 2/25/13 in 11-063341 that was to take
place yesterday 3/11/13, though it did not take place as far as I know, and any
Order that was entered (I did not agree to any Order being entered, and you
represented to me that no Orders were going to be entered in any matter or
case being addressed in court yesterday 3/11/13 incident to the 9 am
combination hearing of that date beyond a 2 week continuance being entered,
sufficient to allow you and I and DDA Young to work together towards a
global resolution, involving both the matters in which you are attorney of
record, and to which I have so consented to you being attorney of record, and
those where you and I are co-counsel, and those where I am self representing,
whichever the case may be (and at this point, that seems to be up for debate
and in the eye of the beholder).
Please indicate whether you will be seeking a continuance as to the 3/19/12
Trial date at 8:30 am in 12-065630 before Judge Clifton, and, if not, when
you and I can meet to address matters related thereto.
NNAHMS is paying for my medication and future psychiatrist visits, and I am
starting counseling there with a psychologist. As such, I don't know why it
would be necessary to provide my prescription records. I would like the RJC
to fulfill the Order rendered on 2/2/13 that it would pay for a mental health
evaluation with my private psychiatrist (Dr. Suat Yasar) whom I have gone to
for years, and who, thus, I feel would be able to provide a more in depth and
better mental health evaluation.
To the extent that during the hearing yesterday (I was only able to speak with
you very, very briefly yesterday prior to the 9:00 am hearing, given your
arriving at 9:20 am for yesterday's hearing, which was set for 9:00 am). I
would like to consult with you further regarding the possibilities of entering
the RJC's CCP program, though at this point, I don't see how doing such
provides much benefit to me beyond being subject to more Orders To Show
Cause should I fail to appear to a check in or arrive late. I have no interest in
being subject to such a program for 36 months. I do not believe I consented
to any Order being entered which would place me in such a CCP program for
36 months or require me to check in at the RJC a second time per week in
addition to my usual Wednesday DAS check ins. You mentioned some
possibile benefit of being enrolled in the CCP program or, in the future, after
more consulation and informed consent being garned from me, upon any such
Consent Order being entered requiring me to participate in the CCP program,
as involving having my medications and psychiatrist visits paid for. However,
NNAHMS is currently providing such a service, and NNAHMS does not
subject me to Order to Show Cause if I am late to an appointment, and given
my ADHD/ADD and Major Depressive Disorder diagnosis, being late from
time to time is a distinct possibility.
If your understanding of what occurred in court yesteday before Judge
Pearson is different than mine, please let me know in writing. I know I was
crying in court and very distraught and indicated to you that I had not had my
medication in two days, and I feel that likely augured towards your moving
for a Competency Evaluation or otherwise seeking a stay of the
proceedings...further, you were provided the 2/2/13 Order for Competency
Evaluation by Judge Pearson, and even where Judge Pearson may have
purported to set aside such Order only an hour after entering it, I don't believe
he has the jurisdiction to do that, but rather, that I must be examined by a a
mental health care professional with the requisite certifcation to perform such
evaluations prior to any matter, in any department of the RJC proceeding.

While I granted you a limited right to pursue a global resolution in a civil
context of the various matters involved here, in a co-counsel arrangement in
which I retain final say on everything, including your continue participation in
any such matters (and, in the proper order, and prior to giving up any leverage
I may have, I am in favor of you being compensated by the State as much and
in as many cases as possible, just not before a deal is worked out in a civil
context disposing of these various matters and where, any subsequent filing
by you of a notice of appearance in a criminal matter is as my co-counsel).
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
Zachary Barker Coughlin 1471 E. 9th St. Reno, NV 89512 Tel and Fax: 949 667
7402 ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com
Zach has 11 files to share with you on SkyDrive. To view them, click the links below.
2 25 12 0204 Order to Show Cause Order 2012-01 RJC Sferrazza Pearson.pdf
2 25 13 Notice of Appeal of Order of 2 13 12 5 Day Incarceration for Contempt 065630 0204.pdf
2 25 13 Request to RJC Chief Judge Pearson for Order for Yasar Evaluation.pdf
2 28 13 0204 063341 WCDA DDA Hezler 2 25 13 letter with new handwritten note remailed threatening
TRO TPO.pdf
2 28 13 0204 AO12-01 Motion for Extension of Time to File Responsive Document to 2 25 13 Order in
AO12-01 for 3 5 13 Hearing by 4pm on 2 28 13.pdf
2 28 13 0204 RJC AO12-01 Motion for Extension of Time to Filed Responsive Document to 2 25 13 Order
in AO12-01 re Right to Counsel.pdf
3 1 13 0204 063341 Coughlin's Motion to for Check for Dr. Yaser Pursuant to Order Rendered on 2 13
13 , Subm of Proposed Order for Mental Eval.pdf
3 1 13 0204 AO12-01 Coughlin's Motion to Dismiss Show Cause Order Lack Specificity Insuff Service, Mtn
for Continuance of 3 5 13 Hearing, Set Aside AO12-01 Void Lack Juris 067980 063341 065630.pdf
3 11 13 0204 063341 067980 AO12-01 filign in relation to what occurred before Judge Pearson
today.pdf
12 3 12 067980 Motion to Substitute Out Leslie and Conflict out wcda wcpd motion for mistrial notice of
leslie and young's failure to hold msc on 11 20 12.pdf
12 20 12 438pm RJC Chief Judge Sferrazza 12-01 Administrative Order 0204 063341 065630 067980
1048 607 599 074328 ocrd tagged.pdf
Download all