Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
7
8
9
10
11
12
REHAN SHEIKH
Appellant (and plaintiff),
v.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Brian Kelly
Secretary, California State
Transportation Agency
Appellee
and
Mark Tweety
Manager, Department of Motor
Vehicles
Appellee
Case NO: 14 1 6 8 5 8
Appellants Supplementary Opening
Brief
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
2
3
4
I. QUESTIONS PRESENTED
7
8
9
10
plaintiffs driving license records without his knowledge. The DMV made those
11
12
Notice to plaintiff.
13
14
15
Does the DMV has a mandatory duty, in order to satisfy the Due Process
Clause(s), to issue a written Notice to plaintiff?
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs Supplementary Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e |i
1
2
3
4
STATEMENT OF CASES
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs Supplementary Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e | ii
1
2
3
additional Questions (Page i). Plaintiff recently learned that defendants alleged
6
7
8
9
II. JURISDICTION
10
11
1291. This Court has authority to grant declaratory relief under 28 U.S.C
12
2201 and 2202. The Case involves plaintiffs driving license. The applicable
13
14
15
16
III.
17
2. The Due Process Clause(s) mandate that the DMV issue a Notice of accusation.
18
19
20
21
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
The DMV denied Right to Due Process by NOT issuing a written Notice.
3. The Due Process Clause(s) mandates that the DMV has the Burden to prove its
accusations for suspending plaintiffs Driving License.
22
23
IV.PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
24
25
26
27
28
1
2
3
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
2
3
not constitute a sufficient Notice and did not conform with the requirements of
5
6
7
8. Recently plaintiff accidently received a copy of the public record and the DMV
report (exhibit) where the DMV alleged three accusations;
i.
ii.
10
iii.
11
12
13
14
15
9. The DMV did not issue any Notice to plaintiff that stated Lack of Knowledge or
skill. For lack of a written Notice of Accusation and for lack of a hearing,
plaintiff has no opportunity to contest such accusation.
10. Even before any judicial finding, the DMV published the above referenced
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
V. ARGUMENTS
a. The Due Process Clause(s) mandate that deprivation of Driving
License be preceded by a written Notice
11. The bare minimum requirement of the Due Process clause mandates that the
DMV issue written Notice of all of its accusations.
28
Plaintiffs Supplementary Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e |3
1
2
3
Many controversies have raged about the cryptic and abstract words of the
Due Process Clause but there can be no doubt that at a minimum they require
notice and opportunity for hearing appropriate to the nature of the case.
7
8
9
10
Mullane, Special Guardian, v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., Trustee, et
al. 339 U.S. 306 (1950)
12. The Notice of accusations is not a mere gesture and must reasonably inform
plaintiff of the pendency of an action and an opportunity to present objections.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
criterion is not the possibility of conceivable injury but the just and
19
20
with which the statute deals." But when notice is a person's due, process
21
22
Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., Trustee, et al. 339 U.S. 306 (1950)
23
13. The DMV suspended plaintiffs Driving License, published its accusations on its
24
public report without a Notice and without any hearing causing undue injury.
25
The DMV continues to suspend plaintiffs driving license since 2011. On such a
26
27
28
1
2
3
7
8
9
charges could seriously damage the students' standing with their fellow
pupils and their teachers as well as interfere with later opportunities for
higher education and employment. It is apparent that the claimed right of
the State to determine unilaterally and without process whether that
10
11
the Constitution. Goss et al. v. Lopez et al. 419 U.S. 565 (1975)
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
claimed that the Board did not have Burden of proof to bring accusations or to
19
20
21
22
suspend license(s). This has long been established that outcome of the case rests
23
with the Burden of Proof. The moving party that is, the party asserting the
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs Supplementary Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e |5
1
2
3
license holder Schireson v. Walsh, 354 Ill. 40, 187 N.E. 921 (1933).
5
6
7
16. If DMV alleges that a Driver did not appear before a third party, the DMV must
prove its accusations and their relevance. This is the process widely accepted in
their driving licenses. In order to deceptively shift its Burden of Proof, the DMV
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
VI.PRAYER
17. Plaintiff seeks a declaratory relief that;
a. The DMV has the Burden to Prove its accusations for suspending
plaintiffs Driving License.
b. The DMV denied Plaintiffs Right to Due Process by NOT issuing a
written Notice of its accusations of Lack of knowledge and skills
c. The DMV denied Plaintiffs Right to Due Process by NOT issuing a Notice
21
22
23
Respectfully Submitted;
24
25
26
27
---------------------------------Rehan Sheikh
Plaintiff
28
Plaintiffs Supplementary Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e |6
Rehan Sheikh
Phone 209.475.1263 Email; rehansheikh@yahoo.com
Date: July 31, 2015
Matthew Besmer,
Deputy Attorney General
Department of Justice
2550 Mariposa Mall, Room 5090
Fresno, CA 93721
Matthew.Besmer @doj.ca.gov
Subject:
Ref:
EXHIBIT
7
8
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
RERAN SHEIKH,
2:14-cv-751 GEB AC PS
20
21
22
I.
23
2.
On At1gust 6, 2014, l retrieved Plaintiff Rehan Sheikh's driving record using the
24
California Department of Motor Vehicle's ("DMV") computer system. Plaintiff's driving record
25
contains information regarding his traffic citation, conviction, and fine payment history as
26
reported by law enforcement agencies and California Superior Courts. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a
27
28
I
Second Declaration of Sharon Robinson in Suppmi of Motion to Dismiss for Mootness and Standing (Rule 12(b)(J ))
and Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Rule 12(b)(6) (2:14-cv-751 GEB AC PS)
3.
As of August 6, 2014, Plaintiff's driving record shows that he has not paid his fine for
his August 11, 20111Taffic citation (No. i\158647), and that he has not appeared in the San
Joaquin County Superior Court on his February 16,2012 traffic citation (No. A156283).
4.
When Plaintiff pays his traffic 1ine and when he appears in court, the San Joaquin
Counly Superior Court -will notify the DMV and Plaintiffs driving record will be updated to
I declare under penalty ofpet:jury under the laws of the United States of America and the
State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on
\0
1\
\2
Sharon Robinson
Declarant
13
Signature
14
\5
\6
17
SA2014ll5505
95ll392l.doc
\8
19
20
2\
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Second Declaration of Sharon Robinson ln Support of Motion to Dismiss for Moo1ness and Standing (Rule 12(b)(l))
and Molion to Dismiss lOr failure to State a Claim Rule 12(b)(6) (2:14-cv-751 GEB AC PS)
EXHIBIT
1 of 2
2 of 2
514/2015
1I0st Used
Online
Hill Code
Type
Activity Check
Reference:
Start Date:
End
Weight
Height
MALE
BLACK
Name:
Address:
New MVR
Sex:
Lyes
llair:
DJ
License:
Dale
MVR:
DO[3:
Iss Datc 01/09/2007
L:xp Date: 01/0912012
1651bs.
5' I0"
BLACK
46
Age:
Failures To Appear
Seq #: II
A\:cidents
rVPE
VIOL
CONV
ACD
,\VI)
VIC
FoeA nON
nCKFI
I'LATE
elflS
OB!II!20 II
osm12012
M"
MAl)
STO(,KT()~
AI58M7
\X()[)(,46 I
FTA
02/1oi2012
STOCKTON
A I 5628]
5WAV921
[)['SCRIPTlON
0,10
UE",
405t)!):'
B2fl
DB09
FTA
B74
DEO)
Fl"A
MI6
MAI6
FIA
MI6
MA H,
FTA
MJ4
MI.[)~
21701
ITA
NU4
M("04
FTA
S94
SA02
2:!])O
~OTICE
TO D!V1V-FA1LL'RE TO APPEAR
1,1601/\ DRIVING
P"j
N
N
OIWIHII,
III;IH II
(II.-IHIHII
I :--'[),IHrt.
02!2~!20 I',:
;LSPEK~IOl\
CODE
A \D
DESCRlI'110"
241
VG09
<iJ8
[1002
,,;uSPl=.NSlON
lO/23J20 12
11/22/2012
.. VERBAL \01 1("1e
IlOCI..'\1E~T
ON I'll E
Issue: 01/0912007
Expire: Oll09f2012
Status:
SUSPENI)I;()
S'lJ',~I)I;N'I)I':I)
,_.
Class: ('
NO"l-COMMERClAL
I.iews\: Status b.planatilln: MANDA lORY SUSP/REVK
I.icensc Status Explanatioll: D1SCIUTIONAR Y SUSPIREVK
License IDENTIFICATION Issue: 11118/2014
Expire: 0110912020 Stalus VALID
Class:
REGULAR
Till:, "'CI~NSf:' NUMBER OF TIIl~ SLJ13JL':CT ABOVE WAS ClII:CKED FOR CllANeiLS OR EVE"lTS I'OSTI:I) TO Till
DRIVING RECOR!) SINCl: TilE I.AST MVR WAS ORDERED.
CHANGES OR EVENTS HA VI: BEEN REPORTED.
CHANGES OR EVENTS THAT TRIGGER AN MVR ORDER CAN INCLUDE, BUT MA Y NOT BE LIMITED TO CUNVICTIONS,
DUPLICATE COPY
without highlighting records
EXHIBIT
514/2015
1I0st Used
Online
Hill Code
Type
Activity Check
Reference:
Start Date:
End
Weight
Height
MALE
BLACK
Name:
Address:
New MVR
Sex:
Lyes
llair:
DJ
License:
Dale
MVR:
DO[3:
Iss Datc 01/09/2007
L:xp Date: 01/0912012
1651bs.
5' I0"
BLACK
46
Age:
Failures To Appear
Seq #: II
A\:cidents
rVPE
VIOL
CONV
ACD
,\VI)
VIC
FoeA nON
nCKFI
I'LATE
elflS
OB!II!20 II
osm12012
M"
MAl)
STO(,KT()~
AI58M7
\X()[)(,46 I
FTA
02/1oi2012
STOCKTON
A I 5628]
5WAV921
[)['SCRIPTlON
0,10
UE",
405t)!):'
B2fl
DB09
FTA
B74
DEO)
Fl"A
MI6
MAI6
FIA
MI6
MA H,
FTA
MJ4
MI.[)~
21701
ITA
NU4
M("04
FTA
S94
SA02
2:!])O
~OTICE
TO D!V1V-FA1LL'RE TO APPEAR
1,1601/\ DRIVING
P"j
N
N
OIWIHII,
III;IH II
(II.-IHIHII
I :--'[),IHrt.
02!2~!20 I',:
;LSPEK~IOl\
CODE
A \D
DESCRlI'110"
241
VG09
<iJ8
[1002
,,;uSPl=.NSlON
lO/23J20 12
11/22/2012
.. VERBAL \01 1("1e
IlOCI..'\1E~T
ON I'll E
Issue: 01/0912007
Expire: Oll09f2012
Status:
SUSPENI)I;()
S'lJ',~I)I;N'I)I':I)
,_.
Class: ('
NO"l-COMMERClAL
I.iews\: Status b.planatilln: MANDA lORY SUSP/REVK
I.icensc Status Explanatioll: D1SCIUTIONAR Y SUSPIREVK
License IDENTIFICATION Issue: 11118/2014
Expire: 0110912020 Stalus VALID
Class:
REGULAR
Till:, "'CI~NSf:' NUMBER OF TIIl~ SLJ13JL':CT ABOVE WAS ClII:CKED FOR CllANeiLS OR EVE"lTS I'OSTI:I) TO Till
DRIVING RECOR!) SINCl: TilE I.AST MVR WAS ORDERED.
CHANGES OR EVENTS HA VI: BEEN REPORTED.
CHANGES OR EVENTS THAT TRIGGER AN MVR ORDER CAN INCLUDE, BUT MA Y NOT BE LIMITED TO CUNVICTIONS,
1 of 2
2 of 2
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
7
8
9
10
11
12
REHAN SHEIKH
Appellant (and plaintiff),
v.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Brian Kelly
Secretary, California State
Transportation Agency
Appellee
Case NO: 14 1 6 8 5 8
Appellants Motion for Leave to File a
Supplementary Brief
and
Mark Tweety
Manager, Department of Motor
Vehicles
Appellee
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
PRAYER
4. Plaintiff respectfully requests the Court to grant permission to file his
supplementary opening brief.
17
18
Respectfully Submitted;
19
20
21
22
23
---------------------------------Rehan Sheikh
Plaintiff
24
25
26
27
28
Motion for Leave to file Supplementary opening Brief Rehan Sheikh v. [DMV]
P a g e |1