1 Aurora Bautista Quicho

207 Albatross Lane

2 Fountain Valley, California

3 Petitioner

8 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
9 DIVISION __
10 Aurora Bautista Quicho, ) CASE NO. ___________
)
11 Petitioner, ) PETITION FOR
) PEREMPTORY WRIT OF MANDATE
12 vs. ) (VERIFIED)
)
13 Mark S. Arnold, and ) POINTS & AUTHORITIES
The Superior Court of California,)
14 Case No. YA058902, ) CCP §§1084 et seq.
People vs. Quicho )
15 ) In re:
Respondents. )
16 ) Los Angeles Superior Court,
) People vs. Quicho,
17 ) Case No. YA058902 (Criminal)
)
18 ) Los Angeles Superior Court,
) Quicho vs. People, et al.,
19 ) Case No. BC324176 (At Law)
)
20 ---------------------------------)-----------------------------
21

22

23 1 I am Aurora Bautista Quicho. I have personal knowledge of the

24 following facts and am competent to testify as to the truth of

25 these facts if called as a witness.

26

27 2 The appellate court may issue a writ of mandate to an inferior

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 1 of 13

 1 tribunal.1 Further, a writ of mandate is enforceable by the
2 appellate court.2

4 3 My interest in the writ of mandate is presently existing. A

5 writ of mandate would be beneficial to me, real and actual,

6 direct and tangible.3 A writ of mandate would result in my

7 incarceration being terminated and my liberty being fully

8 restored.

9
10 SUMMARY
11

12 4 The judge of an inferior court not of record has a duty

13 (A) to order the dismissal, with prejudice, of a criminal
14 case against me,
15 (B) to order my release from incarceration, and
16 (C) to order full restoration of my liberty.
17

18 5 The duty is imposed by a direct order from a superior court

19 which is a constitutional court of record.4 The judge and the
20 1 CCP 1084. The writ of mandamus may be denominated a writ of mandate. CCP 1085. (a) A writ of mandate may
be issued by any court to any inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act
21 which the law specially enjoins, as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to compel the admission of a
party to the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the party is entitled, and from which the party is
22 unlawfully precluded by such inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person.

23 1097. When a peremptory mandate has been issued and directed to any inferior tribunal,
2 CCP
corporation, Board, or person, if it appear to the Court that any member of such tribunal, corporation, or Board, or
24 such person upon whom the writ has been personally served, has, without just excuse, refused or neglected to obey
the same, the Court may, upon motion, impose a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars. In case of persistence in a
25 refusal of obedience, the Court may order the party to be imprisoned until the writ is obeyed, and may make any
orders necessary and proper for the complete enforcement of the writ.
26
3 52 Am Jur 2d Mandamus § 388
3

27 4California 1879 Constitution, Article 6, Section 1, “The judicial power of this State is vested in the Supreme
Court, courts of appeal, superior courts, and municipal courts, all of which are courts of record.”
28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 2 of 13

1 inferior court are unlawfully breeching that duty. For that
2 reason I am moving the above-entitled appellate court for a writ

3 of mandate compelling the judge and the inferior court to execute

4 the said duty owed to me.

6 BACKGROUND
7

8 6 On June 29, 2004 I was negotiating an agreement for the

9 purchase of automobiles from an automobile dealership. It was
10 understood by all parties that I was paying for the automobiles

11 with a private check which required special procedures in order

12 to provide the funds. It was understood that I would not accept

13 delivery of the automobiles until the company received the funds.

14 No one was injured: no one lost any property; no one lost any
15 money. No one was at risk of losing any property or money.
16

17 7 While the negotiation was in progress, the police appeared and

18 under color of law carried me away and imprisoned me against my

19 will.

20

21 8 In an inferior court5 known as The Superior Court6 of the State

22
55“Inferior courts” are those whose jurisdiction is limited and special and whose proceedings are not according to
23 the course of the common law.” Ex Parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212; Smith v. Andrews, 6 Cal. 652

24 66“The only inherent difference ordinarily recognized between superior and inferior courts is that there is a
presumption in favor of the validity of the judgments of the former, none in favor of those of the latter, and that a
25 superior court may be shown not to have had power to render a particular judgment by reference to its record. Ex
parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212. Note, however, that in California ‘superior court’ is the name of a particular court. But
26 when a court acts by virtue of a special statute conferring jurisdiction in a certain class of cases, it is a court of
inferior or limited jurisdiction for the time being, no matter what its ordinary status may be. Heydenfeldt v. Superior
27 Court, 117 Cal. 348, 49 Pac. 210; Cohen v. Barrett, 5 Cal. 195” 7 Cal. Jur. 579

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 3 of 13

1 of California, Case Number YA058902 (hereinafter “Inferior
2 Court”), styled “People vs Quicho, in Torrance, California, under

3 color of law (code) I was burdened with four charges:

4
COUNT 1: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §459,
5 SECOND DEGREE COMMERCIAL BURGLARY;
6 COUNT 2: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §476a(a),
NON-SUFFICIENT FUND CHECK MULTIPLE CHECKS;
7
COUNT 3: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §459
8 SECOND DEGREE COMMERCIAL BURGLARY; and
9 COUNT 4: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE 476a(a)
NON-SUFFICIENT FUND CHECK SINGLE CHECK, and
10 CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §186.11
PATTERN OF RELATED FELONY CONDUCT.
11

12 9 Throughout all proceedings I objected to the jurisdiction. I

13 demanded proof of jurisdiction. The judges, prosecutors, and
14 uninvited public defenders, all refused to respond or show any

15 proof of jurisdiction. (However, one judge did say, “You are

16 under my jurisdiction, whether you like it or not.” That was the
17 closest any Inferior Court personnel came to justifying their de

18 facto jurisdiction.) For them it was enough that they had

19 physical dominion over me; they also felt no need to legitimize

20 their de facto jurisdiction.

21

22 10 In November of 2004 in the capacity as one of the people7 of

23

24
77“The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." [California
25 Government Code, Section 11120; see also California Government Code Section 54950]
“To presume that a sovereign forever waives the right to exercise one of its powers unless it expressly reserves the
26 right to exercise that power in a commercial agreement turns the concept of sovereignty on its head.” Merrion, et al.,
dba Merrion & Bayless, et al. v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe, et al. 1982.SCT.394 , 455 U.S. 130, 102 S. Ct. 894, 71 L. Ed.
27 2d 21, 50 U.S.L.W. 4169 pp. 144-148.

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 4 of 13

 1 California, I filed in a court of record8 a counterclaim against
2 the several judges, prosecutors, and uninvited public defenders:

3 The Superior Court9 of the State of California, Case Number

4 BC324176 (hereinafter “Constitutional Court” ), styled “Quicho vs

5 People, et al., in Los Angeles, California,

7 11 All of the defending judges, prosecutors, and uninvited

8 public defenders demurred to the counterclaim. None objected to
9 my status as one of the people of California. None object to the
10 Constitutional Court being a court of record. They each admitted
11 the fact that they acted without jurisdiction, but claimed that

12 they carried judicial immunity. The Constitutional Court found

13 that they did not have judicial immunity because, by their own

14
88 A court of record may not be in name only. Further, keeping a record alone is not sufficient to qualify as a court
15 of record. The court of record must meet all of the following requirements:
A. The tribunal is independent of the magistrate (judge) [Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229;
16 Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688,
689][Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
17 B. Proceeding according to the common law [Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte
Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689]
18 [Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
C. Power to fine or imprison for contempt [Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte
19 Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689]
[Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
D. Keeps a record of the proceedings [3 Bl. Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga.,
20 24 F. 481; Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal 225; Erwin v. U.S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.R.A. 229; Heininger v. Davis, 96
Ohio St. 205, 117 N.E. 229, 231]
21 E. Generally has a seal [3 Bl. Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481; Ex
parte Thistleton, 52 Cal 225; Erwin v. U.S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.R.A. 229; Heininger v. Davis, 96 Ohio St. 205,
22 117 N.E. 229, 231.][Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]

23 99 “The only inherent difference ordinarily recognized between superior and inferior courts is that there is a
presumption in favor of the validity of the judgments of the former, none in favor of those of the latter, and that a
24 superior court may be shown not to have had power to render a particular judgment by reference to its record. Ex
parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212. Note, however, that in California ‘superior court’ is the name of a particular court. But
25 when a court acts by virtue of a special statute conferring jurisdiction in a certain class of cases, it is a court of
inferior or limited jurisdiction for the time being, no matter what its ordinary status may be. Heydenfeldt v. Superior
26 Court, 117 Cal. 348, 49 Pac. 210; Cohen v. Barrett, 5 Cal. 195” 7 Cal. Jur. 579

10 27
California Constitution (1879), ARTICLE 6, JUDICIAL : SEC. 1. The judicial power of this State is vested in the
Supreme Court, courts of appeal, superior courts, and municipal courts, all of which are courts of record.
28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 5 of 13

1 admissions in their demurrers, they acted without lawful
2 jurisdiction.

4 12 The Constitutional Court awarded judgment in my favor. None

5 objected. Though in the judgment the defendants were invited to
6 file their post-judgment objections, none moved for

7 reconsideration of the judgment. None filed a notice of appeal.

8 None appealed the judgment. The judgment now stands without any
9 legitimate sign of objection. Exhibit “A” is the Constitutional
10 Court’s judgment that accompanies this petition.

11

12 13 Subsequently, the Constitutional Court ordered defendant (and

13 respondent herein) Mark S. Arnold, who is the judge of the

14 Inferior Court; and the Inferior Court to discharge with

15 prejudice all charges nunc pro tunc, to order my release from

16 incarceration, and to restore my full lawful liberty.

17

18 14 The order was an alternative order. Though invited, neither

19 Mark S. Arnold nor the Inferior Court filed any paper to show

20 cause why the Constitutional Court order should not be obeyed.

21 Nevertheless, they continue to repeatedly disobey the order.

22 Twice Mark S. Arnold was found in direct contempt of the

23 Constitutional Court and fined (once for $1, once for $100). To
24 date Mark S. Arnold has simply ignored all orders of the

25 Constitutional Court. To my knowledge he has not yet paid any of

26 the fines to the County of Los Angeles.

27

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 6 of 13

 1 15 It appears to me that the Inferior Court is a judicial island
2 respecting no law but its own, committed to causing me to lose my

3 liberty and my common law substantive right to my own court:10

4 jurisdiction is something to be taken for themselves, and they

5 are answerable to no one but themselves.

7 16 In the most recent finding of contempt (see Exhibit “C” that

8 accompanies this petition) the Constitutional Court also issued a

9 bench warrant to the sheriff to attach the body of the Mark S.

10 Arnold if the sheriff cannot secure Mark S. Arnold’s performance

11 of duties enumerated above. I believe the order is not yet

12 executed, and it will not be executed.

13

14 17 After the Constitutional Court issued the bench warrant, I

15 was visited in the Los Angeles County jail by three large

16 intimidating male visitors, two well dressed and the other

17 casually dressed. They said that I would be punished for

18 threatening a judge (something I would never do). I asked for
19 their business cards. They refused. I asked for their names.
20 They refused. They told me that I was a “minority citizen of
21 California.” They implied that I was a lesser being, not
22 entitled to all the natural rights of one of the people of

23 California. It appears to me that their sole purpose was to

24 discriminate, harass and intimidate me into not asserting my

25 rights as one of the people of California,11 and to cause me to

1026
11
Henceforth the writ which is called Praecipe shall not be served on any one for any holding so as to cause a free man to
lose his court. [Magna Carta, Article 34].
27 1112 “The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them." [California
Government Code, Section 11120; see also California Government Code Section 54950]
28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 7 of 13

 1 give up or lose my Constitutional Court.12 As of this date I
2 still do not know who those persons are who imposed upon me in

3 the jail.

5 PETITION
6 FOR WRIT OF MANDATE
7 18 The inferior court13 is known as The Superior Court14 of the
8 State of California, Case Number YA058902 (hereinafter “Inferior

9 Court”), styled “People vs Quicho, in Torrance, California, and

10 proceeding under color of law (statutes & code).

11

12 19 I, Aurora Bautista Quicho, as one of the people of California

13 petition the above-entitled appellate court of record15 to issue a

14
“To presume that a sovereign forever waives the right to exercise one of its powers unless it expressly reserves the
15 right to exercise that power in a commercial agreement turns the concept of sovereignty on its head.” Merrion, et al.,
dba Merrion & Bayless, et al. v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe, et al. 1982.SCT.394 , 455 U.S. 130, 102 S. Ct. 894, 71 L.
16 Ed. 2d 21, 50 U.S.L.W. 4169 pp. 144-148.

17 1213 "Henceforth the writ which is called Praecipe shall not be served on any one for any holding so as to cause a
free man to lose his court." Magna Carta, Article 34.
18
1314 “Inferior courts” are those whose jurisdiction is limited and special and whose proceedings are not according to
19 the course of the common law.” Ex Parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212; Smith v. Andrews, 6 Cal. 652

20 1415 “The only inherent difference ordinarily recognized between superior and inferior courts is that there is a
presumption in favor of the validity of the judgments of the former, none in favor of those of the latter, and that a
21 superior court may be shown not to have had power to render a particular judgment by reference to its record. Ex
parte Kearny, 55 Cal. 212. Note, however, that in California ‘superior court’ is the name of a particular court. But
22 when a court acts by virtue of a special statute conferring jurisdiction in a certain class of cases, it is a court of
inferior or limited jurisdiction for the time being, no matter what its ordinary status may be. Heydenfeldt v. Superior
23 Court, 117 Cal. 348, 49 Pac. 210; Cohen v. Barrett, 5 Cal. 195” 7 Cal. Jur. 579

24 15 California 1879 Constitution, Article 6, Section 1, “The judicial power of this State is vested in the Supreme
Court, courts of appeal, superior courts, and municipal courts, all of which are courts of record.”
25 COURT OF RECORD: To be a court of record a court must have four characteristics, and may have a fifth. They
are:
26 1.A judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the person of the magistrate
designated generally to hold it. [Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc.
27 Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689; Black's Law
Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 8 of 13

 1 writ of mandate commanding respondent Inferior Court, Mark S.
2 Arnold, and its judges to obey the lawful judgment and

3 alternative [now final] order served upon it by the Superior

4 Court of the State of California, Case Number BC324176,

5 (hereinafter “Constitutional Court”) styled “Quicho vs. the

6 People of the State of California, et al.”, in Los Angeles,

7 California, and proceeding as a court of record.

9 20 The Constitutional Court issued a final judgment16 finding

10 that the Inferior Court does not have jurisdiction over Aurora

11 Bautista Quicho. Subsequently the Constitutional Court issued

12 the alternative order to the Inferior Court. The alternative
13 order was violated within direct view of the Constitutional

14 Court, so the Constitutional Court then issued a summary finding

15 of direct contempt. A copy of the Constitutional Court judgment

16 (EXHIBIT “A”), the alternative order (EXHIBIT “B”) and the

17 contempt order (EXHIBIT “C”) are incorporated by reference as

18 though fully stated herein.

19

20 2. Proceeding according to the course of common law. [Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex
parte Gladhill, 8 Metc. Mass., 171, per Shaw, C.J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689;
21 Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
3. Its acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled, or recorded, for a perpetual memory and testimony. [3 Bl.
22 Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481; Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal 225; Erwin
v. U.S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.R.A. 229; Heininger v. Davis, 96 Ohio St. 205, 117 N.E. 229, 231]
23 4. Has power to fine or imprison for contempt. [3 Bl. Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher,
C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481; Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal 225; Erwin v. U.S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.R.A. 229; Heininger v.
24 Davis, 96 Ohio St. 205, 117 N.E. 229, 231; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
5. Generally possesses a seal. [3 Bl. Comm. 24; 3 Steph. Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481;
25 Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal 225; Erwin v. U.S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.R.A. 229; Heininger v. Davis, 96 Ohio St.
205, 117 N.E. 229, 231; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed., 425, 426]
26
1617 “The judgment of a court of record whose jurisdiction is final, is as conclusive on all the world as the judgment of this
27would be. It is as conclusive on this court as it is on other courts. It puts an end to inquiry concerning the fact, by
court
deciding it." Ex parte Watkins, 3 Pet., at 202-203. [cited by SCHNECKLOTH v. BUSTAMONTE, 412 U.S. 218, 255 (1973)]
28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 9 of 13

1 21 The said alternative order of the Constitutional Court
2 commands as follows:

4 TO THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT DISTRICT,

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CASE
5 NO.
YA058902 -- SCILICET: JUDGES, DISTRICT ATTORNEY,
6 DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, PUBLIC DEFENDER, DEPUTY
PUBLIC DEFENDER (ALL OFFICERS OF THE COURT),
7 CLERKS,
SHERIFFS, BAILIFFS, AND ALL PERSONS ACTING IN
8 CONCERT
WITH YOU:
9
COMES NOW THE ABOVE-ENTITLED COURT OF RECORD OF
10 AURORA
BAUTISTA QUICHO ON ITS OWN MOTION AND
11 ORDERS AS
FOLLOWS: That all barratry17 shall
12 cease, and all of
the following charges be DISCHARGED NUNC
13 PRO TUNC,
IMMEDIATELY, WITHOUT DELAY, IN THE
14 INTEREST OF
JUSTICE, and WITH PREJUDICE:
15
COUNT 1: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §459,
16 SECOND DEGREE COMMERCIAL BURGLARY;
17 COUNT 2: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §476a(a),
NON-SUFFICIENT FUND CHECK MULTIPLE
18 CHECKS;
19 COUNT 3: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §459
SECOND DEGREE COMMERCIAL BURGLARY; and
20
COUNT 4: CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE 476a(a)
21 NON-SUFFICIENT FUND CHECK SINGLE CHECK,
and
22 CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE §186.11 PATTERN OF
RELATED FELONY CONDUCT.
23

24

25
17 Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: BARRATRY, n. The practice of exciting and encouraging lawsuits and quarrels.
26 Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856: BARRATRY, crimes. In old law French barat, baraterie, signifying robbery,
deceit, fraud. In modern usage it may be defined as the habitual moving, exciting, and maintaining suits and
27 quarrels, either at law or otherwise. 1 Inst. 368; 1 Hawk. 243.

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 10 of 13

 Further, it is ordered that the defendant be released
1 immediately, without delay and with full restoration of
lawful liberty.
2
Further, if the above order is not obeyed, then no later
3 than Wednesday, June 1, 2005 you shall show cause to this
court why this order should not take effect or should be
4 modified, or why you should not be held in contempt of
court.
5

6
22 The alternative order of the Constitutional Court was timely
7
served upon the Inferior Court, its judges, its officers, and
8
interested parties. Though given the opportunity, no opposing
9
response was filed by the Inferior Court or any of the officers
10
or parties.
11

12
23 This verified petition for peremptory writ of mandate is
13
presented to the above-entitled court of record (and not to a
14
judge or justice) as described in California Code of Civil
15
Procedure, Section 1085.18
16

17
24 This petition is made on the grounds that said Inferior
18
Court, its officers, and other persons acting in concert with
19
them are disobeying the order of the Constitutional Court and
20
proceeding as if the Constitutional Court and its orders do not
21
exist. That default of duty has resulted in the continuing loss
22
of liberty of this petitioner, said liberty being a natural right
23
of the petitioner. A writ of mandate is an appropriate remedy to
24

25 18 Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1085(a): "A writ of mandate may be issued by any court to any inferior
tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins, as a
26 duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to compel the admission of a party to the use and enjoyment of a
right or office to which the party is entitled, and from which the party is unlawfully precluded by such inferior
27 tribunal, corporation, board, or person."

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 11 of 13

 1 compel public functionaries or bodies to perform the duties
2 imposed on them by virtue of their office.

4 25 Further grounds are that said subjects of this court

5 willfully conspired to, and did contemptuously subvert this

6 court’s order to restore my liberties. For example, the officers

7 of the Inferior Court have physically beaten, Tasered, injured,

8 and jailed the 73-year-old female arthritic process server of the

9 Constitutional Court after she served a Constitutional Court

10 order upon the Inferior Court. The consequence of said
11 contemptuous behavior is to unlawfully interfere with the conduct

12 of the business, dignity, and authority of the Constitutional

13 Court, and consequently the natural rights of this petitioner to

14 orderly due process and liberty.

15

16 26 It should be noted that during all proceedings in the

17 Inferior Court, at all times I, Aurora Bautista Quicho,

18 maintained my position: I always objected (when allowed) to

19 every exercise of false jurisdiction that was asserted under

20 color of law. I never voluntarily agreed to be represented by

21 any defender public or private, and I always objected to such

22 forced representation. All entries in the Inferior Court’s Case

23 Summary which lead one to believe that I voluntarily participated

24 in the proceedings, or that I voluntarily accepted the forced

25 representation are false.

26

27 27 WHEREFORE, I, the affiant herein, pray that this court issue

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 12 of 13

1 a peremptory writ of mandate requiring the respondents and all
2 persons acting in concert with them to obey the order of the

3 Constitutional Court.

5 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing facts are

6 true and correct, and that this was executed in the county of Los

7 Angeles, California on August 22, 2005.

9 Aurora Bautista Quicho

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Petition for Peremptory Writ of Mandate Page 13 of 13