WE DEMAND ACTION NOW! Abolish the State of Colorado's Illegal and Unconstitutional Mandatory Parole Laws. To Fail to Take Action: "Could Affect Your Rights as an American ... And affect the rights of all of us around the World"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZ3oJGqr6ls

Colorado is violating the United States Constitution. This is a violation of Federal Law. If one state can violate the United States Constitution, and get away with it; it places all Americans in danger. Ultimately, this can affect the civil and human rights of people everywhere --- across the globe ... because of America's influence on an international level.

Again, Colorado is violating the United States Constitution. That is a violation of Federal Law. It is my job as the Director of the National Committee Against Judicial Corruption (NCAJC), and as an American citizen, to defend the Constitution of the United States. That is the oath I took when I joined the United States Army, to defend the United States Constitution, against all enemies, both foreign and domestic. Over and over I have had to explain this to the American people, which is cause for concern, as no one seem to understand this. This is part of the problem in America, and a direct result of why states are getting away with violating the constitution; because no one seems to understand that each state is bound by the United States Constitution. Everyone says: "Oh ... that don't apply to me ... I live in California; Wyoming; or where ever." This pattern of thought is simply a lack of education on the part of the American people. Yet, everyone wonders why our nation is going down the drain. 

This country is not a bunch of different countries united, where each one can make their on Federal laws. The Law of the Land is the Constitution of the United States ... not the constitution of Colorado, or Wyoming. This is a Federal Republic. And as a Federal Republic ... every state must abide by Federal Law, which is the Constitution of the United States. Plain and simple.

***

Mandatory Parole In Colorado

By dertin | Posted November 5, 2008 | Denver, Colorado

Normally when a crime is committed a judge sentences the offender to a certain amount of time, let say in this case 2 years. If the offender is behaved and completes programs the offender will be recommended for Parole, which would mean he gets out of Prison after a year in and then serve his last year on Parole. In Colorado it doesn't work this way, when sentenced to the 2 years the offender MUST serve his entire sentence, the entire 2 years, then upon release the offender is then put on parole for 1-5 years even after serving all their time. This is double jeopardy yet the state of Colorado gets away with it. Another crime they have managed to mangle, is "Washington DC" told Colorado they can not build any more prisons, they keep building them because their primary income comes from prison which means Mandatory Parole effects ALL of America, we pay taxes to CO for this program that no one else does. When they were told to stop building new prisons they decided to renovate an old building in to a prison ... which as you can see they didn't break the law they altered it to fit what they wanted. WHY IS COLORADO GETTING AWAY WITH THESE CRIMES??? Why are our federal dollars being invested in these programs for prisons in Colorado that do not work???? We want to end Mandatory Parole in Colorado. It has been a dismal failure since it's inception and does nothing to prevent crime. It's a huge money hog and the money being spent on mandatory parole would be better spent on mental health, drug and alcohol counseling and assisting former offenders to start their lives over again. Colorado's parolee recidivism rate is almost 70%. There has been nothing done to help offenders rehabilitate in prison, in fact all programs both professional and religious have been cut in order to spend money on new prisons. Loved ones and family members pay financial support for offenders both in and out of prison and are being used to finance the entire state prison system. The Colorado taxpayers are also being financially lied to about where their tax dollars are going. Families pay for everything except food and the buildings through exorbitant canteen services, telephone fees and JPay fees. In short, the families and loved ones of offenders are paying for everything except beds and food and the taxpayers are paying for new prisons instead of rehabilitation. The parole system here in Colorado is setting offenders up to fail. Parole officers look for every way they can to violate a parolee, including making up violations. Mandatory parole does not work, it has been proven over and over again. Parole is a system set up to find and cause failure. The money being spent on mandatory parole would be better spent on hiring people who have degrees in social work and counseling. Mandatory parole effectively extends prison sentences from 1 - 5 years. Although courts have disagreed that this is double jeopardy, it is a prison sentence just the same, it just doesn't have bars. 3 minutes of your time can make life a bit better for tax payers and for a lot of families. Please help us make a difference.

***
In regard to the State Legislature of Colorado and the making and passing of Colorado's Mandatory Parole Laws by its legislature, the 8th Amendment prohibits sentences that are grossly disproportionate to the crime. This is interesting when we consider Colorado who's legislature has passed laws such as Mandatory Parole Laws, which places a prisoner on a Mandatory Parole even after they serve their entire sentence, and thus, they were never sentenced to the Mandatory Parole by the original sentencing judge. In Colorado the judge sentences the defendant to a sentence, of say, two years inprisonment, and then after the defendant serves all his or her time, they are then placed on the Mandatory Parole which was placed upon them, not by the judge, but by the State Legislature. All this considered, and back to what I originally disgussed in regard to the 8th Amendment; this is a violation of the United States Constitution. Why? Because for thing, the Colorado State Legislature in regard to Mandatory Parole does not pass the test of law in this area--- meaning that the 8th Amendment prohibits sentences that are grossly disproportionate to the crime. This means in this case, that Mandatory Parole laws are disproportionate, because there is no distinction beween the crimes of each defendant that are placed on the Mandatory Parole; regardless of the crime, every single prisoner has a Mandatory Parole to serve, thus, is disproportionate, because the sentencing judge had no say-so or authority as to its discretion. The Colorado State Legislature cannot therefore pass the legal test in this case, because the test requires the courts to first look to the serverity of the offense; compares it then to the penalty; and the state's justification for the punishment. Then, the court must compare this result to other jurisdictions schemes, and other punishments for crimes in the same jurisdictions. This having been said, there are constitutional constraints on legislatures in innacting criminal statutes. The constitution prohibits the innactment of ex-post-facto laws, retroactive legislation, or legislative expansion of existing laws which is prohibited.

***
GREETINGS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
"Stop Colorado's Illegal Mandatory Parole Laws"

Greetings to the American people:

We are the National Committee Against Judicial Corruption (NCAJC), and are asking you to join us in this fight to overturn and stop the State of Colorado's Illegal Mandatory Parole Laws. We encourage you to stage protest at the Colorado State Capitol Building, as well as to write your representative in Washington and voice your concern with these illegal laws that place all of us at risk of having a future destroyed U.S. Constitution.

This is a Petition to the Federal government of the United States as well as the Colorado State Governor and Legislature to issue an order to declare that the Colorado Mandatory Parole Act, Title 18-1.3-401, violates the "Separation of Powers" provision of Article III of the Colorado Constitution and the United States Constitution and therefore, the sentencing of Mandatory Parole imposed upon the American people is an illegal and/or Unconstitutional Sentence. In support of such Relief, we submit the following Claims and Arguments:

CLAIM FOR RELIEF:
We, the (NCAJC), in defense of the American people, claim and argue that Title 18-1.3-401, The Colorado Mandatory Parole Act Violates the "Separation of Powers" provision of Article III of the Colorado Constitution and the United States Constitution.

Title 18-1.3-401, the Colorado Mandatory Parole Act, makes it absolutely mandatory that the Sentencing Judge impose a term of Mandatory Parole to run Consecutively to any imposed term of imprisonment, and the respective sentencing judges do not have the authority and discretion as to whether to suspend or to actually impose a sentence of Mandatory Parole, or to order said term of Mandatory Parole to run Concurrently with the term of imprisonment. The (NCAJC) claims and argues that this Mandatory Sentencing Violates the "Separation of Powers" provision of the Colorado Constitution and also the United States Constitution.

In United States vs. Klein, 80 US (13 Wall) 128, 147, 20 L. Ed. 519 (1871), the United States Supreme Court proclaimed: "It is the intention of the Constitution that each of the great co-ordinate departments of government --- the LEGISLATURE, the EXECUTIVE, and the JUDICIARY --- shall be, in its sphere, independent of the others."

Now in Hadix vs. Johnson, 144 F. 3d 925, 943 (6th Cir., 1998) the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit declared: "The Judiciary's fulfillment of its Article III responsibilities requires at its core, meaningful judicial decision making."See United States vs. Rojas, 53 F. 3d 1212, 219 (9th Cir., ((S)eparation of powers would be implicated when the actions of another branch threatens an Article III Courts independent and impartiality on the execution of its decision making functions." ), Cert. denied, 516 US 986, 16 S. CT. 478, 133 L. Ed. 2d 407 (1995).

In Rodriguez vs. Cook, 169 F. 3d 1176, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 1999), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit proclaimed: "Separation of powers is intended to structurally protect the independence of each of the three branches of government."United States vs. Klein, 80 US (13 Wall), 128, 147, 20 L. Ed. 519 (1871).

In Inmates of Suffolk County Jail vs. Rouse, 129 F. 3d 649, 655-56 (1st Cir., 1997), the United States Court of Appeals of the First Circuit declared: "Few Tenants are more central to the genius of our Constitutional System than the Separation of Powers Principal." See Donoghue vs. United States, 289 US 516, 530, 53 S. CT 740, 743, 77 L. Ed. 2D 1356 (1993) (describing separation of powers as basic and vital to our scheme of government). This principal has many configurations. In one such configuration, it insulates the judiciary from unwarranted legislative intrusion.

See also Benjamin vs. Jacobson, 122 F. 3d 1081 (8th Cir., 1977). Dougan vs. Singletary, 129 F. 3d 1424 (11th Cir., 1998). Rivera vs. Allen, 169 F. 3d 1176, 1179-82(9th Cir., 1999).

The Florida Supreme Court in Allen vs. Butterworth, 756 50. 2d 52 (Fla., 2000), declared that the State Death Penalty Reform Act (which mandatorily restricted post-conviction relief for death penalty prisoners), violates the separation of powers doctrine of the Constitution and was therefore Unconstitutional.

In US vs. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), the Supreme Court declared that the Federal Sentencing Act violated the separation of powers of the United States Constitution due to the mandatory requirements involved in the sentencing of Federal defendants by US District Court Judges.

Once the United States Supreme Court decides that a type of statutory provision is Unconstitutional, then its ruling means that the Unconstitutional statute --- or its portion thereof --- has been Unconstitutional since it very first became law. See Rivera vs. Roadway Express, 114 S. Ct. 1510 (1994).

The United States Supreme Court decision in US vs. Booker, Supra, does not merely establish a new procedural rule --- which would render it only prospective in its application --- but rather passes on the very constitutionality of certain statutory provisions. See Schriro vs. Summerlin, 112 S. Ct. 2519 (2004).

In Miller vs. French, 120 S. Ct. 2246, 2246, 2247 (2000), the United States Supreme Court emphasized:"While the boundaries between the three branches of government are not hermetically sealed, the Constitution prohibits one branch from encroaching upon the central prerogative of another."

We the (NCAJC) submit and argue that while the Colorado Legislature can establish the minimum amount of sentence and a maximum amount of sentence for each respective felony crime and misdemeanor criminal conviction, the Legislature of the State of Colorado cannot require the sentencing judge to mandatorily sentence a defendant to a mandatory sentence; the sentencing judge must have the authority and independent judicial discretion as to what particular sentence would be proper and appropriate for the separation of powers of Article III, "Distribution of Powers" of the Colorado Constitution, the sentencing judge must have the independent authority and judicial discretion to determine what sentence is appropriate in each case.

Since the sentence of Mandatory Parole that has been imposed upon the American people and the Citizens of the State of Colorado violates the 'Separation of Powers" provision of Article III of the Constitution of the State of Colorado, the Federal government of the United States, and the Colorado Legislature, must declare that the said statute violates the Colorado Constitution and vacate and set aside the sentencing of American Citizens to Mandatory Parole that Colorado Courts have imposed on the American public.


CONCLUSION

Wherefore, we the American people do hereby pray for the following relief:

1). That the Federal government of the United States issue an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE to the Attorney General of the State of Colorado to show cause within the next twenty (20) days as to why the Colorado Legislatures should not declare the Colorado Mandatory Parole Act, Title 18-1.3-401 to be in violation of Article III of the Colorado Constitution and show cause why the Legislature should not vacate and set aside the Mandatory Parole that has been imposed upon the American people.

2). That the Federal government will issue an Order to declare the Colorado Mandatory Parole Act violates Article III of the Colorado Constitution and the United States Constitution.

3). That the Federal government will issue an Order to Vacate and Set Aside the Sentences of Mandatory Parole that the Colorado State Legislature has imposed upon the American people, and the Citizens of the State of Colorado.

4). That the Federal government may grant any other relief deemed fair, just, proper, and appropriate.

We of the National Committee Against Judicial Corruption (NCAJC), do hereby sign electronically this document this very day, April 12th, 2013, and do encourage the American people to forward this Protest to as many people as possible.

DATED: April 12th, 2013

Roger Blackburn
Founder and Director,
National Committee Against Judicial Corruption (NCAJC)

Book orders and marketing packages can be placed now on Bairnes & Noble. Just click on the link to view book overview and description.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/peoples-republic-roger-s-blackburn/1121498285?ean=9781680909852

***
One thing we as Americans can all do to cut waste and save tax dollars is to push though and forward a Bill to Abolish Colorado's Mandatory Parole Laws for all non-violent offenders, or give the issue to your colleagues for debate. Naturally, I do understand that a child predator needs to be monitored for good reason, but someone who has not committed a violent crime ... well, this is just a waste of tax payer money, that could be used more productively in other areas. There is a lot of waste taking place inside Colorado's Judicial System: they place most offenders in drug programs after their release, by force (even though many of them have no drug charges) and then force them to pay $50 a week, and if you don't pay it your parole is violated and you go back to prison for six months (how much does this cost just because the guy got stopped driving without license?) They have did this "To Many," yet "The Many" do not have drug charges ... yet if "The Many" do not pay for this program that has nothing to do with "the many," and of which "the many" were never sentence to by a judge ... then "The Many" goes back to prison. Complicated reading? Yeah, that's what they want you to believe ... that it's more complicated than it really is. People, this is plain wrong, and tantamount to something from the former Soviet Union. Some people will laugh at that, but why laugh ... what is the difference? Are we better than the Soviets because they call us Americans (we do nothing wrong and we're always right) which the system today thinks that gives them the right to twist and do anything they please as long as it lines their pockets with the almighty dollar. These people make millions, and the poor guy who has already paid for his crime is the one who suffers, as he can barely pay his bills and feed his family anyway ... much less for a drug program that has nothing to do with him, as he is not a drug offender: he needs $200 just for this program a month or else. Not to count the fact that many of Colorado's halfway house and these programs are actually owned by those in power themselves/judges, etc. (Conflict of Interests). Well, isn't this an incentive to create a "Human Cattle Industry?" Ridiculous! And in truth is a gross violation of Government Ethics.

Take Care People! And thanks again for listening.

Roger S. Blackburn
J.D. 2nd Year Juris Doctor Candidate
Founder and Director
National Committee Against Judicial Corruption (NCAJC)