Dismiss Luman case; Hammond knows officer violating law

Sheriff Jim Hammond talks with Hamilton County sheriff’s deputies at the county courthouse. The county’s chief law enforcement official and chief peacekeeper dislikes talking about the laws he enforces, and also reading an administrative notice intended to bring him into compliance with federal rules for transportation. (Photo David Tulis)
Jon Luman, here in the court of Judge Don Poole, faces criminal charges by police and sheriff’s deputies operating outside of lawful authority — but pursuant to court-permitted violations of the people’s constitutional rights. (Photo David Tulis)

If I were Jon Luman, the Red Bank carpenter, I would file the following motion in the sessions court of Lila Statom, who has his case on the docket Tuesday. Mr. Luman is being harassed for the exercise of his rights to travel and communicate. That is to say, his right to go by car on the public right of way to his place of work and to other places pertaining to pleasure or private necessity. The case is brought to the judge by Sheriff Jim Hammond, who has ignored the transportation administrative notice, a restatement of law that points out how he and his department can obey the state shipping law.

By David Tulis / 92.7 NoogaRadio

Instead, Mr. Hammond has been misusing that law in a custom handed to him from generations of sheriffs before him. Administrative notice intends to bring that abuse to an end, either by convicing Mr. Hammond and others to respect the people, or by a painful, well-aimed lawsuit alleging bad faith and oppression by an individual deputy or an individual sheriff in his personal capacity.

Mr. Luman has his own ideas about what to say and file. But if it were me, I’d do something like this:

Motion to dismiss on lack of jurisdiction

Comes now the accused to demand dismissal of the charges in above cases.

Accused moves this court dismiss all charges on jurisdictional and due process grounds, on account of the officer’s having no lawful authority to enforce the state’s shipping, freight and transportation law against a member of the public of Tennessee not involved in shipping, freight or transportation.

The arrest of the accused under Tenn. Code Ann. § Title 55, the motor and other vehicle statute, is outside the scope of authority of Sheriff Jim Hammond, who knows better. Since March 1, 2018, Sheriff Hammond has been under administrative notice about the limits of his authority to enforce the rules of the road. Exhibit 1, transportation administrative notice. 

The document prepared by David Tulis establishes the disabilities of the shipping law. Title 55, under which this prosecution is brought, grants the Tennessee Highway Patrol authority to enforce the rules of the road and other duties upon commercial users of the public right of way in Hamilton County. This power is pursuant to U.S.C. § Title 49.

District attorney Neal Pinkston also has been put under transportation administrative notice as of March 26, 2018, and his actions to enforce this law against someone not subject to it violates the due process rights of the accused. Exhibit 2, affidavit of service.

Service by David Tulis to DA Neal Pinkston on his “leave me alone and get out of my face” affidavit on the limits of the state shipping law, wrongly used against the general public.

This criminal action is brought against the accused in bad faith. The black-letter law in Tennessee, consistent with the rights of the people protected by the state and federal constitutions, do not allow prosecution of a party not subject to a statute. The shipping code regulates the activity of shipping, the carrying of freight and transportation, defined in the notice.

Neither Sheriff Hammond nor the district attorney have rebutted the administrative notice, nor contested its contents. The document has been notoriously published, meeting legal requirements for notice by Times Free Press legal classifieds. Exhibit 3, affidavit of publication.

David Tulis made notorious publication of Transportation Administrative Notice Tennessee by making it a public document and also publishing a classified ad in the Times Free Press, as sworn here.

The accused hereby rebuts any presumption that he is subject to the shipping statute and must show proofs of the exercise of a state privilege. The officer obtained no evidence that the accused was involved in freight, shipping or transportation. 

The accused demands dismissal of all charges under the court’s ministerial authority.

The David Tulis show is 1 p.m. weekdays, live and lococentric.

Get your TAN now: Transportation Administrative Notice creates cause of action vs. cops, traffic court defense




One Response

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.