Image via Wikipedia

When I realized the judge had just used his official position to benefit himself I put together a motion for substitution of judge based on breach of fiduciary duty principles. Here are some more of the facts I incorporated into that motion:

17. That this Court’s failure to follow Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3A(1) A judge should be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence in it.” and then entering a sanctions order against me after I quoted and followed the law amounts to First Degree Official Misconduct contrary to 18-8-404(1) C.R.S because Daniel Naughty, a public servant, when, with intent to obtain a benefit for another, ‘the very bad attorney representing my opponent’, knowingly (c) Violate[d] lawfully adopted rule relating to his office. First degree official misconduct is a class 2 misdemeanor.

18 That this Court’s failure to follow Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3A(4), “A judge should accord to every person who is legally interested in a proceeding…[a] full right to be heard according to law…” by not reading my paperwork and understanding what it said and then entering a sanctions order against me after I quoted and followed the law amounts to First Degree Official Misconduct contrary to 18-8-404(1) C.R.S because Daniel Naughty, a public servant, when, with intent to obtain a benefit for another, ‘the very bad attorney representing my opponent’, knowingly (c) Violate[d a] lawfully adopted rule relating to his office. First degree official misconduct is a class 2 misdemeanor.

19. That this Court’s failure to follow Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3A(10), “A judge shall attempt, to the extent practicable, to make certain that lawyers in proceedings before the judge abide by their duties under the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct; in particular in this case, Colo.RPC 3.1, “A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous…” such as asking for sanctions in a response instead of a motion as required by  Colo. City Metro. Dist. v. Graber & Son’s, Inc., 897 P.2d 874 (Colo. App. 1995)( A request for attorney fees as a sanction for assertion of a frivolous claim may be requested by motion.); also Township Homeowners Association Inc. v. Arapahoe Roofing and Sheet Metal Co., 844 P.2d 1316 (Colo.App. 1992)  (Inclusion of attorney fees in the prayer is essentially surplusage. At most, such reference provides notice to the opposing party that such fees may be requested.); 13-17-102(4) C.R.S “The court shall assess attorney fees if, upon the motion of any party…”; and, C.R.C.P. 7(b)(1) which reads, “An application to the court for an order shall be made by motion…” And then entering a sanctions order against me after I quoted and followed the law amounts to First Degree Official Misconduct contrary to 18-8-404(1) C.R.S because Daniel Naughty, a public servant, when, with intent to obtain a benefit for another, ‘the very bad attorney representing my opponent’, knowingly (c) Violate[d] lawfully adopted rule(s) relating to his office. First degree official misconduct is a class 2 misdemeanor.

20. That Judge Daniel Naughty issuing a sanction against me for doing what the law allows me to do under the principles enunciated in Hoang v. Arbess, 80 P.3d 863 (Colo.App. 2003) and Snowden v. Taggart., 17 P.2d 305 (Colo. 1932) amounts to a public servant, while acting or purporting to act in an official capacity or taking advantage of such actual or purported capacity, committing official oppression contrary to 18-8-403(1)(a) C.R.S.  since with actual knowledge that his conduct is illegal, he subjected me to an assessment, that being an amount assessed as payable, in the form of a sanction. Official oppression is a class 2 misdemeanor.

21. That Judge Daniel Naughty aided, abetted, and encouraged the notarial misconduct of opposing counsel; in particular violations of 12-55-110(2)(a) C.R.S., 12-55-110(4)(a) C.R.S., 12-55-105 C.R.S. (2^nd Degree Perjury) and 18-5-114(1) C.R.S. (offering a false instrument for recording) contrary to 18-1-603 C.R.S. Or, in the alternative, Judge Daniel Naughty was an accessory to these crimes contrary to 18-8-105(1) C.R.S.

22. That Judge Daniel Naughty had failed to uphold his legal duty to turn ‘the very bad attorney representing my opponent’ in to the Attorney Regulation Committee of the Supreme Court of Colorado to be disciplined for his misconduct both civil and criminal as required by Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3B(3) as well as C.R.C.P. 251.4.

23.  That Judge Daniel Naughty had failed to uphold his legal duty to turn ‘the very bad attorney representing my opponent’ in to the Weld County District Attorney for prosecution for his misconduct as a notary, both felony and misdemeanor, as required by 18-8-115 C.R.S.

• Is a Judge a Fiduciary? The Facts 1:
• When Must a Trial Judge Disqualify Himself?
• Is a Judge a Fiduciary? The Conclusion:
• Is a Judge a Fiduciary? The Authority 2:
• When Does the Continuing Violation Doctrine Apply to Statute of Limitations?
• When May a Corporation be Judicially Dissolved?
• When Does the Statute of Limitations Begin to Run?
• How To Win In Todays Courts!
• Are Collection Due Process Hearings All Void?? Probably!
• What Does it Mean When a Judge Fails to File His Oath?