Courts and local attorneys

Gregg Leverett's picture
The following is what a local attorney who handled my case sent me. I stated to Judge Ronald Schultz, "I am only agreeing to the plea agreement, only if my gun ownership rights are retained after my probation." I was told by both my attorney and Judge Schultz that after I finished my probation that I would have these rights back. I have to say that both my attorney and judge Schultz did not inform me of the full implications of the law. After learning that what my attorney and judge Schultz told me was not factual, I called and asked judge Schultz's clerk if judge Schultz was going to honor what he told me in court. I have attached his response to that question. Judge Schultz states that I want to buy a gun. As I that is not what I had asked of the judge, I feel that judge Schultz just reached into a hat and pulled out a response. This inability of the courts to answer questions asked of them shows the problems that exist in all of the 8th Judicial District. ________________________________________ From: Joseph Taylor <jataylorlaw@hotmail.com> To: gxxxxlxxxxxxx Sent: Monday, April 6, 2009 1:29:23 PM Subject: RE: Can't believe this Hi Greg! I reviewed your files and I didn't see a copy of the requests made to the DA's Office re: Alexandra's file. I believe that I gave the only copies I had to Barb when I provided the rest of the documents. Nevertheless, the DA's Office should have copies in their file for you and you can request them, if necessary. We eventually did receive the documents from Alexandra's file and these were provided to you - the letter that she sent to the Court, as well as the letter from her friend. Also, you say in the email below that you were charged for these requests. You previously left messages stating that you were NOT charged for these requests, and because of that, you doubted whether or not the requests had ever been made. I have reviewed your billing record and do not see that you were charged for the requests. If you have information to the contrary, please let me know the date and amount of time billed to you for these requests. As I stated to you previously, you were not billed for all the time I spent on your cases. As for your prior criminal cases, I do recall that we were interrupted by the DUI proceeding, and that there was some talk while we waited for the paperwork to be drawn up by the clerk. I do not recall, however, what that conversation entailed. You and I had spoken before about your right to hunt, and I believe there was a letter from your pre-trial release officer (or someone similar) stating that you could hunt. I do not believe that, after the DUI proceeding, we ever went back up to the podium and spoke directly to the judge. We had previously discussed the effect a plea of domestic violence would have on your ability to hunt. I'm sorry, I do not specifically recall the judge lifting any ban on your ability to possess firearms. I'm not saying he didn't say that, I'm just saying I don't remember what was discussed that day. If you have any other questions or concerns, please contact me by email at this address. I will be glad to respond to you. I would prefer not to set any additional meetings at this time, since you failed to appear for our March 25th meeting and did not contact us to inform us that you would not be there. Sincerely, Andy Taylor If you read the bold above, one has to wonder what kind of representation Andy Taylor was giving me. It would seem to me that if an attorney had a client ask the judge something in court, that he would write down what was asked and the answer. That is of course, unless the attorney in question, Andy Taylor, was representing the prosecution more than his client. Find attached the response from Judge Ronald Schultz to the question asked of him. He does not answer the question asked. The attachement is only one page but can not be attached.  I have copied the body of the Minute Order I received from judge Ronald Schultz. The Defendant called the courts requesting permission to purchase weapons. The Court notes that the eighteen month probation period starting in December 2007 when the Defendant was sentenced, terminated in June 2009. This case was closed pursuant to those terms. The Court has nothing properly before it and any issues the Defendant has with Federal laws does not involve this Court. DATED this 21st day of January, 2011. Ronald L: Schultz County Court Judge The pdf file of the letter from judge Schultz can be found at: http://www.judicialjustice.org/index.php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=5&id=8&Itemid=73 
Site Meister's picture

How Does Your Post Contribute?

As the Site Administrator, I have to insure that the site actually portrays what I want it to.

When this was posted on Insuring Justice For All, what part of the following is not understood: "This forum is dedicated to discussions about how to improve the administration and execution of justice in Larimer County Colorado. How can we make it better? How can we insure that everybody has access to justice rather than only those with money or connections have access to justice?"

How does your post accomplish that? It doesn't. It continues your diatribe about the local judicial administration and certain individuals who you have a beef with, but you propose nothing to fix it. In a circumstance as above, where one of your constitutional rights is being abused, you pull the transcript and sue them if they are abusing you or shut up and bite the bullet if you perpetrated. You plead guilty, correct? You accepted the conditions, correct? Then accept the consequences.

So to solve what I see are issues with problems with posting in the proper places, I'm making a forum topic for Problems in the Courts. I've asked that you create a book on this but you choose not to, so I have to take the initiative here.

The purpose of this site is to allow for posters who have been censored. Not for long running diatribes that go nowhere. Get your own site for that. Henceforth, I want all the posts related to these issues of yours in one place, either in a book, or in a forum. If necessary, we can create you your own Gregg's Forum if you want.

Site Meister
(Alfred P. Reaud, aka CatWhisperer)
Email: alreaud@happycattech.com
Cell: 970.297.8490

Gregg Leverett's picture

Showing problems

CatWhisperer, What I want to show with this is that I agreed to a plea. Yes, I did that after I was told by my attorney and the judge that I would not lose my gun rights. I went into court and asked judge Ronald Schultz the same question, and the judge replied that after the completion of probation, I would have these rights. After, I completed my part of the bargain, I was informed that what both my attorney and the judge told me was not true. I feel that these types of actions in the 8th Judicial District should be known by the citizens. I would have never agreed to the plea agreement had either my attorney or judge Schultz had informed me of the immediate results of the plea agreement. I feel that this lack of knowledge by a current judge in the 8th Judicial District should be known by the public. As far as doing something about this I have a court date on May 24, 2011 at 3:30 PM in Div L2. The address is 810 E 10th Street Suite 110 Loveland, CO 80537. I think that people should know that acts of not following the law, such as informing a defendant of all the consequences of a plea agreement, is using deceptive techniques to gain a plea agreement. This is supported by Colorado Case law. As the e-mail from my attorney, Andy Taylor, states that I did ask judge Ronald Schultz a question, but he can not recall what was asked or what the answer was, proves that I did ask the question, but Mr. Taylor was more interested in helping the prosecutor gain a plea agreement, rather than representing me. The fact that I called and spoke with judge Schultz's clerk, and asked if he was going to honor, what he told me in court. The letter that judge Schultz then decided send and states I wanted to buy a gun, was not the question asked of judge Schultz. As many have seen judges in the 8th yell at defendants for not answering a question. I feel that the court/judges should answer the question asked of them by defendants. As I was given an inaccurate answer to the question that made me agree to the plea, and then again when I asked if he was going to honor the answer he gave in court, should be known by the public. I know that this is not offering a solution, but it is demonstrating the lack of integrity of judges, attorneys and prosecutors in the 8th Judicial District. As I have written evidence that refutes statements made by the prosecutor, that are from professionals, and other evidence that I plan on presenting, I feel that the public should know that judges do not answer direct questions asked of them. I think that if more people know that these same judges will yell at people before them when they themselves will not answer direct questions asked of them. This should be known by the public to help make informed decisions when voting for the retention of a judge. I feel that judges should answer questions from defendants with facts, and not just grab an answer from a hat. That is what has happened in my case. If you feel that this information should not be know by the public, then I will not post this stuff. I you want me to put this in another part of this site fine, please send me some more info on how to organize and do that.