BOND REDUCTION DENIED AND GRAND JURY EXHIBITS RELEASED IN BREWINGTON CASE
STATE OF INDIANA
COUNTY OF DEARBORN
STATE OF INDIANA,
Plaintiff
vs
DANIEL BREWINGTON,
Defendant
DEARBORN SUPERIOR COURT II
CAUSE NO. I5D02-110 3-FD-084
AUG 2 3 2011
Comes now the State appearing by Prosecuting Attorney, Aaron Negangard and
the Defendant appearing in person and by counsel, Bryan E. Barrett, on Defendant's
Application for Reduction of Bail. A hearing was conducted on this matter on the 17th
day of August,2011.Evidence was presented and argument was made.
And the Court having heard the evidence and being duly advised in the premises
now FINDS and ORDERS as follows:
1. State presented evidence that Defendant has a history of refusing to follow
Court Orders and distain for the authority of the Court. The State also presented evidence
that since his arrest,the Defendant may have contemplated violence towards at least one
alleged victim in this case.
2. The Court concurs with all of the findings set forth in the original Order
Setting Bail of March 11, 2011 issued by the Honorable Sally A. Blankenship.
3. Defendant's Application for Reduction of Bail is hereby DENIED and
Bond remains set at $500,000.00 Surety and $100,000.00 cash bond with all other
conditions of bond remain in full force and effect.
The posting of cash bail is subject to the following conditions:
(1) The bail shall be posted in the name of the Defendant;
(2) The bail shall be considered a personal asset of the Defendant;
(3) The bail shall also be available for payment of Court costs, fines,
restitution, and necessary attorney fees should a finding of guilt be
made;
(4) Bail is subject to revocation and the Defendant shall be re-arrested
upon failure to appear in Court when ordered or a commission of a
criminal act before the time of trial or violation of any other conditions of bail.
ALL OF WHICH IS ORDERED this 18th day of August,2011.
BRIAN D. HILL, Special Judge
Dearborn Superior Court II
Distribution:
Aaron Negangard
Brvan E. Barrett
ALSO:
STATE OF INDIANA
) ss.
COUNTY of DEARBORN
)
STATE OF INDIANA
v.
DANIEL BREWINGTON
CAUSE NO.15DO2-1103-FD-084, AUG 2 3 2011
ORDER TO RELEASE GRAND JURY EXHIBITS
All Grand Jury Exhibits for Cause Number 15DO2-1103-FD-084 are to be
Released o the Prosecuting Attorney
ORDERED THIS 17th day of August, 2011.
Brian D. Hill, Special Judge
Dearborn Superior Court No.2
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Of course Dan is going to have disdain for the courts they took his kids and violated all his civil rights. I can't believe this new judge wasn't smart enough to know that there is no evidence to proof that he was soliciting a drive on a judge. Why didn't the judge ask the prosecutor why he tried to get Dan to plea with time served if Dan was really soooooo dangerous? Duh!
This is a travesty of justice.
Removing a Judge from office is not a new, radical idea. Thirteen times in our nation’s history, federal Judges have been impeached and removed from office. The impeachment charges have ranged from bringing the court into disrepute, to abuse of power, to unlawful rulings.
All Judges swear an an oath to uphold the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land. It’s spelled out in the Constitution in Article Six. Yet, rather than upholding the Constitution, some Judges are using their gavel to legislate radical political views. That power is not granted to them by the Constitution. If any Judge tries to make the Constitution say something
other than what its framers intended, or tries to legislate law from the bench, it is permissible—legally--to impeach that Judge and remove him from office.
Article Three says that a federal Judge will serve during good behavior. It says that a Judge can be removed from office by impeachment by the House
of Representatives, followed by a trial in the Senate and a conviction of the charges.
Article Two, Section Four of the Constitution says, The President, Vice-President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
According to the Constitution, We, the People, have the authority to impeach and remove any Judge who is guilty of legislating from the bench. That Judge has broken his oath of office and can be removed. These activist Judges have taken power unto themselves because we’ve refused to stop them!
In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one’s nation or state. Reneging on a sworn oath of public office falls under that definition. In addition, legislating from the bench falls under the more broad definition of other high crimes and misdemeanors.
Post a Comment