Email Dark Sorrow
Forced
To Plead Guilty Because of Blind Justice
The Clint Reed Story
It has been a common practice for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to get people to plead guilty to crimes that they did not commit. Clint Reed is one of those people and the list goes on. On August 14,1998, the Superior Court issued a five page memorandum of law in correlation to remanding Clint Reed's case back down to the lower courts of Frenklin County for an evidentiary hearing to challenge Reed's court appointed attorney Robert Trambleys stewardship.
Reed was promised a sentence of 36 to 60 months to run concurrent on two counts of conspiracy in correlation to a drug case, after Reed, did not receive the sentence of 24 to 60 months, Reed sent his court appointed attorney a letter asserting that he wanted to withdrawal his plea, yet Reed's appointed attorney refused to acknowledge Reed's request to withdraw his plea, which was prejudicial to Reed's case.
On May 1, 1997, Michelle R. Calvert, was appointed to represent Reed in the case of the Commonwealth VS Clint Reed, No. 252 Harrisburg, 1997, term, subsequently Reed was having problems with his court appointed attorney Michelle R. Calvert, in reference to filing a 1925, B, statement related to Reed's case, in addition to the 1925, B, statement was crucial to Reed's case, an absent filing a 1925, B, statement would wave Reed's issues, subsequently Reed sent The Honorable Judge William Kaye a missive dated October 19, 1997, and November 19, 1997, and December 3, 1997, in reference to his court appointed attorney Michelle Calvert, not wanting to file the 1925, B, statement, as no action was taken by the Honorable Judge William Kaye, to resolve this matter of the 1925, B, statement was very prejudicial to Reed's case, a clear violation of due process and the equal protection's of both State & Federal Constitutional issues for Reed.
Reed, even sent his court appointed attorney (Michell R. Calvert), a certified letter dated October 9, 1997, evincing all of his State & Federal Constitutional issues that was relevent to his case, yet Michelle R. Calvert did not even acknowledge or plead Reed's issues in correlation to the germane merits that would overturn Reed's case in the Superior Court, as Reed's Court appointed attorney's actions was prejudicial to Reed's case, in correlation to not pleading Reed's germane issues that is stated in the aforementioned certified letter.
On September 18, 1998, Clint Reed's attorney sent Clint Reed a two page letter asserting that she is no longer practicing criminal law, as the Franklin County Court docket entry sheet reveals that Michelle R. Calvert, filed on July 1998, a Petition to withdraw as counsel in correlation to representing Reed, as the Franklin County Court docket sheet reveal that the Honorable Judge William Kaye, denied Michelle R. Calvert's petition to withdraw as Reed's attorney, yet Reeds attorney told Reed that she is no longer practicing criminal law, as this information is clearly stated in Michelle Calvert's letter dated September 18, 1998, addressed to Clint Reed.
Reed has been fighting a battle since the inception of his case in appertain to when Michelle Calvert was first appointed on May 1, 1998. Subsequently Reed had problems with Michelle Calvert, yet Reed, has sent Michelle Calvert a letter dated November 8, 1998, asking her to file a motion for the Commonwealth to produce any drugs and photographs related to his case.
Reed has sent the Honorable Judge William Kaye, a missive dated November 8, 1998, apprising the Judge that he wants the Commonwealth to produce the drugs and photographs related to his case.
The lower Courts docket entry sheet reveals that the Commonwealth do not have any evidence to produce that even warrant a conviction or plea, this case is a total miscarriage of justice for the Commonwealth to use skullduggery tactics to have a person plead guilty to a crime that they did not commit, in addition Reed's co-defendant Rebecca Allison, caught with drugs, yet Reed was forced to plead guilty, yet Reed, was manipulated to plead guilty at the said adverse of his court appointed attorney Robert Trambley, based on the said case of Com vs. Widman, 453 Pa 119, an accused is entitled to adequate representation in appertain to Pointer vs. Texas, 83 S. CT. 1065, which states, an accused is entitled to adequate representation, yet Reed, was not afforded adequate representation in correlation to the above stated said cases mentioned supra, yet Reeds Court appointed attorney Robert Trambley, did not apprise Reed, that the Commonwealth did not have any evidence to convict him, based on the said authority on Com vs. Ulen 608 A2d 798, an accused is entitled to present evidence in his defense, and based on Brady vs. Maryland 83 S. Ct. 1194, an accused is entitled to present evidence in his defense, yet Reed was deprived the right to counsel and the right to present evidence in his defense, as the docket entry sheet clearly shows Reed's court appointed attorney Robert Trambley's inept actions of not investigating the case which is clearly prejudicial to Reed's case being denied due process of law and the equal protection's of both State & Federal said Constitutional provision's which was very prejudicial to Reed's case, on November 30, 1998, the court appointed attorney Thomas S. Diehl, to represent Reed, in correlation to his evidentiary hearing, yet Reed has dispatched Diehl, a missive date March 1, 1999, pertaining to filing a Petition of Pennsylvania to produce any photographs or drugs in reference to his case. On January 20, 1999, Reed, received a letter from his court appointed attorney, Mr. Diehl, stating; His office does not accept collect calls, which puts Reed at a clear disadvantage in ablative to receiving justice in the judicial system in this Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, will Reed's new court appointed attorney Mr. Diehl, be a product of the atrocities of the unmitigated entity of attorney's that has the outright propensities to display a complete apathy towards a client to deprive the client of the fundamental rights that is clearly redacted in both State & Federal Constitutional provision's, it is axiomatic if this can happen to the Reed case, just think how many cases the Commonwealth got people to plead guilty to crimes that they did not commit, as Reed, has maintained his innocence in reference to the drug case, as Reed's guilty plea Colloquy evinces hoe Robert Trambley, got Reed to plead guilty to a crime he did not commit. As Reed, did not have any drugs on him when he was arrested, yet Reed's attorney over looked these crucial facts which was clearly prejudicial to Reed's case. Reed had no knowledge of the law, during the course of his case. As this story is true and supported by documentation, as the story was written and researched by Allen Ross, Of S.C.I., Cresson.
List of all documents to support this article;
1. Five page Memorandum from the Superior Court remanding Reed's case back down to the lower courts.
2. Reed's October 19, 1998, three page letter to the Honorable Judge William Kaye.
3. Reed's November 19, 1997 three page letter addressed to the Honorable Judge William Kaye.
4. Reed's December 3, 1997, four page letter addressed to the Honorable Judge William Kaye.
5. Reed's certified letter dated October 9, 1997, consisting of four pages listing all of Reed's issues, as the above stated certified letter dated October 9, 1997, was sent to Michelle R. Calvert.
6. A copy of Reed's attorney's Michelle R. Calvert's September 18, 1998, letter.
7. A copy of Reed's attorney's Michelle Calvert's Petition to withdraw as counsel.
8. A copy of the Honorable William Kaye's Order of July 7, 1998, order denying Michelle's R. Calvert's Petition to withdraw from Reed's case.
9. Reed's November 8, 1998, letter to his attorney Michelle Calvert, with affidavit.
10. Reed's November 8, letter to the Honorable Judge William Kaye.
11. Reed's lower courts docket entry sheet in reference to all filings related to Reed's case.
12. A copy of the guilty plea Colloquy for Reed's case.
13. Michelle R. Calvert's December 14, 1998, letter addressed to Clint Reed.
14. Thomas S. Diehl, letter of January 20, 1999, addressed to Clint Reed.
15. Court Order of November 30, 1998.
16. Clint Reed's letter dated March 1, 1999, addressed to Thomas S. Diehl.
For more information on this case:
Mr. Clint
Reed #DX-0110
P.O. Box A
Cresson, Pa. 16699-0001
Dark Sorrow has no opinion or facts on this case. I encourage people to research all the information provided.
[ Home | Just For Kids | Victims | Prisoners
About Dark
Sorrow | Favorite Links ]
Let me know your opinions and ideas!
Email Dark
Sorrow