follow me on Twitter

    Friday, April 24, 2009

    Presiding Criminal Court Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr Violates Law - Withdraws Defendant's Notice of Appeal

    I filed a Notice of Appeal as a right with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County on March 9, 2009. I was found not guilty of Medicaid vendor fraud because it was a case of ID theft. I am NOT appealing the verdict. I am appealing the issue of jurisdiction both because controversies remain and due to the public interest exception to the mootness doctrine.

    The Circuit Court loses jurisdiction once the Notice of Appeal is file. The Clerk of the Court is required by law to transmit the Notice of Appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court.

    On March 20, 2009 Judge Biebel sue sponte wrote an order barring the Clerk from transmitting the Notice of Appeal or from preparing the record on appeal, illegally declaring that there was “no appeallable order”.

    I too the Notice of Appeal to the Illinos Appellate Court and had the case docketed - 09-0949. I also filed the following two motions. Judge Biebel has violated his oath of office by blatantly violating law.

    The result of his order would have been to deny the appeal of the jurisdictional issue, which if I win, will set precedent and prove that Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan and the Illinois State Police Medicaid Fraud Control Unit in conjunction with the Office of Inspector General Federal Dept. of Health and Human Services have been illegally and baselessly prosecuting a number of quality and dedicated providers of mental health services to persons on Medicaid. A win would free Dr. Maisha Hamilton Bennett, overturn her conviction and overturn the conviction of Naomi Jennings and perhaps others I don’t know about, as well as force the prosecution against Vernon Glass to cease.

    As explained in the following link AG Madigan and IL Medicaid (started by previous AG Ryan and previous administrations) have a scheme to deny mental health care to persons on Medicaid, use this as a phony claim they are tough on fraud for election purposes, and use this to help balance the IL budget on the backs of the mentally ill. They are claiming that Medicaid will not pay for psychiatric services performed by non-physicians such as licensed drug-addiction counselors and psychologists when billed fee-for-service as employees of physicians. They claim it is felony fraud for a physician to bill Medicaid for services of such licensed employees.
    This essentially denies mental health care to persons on Medicaid as > 80 % of mental health care in this country is provided by non-physicians. We need 30,000+ pediatric psychiatrists yet the country has less than 5,000. Failure to provide mental health care increases crime, misery, family disruption, and poverty. It is a disaster to our economy. Judge Biebel is part of the problem, not the solution. He should be impeached. As presiding criminal division judge he should be held to a higher standard and should know better.

    For a detailed and exhaustive analysis of the fraudulent nature of the charges and the state scheme see:
    For a detailed analysis of why the indictment is legally insufficient and therefore the case is void see:
    For a shorter description of the scheme by the state to deny mental health care see:
    For detailed discussion of the jurisditional issues in a federal Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus which was denied and is pending before the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals under the public interest exception to the mootness doctrine see:

    The following is my Motion to the IL Appellate Court to overturn Judge Biebel’s void and illegal order:

    IN THE

    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS ) Appeal from the Circuit Court
    ) of Cook County, Illinois
    Plaintiff-Appellee )
    -vs.- ) No. 04 CR 17571-03
    ) Honorable Jorge Alonso
    Defendant-Appellant ) Judge Presiding


    NOW COMES, Linda Shelton, Defendant, Pro Se, who respectfully moves this Honorable Court to order Presiding Circuit Court of Cook County Criminal Division Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr. to vacate his illegal order for Circuit Court of Cook County Clerk not to transmit Notice of Appeal in above titled case to Illinois Appellate Court. In support of this motion Defendant states as follows:
    Defendant, pro se, filed Notice of Appeal (Exhibit A) with the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County (“Clerk”) on March 9, 2009 and requested the Clerk to prepare the Record on Appeal.
    Defendant, on April 10, 2009, received an order made sue sponte by Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr. instructing the Clerk NOT to transmit the Notice of Appeal to this Appellate Court stating that there was no final appealable order. (Exhibit B)
    Notice of Appeal states that Defendant was found not guilty on February 24, 2009, but was appealing NOT THE VERDICT, but the issue of JURISDICTION of the court.
    The Illinois Appellate Court, 3rd District in King v. DeDonker, 17 Ill.App.3d 1064, 309 N.E.2d 598 (1974) ruled that a judge’s refusal to enter a finding of not guilty after a not guilty verdict was a final appealable order. The United States Supreme Court in several cases granted certiorari after not guilty verdicts and ruled that issues in cases where there were not guilty verdicts were appealable if they met two tests: 1) there remained a controversy, and 2) when there is no threat of either multiple punishments or successive prosecutions as a result of overturning the decisions of the trial court; in essence that as long as the double jeopardy clause is not offended the appeal is not barred. United States v. Jenkins, 420 U.S. 358, 95 S.Ct. 1006, (1975); Serfass v. United States, 420 U.S. 377, 95 S.Ct. 1055 (1975); United States v. Wilson, 420 U.S. 332, 95 S.Ct. 1013 (1975); United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co, 430 U.S. 564, 97 S.Ct 1349 (1977); and United States v. Ceccolini, 435 U.S. 268, 98 S.Ct. 1054 (1978)
    A case is only moot when it involves no controversy. Hynde v. Hopper, 56 Ill.App.2d 152, 205 N.E.2d 647 (1965)
    In the present case there remains a controversy – the issue of personal and subject matter jurisdiction. The appeal and decision about this controversy denying Defendant’s multiple motions to dismiss pretrial for lack of jurisdiction was barred until there was a final order of the court (finding of not guilty after not guilty jury verdict). The issue is not moot because a decision on jurisdiction will solve several remaining controversies. There is no limitations on the time to appeal void orders.
    First, if the case lacked jurisdiction and was null and void ab initio, then all bail orders are void and the Clerk may not retain the 10% of the bail or $1100, and she must return this money to the Defendant.
    Second, if the case was null and void ab initio, then the case must be expunged from Defendant’s criminal record without charge to her and without the requirement that she apply for it to be expunged.
    Third, if the case was null and void ab initio, then two findings of criminal contempt found during the precedings would also be null and void and must be vacated and expunged, even IF the defendant had made contemptuous statements or made contemptuous actions during these two hearings which would become nullities. ACC 050087-01 and ACC 070057-01
    Fourth and finally, Defendant also claims that the issue of jurisdiction is not moot because if the valid controversy of alleged lack of jurisdiction in this case is resolved in favor of the State’s position that there is jurisdiction, res judicata on this issue would bar any tort action against Judge Pantle and Attorney General Lisa Madigan in federal case number 1:06-cv-04259, a pending civil rights suit against these persons on hold in federal court pending the disposition of this criminal case (now it will be taken off of hold status). The orders of the federal court based on presumed absolute judicial and prosecutorial immunity did not address the merits of the allegation of total lack of jurisdiction of prosecutor or Trial Court and its judge. Therefore, the Federal District Court has NOT decided this jurisdictional issue in the pending case, 1:06-cv-04259. There is no issue of res judicata barring the consideration by the Illinois Appellate Court of the controversy concerning jurisdiction in this case. The Federal Court order removing these two persons from the suit as defendants will be appealed due to their lack of jurisdiction. This order of the Federal District Court in case number 1:06-cv-04259 becomes null and void if this Illinois Appellate Court rules that this criminal case was null and void ab initio, as prosecutors and judges lose absolute immunity ONLY when they are declared to have NO jurisdiction in a case. Therefore a controversy remains as to whether the Illinois Attorney General ever had jurisdiction to indict and prosecute defendant and whether the Trial Court ever had jurisdiction to hear this case, based on the resulting void indictment. The resolution of this controversy has immediate impact on the resolution of the above mentioned federal case and on the convictions of Maisha Hamilton Bennett and Naomi Jennings, as well as on the pending criminal case against Vernon Glass. All these cases involve the same charges and the same issues leading to the conclusion that there was a lack of trial court and prosecutorial jurisdiction or authority as listed in the Notice of Appeal. Therefore, harm will befall defendant and continue to befall Maisha Hamilton Bennett, Naomi Jennings, and Vernon Glass if the issue on this appeal of jurisdiction is not resolved in defendant’s favor.
    Therefore, the Illinois Appellate Court is NOT BARRED from hearing this appeal pertaining solely to the jurisdictional issues.

    WHEREFORE, Defendant, respectfully moves this Honorable Court to issue an order for Judge Paul P. Biebel Jr. to vacate his order of March 20, 2009 to the Clerk not to transmit the Notice of Appeal to this Honorable Court.

    Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/109-1 I certify that the statements set forth herein are true and correct.
    Dated: April 14, 2009
    Respectfully Submitted,
    Linda L. Shelton, Ph.D., M.D. Linda L. Shelton

    1 comment:

    Pat said...


    This is about a civil case/ complaint:
    To whom it may concern!

    Brought by (Pat Jablon)that names a Judge, five attorney’s and other as defendant’s;

    That alleges has numerous statutory causes of action against each defendant, such as fraud, human, civil, and constitutional rights violations, corruption, bribery, million dollar + payoffs.

    I bring this suit pursuant to Title 42 U.S. Code 1983 for violations of certain protections guaranteed to me by the Fifth and fourteenth Amendments of the State Constitution by the defendants under color of law in their Capacity in the Courts of Cook County.

    This letter is a complaint about my Illinois divorce, case # 09D8322, a multi-millionaire husband, a crooked Judge and attorneys, whom my husband alleges that he paid a million plus dollars to Judge Moira Susan Johnson, and hundreds of thousand dollars to the attorneys in question to botch the case.

    In Crook County Illinois, (cook county) there's an Estate Attorney name Donald Sadowski (Schaumburg. IL) who has committed fraud and other crimes that resembles a Ponzi scheme. he has misused his power by illegally removing my Florida gift home out of my unregistered Trust name. He then placed my gift home in another trust to allegedly off-set the balance of that trust, Afterwards, he allegedly paid Circuit Court Judge, Moira Susan Johnson (Richard J. Daley Center, Chicago Il) a million plus dollars and several attorneys in question: divorce attorney Joel Degrazia ( Schaumburg Il), divorce attorney Jessica Oefelein ( Schaumburg Il), divorce attorney Elliot Heidelberger (Hanover Park and Chicago Il), divorce attorney Learetta Tyson ( South Chicago Il) thousands of dollars to botch the divorce case and cover up the crime.

    If a Judge does not fully comply with the Constitution, then his/her order are void, In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888), he/she is without jurisdiction, and he/she has engaged in an act or acts of treason.

    If anyone has an estate planning or business dealing with Estate attorney Donald Sadowski of Schaumburg Il, who’s connected with And Alliance Bernstein Global Investor Service Inc.
    I suggest you inspect and Investigate your Fund/Portfolio with this crook and get a second opinion.