Saturday, November 20, 2010

Here is the reply I received from the office of Governor Schwarzenegger in regards to my notifying him about my concerns of election fraud. I feel Santa Barbara Superior Court Presiding Judge Arthur Garcia should have ran for reelection in March of 2004 and not June of 2006.

* At the bottom of this posting is the correspondence from me to the Governor that starts the interaction off.

 Here is what I received yesterday from the office of Governor Schwarzenegger. The reply was dealing with my concern on how to verify whether or not Santa Barbara presiding Judge Arthur Garcia did indeed commit election fraud while he was wrongfully seeking reelection for his Judicial seat in June 2006 instead of March 2004. That is when I feel he was obligated to re-seek his seat. I also feel under the terms and conditions of his appointment to the California Superior Court Bench as defined by our California Constitution there is no room for such an error to be made.
Below is the correspondence sent to me on behalf of the Governor of California.
> From:
> Subject: Re:Election Fraud by our Superior Court Bench in Santa Barbara
> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:30:02 -0800
> Thank you for writing Governor Schwarzenegger regarding this judicial matter.
> The Governor appreciates hearing from constituents on the issues that matter to them. The issue you discussed falls under the jurisdiction of the Judicial Council of California. In order to ensure your concerns are properly addressed, you may wish to contact that office directly at:
> Administrative Office of the Courts
> 445 Golden Gate Avenue
> San Francisco, California 94102-3688
> (415) 865-4200
> Helpful information may also be found at the Administrative Office of the Court's home page: Again, thank you for your letter voicing your concern on this important matter.
> Sincerely,
> Office of Constituent Affairs

Attention: Office of Constituent Affairs

 Here is my reply to there comments;
Thank you for immediate attention you have shown my concern of possible election fraud by Santa Barbara Superior Court presiding Judge Arthur Garcia. I do believe you have been ill informed as to what other recourse's are still available to me. You see Debra Bowen the California Secretary of State runs a division that deals directly with California Election Fraud. Of course our Santa Barbara Grand Jury or even The F.B.I. would be other offices I should consider. I do plan on contacting all the forenamed offices as well as the California Judicial Council. I was just hoping to see me taken serious at our State level of Government. I am also wondering if there might be a liaison from your office I can personally correspond with further since this correspondence I received has no person named that I might follow up with. This being important since I feel as my investigation grows the number of Judges involved in election fraud is sure to grow. Below is the information I was able to ascertain from the State run web site of Debra Bowen.


Larry Mendoza

California Secretary of State Debra Bowen

Election Voter  Complaint

or Voter Complaint

The Secretary of State's Election Fraud Investigation Unit primarily investigates election related criminal violations, as provided by the California Elections Code.
View some of the more common Election Code violations or view all of the penal provisions of the Elections Code (sections 18000 through 18700).

Election Voter Complaint Form

If you believe that you are a victim of election fraud or have witnessed a criminal violation of the California Elections Code, you may use the Election Voter Complaint Form to report the violation to our office.
Select the Election Voter Complaint Form in your preferred language:
Election Voter Complaint Form - English (pdf ~334KB)

Election Voter Complaint Form - Spanish (pdf ~334KB)

Once the Election Voter Complaint Form has been completed, it can be mailed or faxed to:
California Secretary of State
Election Fraud Investigation Unit
1500 11th Street, 5th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Fax: (916) 653-3214
If you have questions, you may contact the Secretary of State's office at:
English: (916) 657-2166 or (800) 345-VOTE (8683)
Spanish: (800) 232-VOTA (8682)

Below is the main issue I shared with Governor Schwarzenegger in an email late Thursday;

*Santa Barbara Superior Court Judges Arthur Garcia and Judge George Eskin were appointed to the bench on 08/27/03 So according to our California Constitution the appointees would have to seek re-election on the next general election after January 1 2004. That would make the next general election March 2 2004. The primary's switch to there current June date in 2006.Yet Garcia does not run for reelection until June of 06. People how can that be? That would mean his appointment covered the remainder of 03, all of 04, all of 05 and all of 06. An he would seek re election in 06 for his first six year term to start 01/01/07 an that is election fraud! There is no ambiguity in the length of time an appointee may sit on the bench until re-election is required.

Below are the laws dealing with Superior Court appointees and length of service before election is required.

     A judicial seat is newly created If created in an election year, it will be on the ballot in two years; if created in a non-election year, it will be on the ballot the following year.
    A newly created seat produces a vacancy which, under Art. VI, §16(c) "shall be filled by election to a full term at the next general election after the January 1 following the vacancy." Fields v. Eu (1976) 18 Cal.3d 322.
    A judge leaves office (dies, retires, resigns, is removed from office or is appointed to another post) in a non-election year. The election will be held the following year.
    Under Art. VI, §16(c) of the state Constitution, "the vacancy shall be filled by election to a full term at the next general election after the January 1 following the vacancy, but the Governor shall appoint a person to fill a vacancy temporarily until the elected judge’s term begins." The person who is to "temporarily" fill the vacancy will, of course, nearly always become the elected judge owing to the advantage of incumbency in running for election.
    A judge leaves office early in the year in which his or her term expires. 

Larry Mendoza

No comments: