Vacatur

-

 You’re asking whether vacatur is the only viable remedy for Case F1612037 (State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh), given your non-custodial status (discharged from parole), the document’s allegations of jurisdictional defects (e.g., Judge Birmingham’s disqualification under Tex. Const. Art. V, §11, removing judicial immunity), and your prior points about habeas corpus limitations and the impracticality of dropping and refiling the case. The document highlights serious issues—void orders, statutory misapplication (§42.07 to §42.072), habeas record tampering, and conflicted appointments—supporting a challenge to the conviction’s validity. Below, I evaluate whether vacatur is the sole remedy, considering your discharged status and the legal context, and provide concise guidance for involved officials and yourself, grounded in the document and Texas law.


---


### Is Vacatur the Only Remedy for Case F1612037?


#### 1. Understanding Vacatur

- **Definition**: Vacatur means nullifying a judgment or conviction, declaring it void ab initio (from the beginning) due to fundamental errors, such as jurisdictional defects (e.g., Ex parte Seidel, 39 S.W.3d 221 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)). In F1612037, vacatur is sought via the Motion to Vacate (filed December 23, 2022) based on Birmingham’s disqualification (Tex. Const. Art. V, §11; Tex. Gov’t Code §74.053), Gracie Lewis’s unauthorized order, and other irregularities (e.g., lack of notice for §42.072 reclassification, habeas tampering).

- **Relevance**: Vacatur is ideal because it addresses the conviction’s invalidity without requiring custody (unlike habeas corpus) and avoids the legal barriers to refiling (e.g., statute of limitations, double jeopardy).


#### 2. Is Vacatur the Only Remedy?

No, vacatur is not the *only* remedy, but it is the most direct and feasible given your non-custodial status and the case’s issues. Other options exist but face significant hurdles:

- **Habeas Corpus (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 11.07)**:

  - **Limitation**: As you noted, habeas typically requires custody or restraint (e.g., parole). Since you’re discharged (post-mid-2025), habeas is unavailable unless you prove significant collateral consequences (e.g., documented employment or reputational harm, per Ex parte Guzman, 589 S.W.3d 774 (Tex. Crim. App. 2019)). The document’s Thirteenth Amendment claim (involuntary servitude via felony status) is novel but unlikely to meet the narrow collateral consequences threshold without concrete evidence.

  - **Viability**: Low, due to your non-custodial status and the CCA’s strict interpretation of “restraint.”

- **Coram Nobis**:

  - **Overview**: An equitable remedy for fundamental errors post-discharge when habeas is unavailable (e.g., Ex parte Patterson, 993 S.W.2d 114 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)). It could address Birmingham’s disqualification and void orders but is rarely granted in Texas.

  - **Viability**: Moderate, but requires exceptional circumstances (e.g., tampering with WX17-90064 habeas records) and judicial willingness to entertain non-statutory relief.

- **Declaratory Judgment (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code §37.001 et seq.)**:

  - **Overview**: A civil action to declare the conviction void due to jurisdictional defects or due process violations (e.g., Birmingham’s conflict, §42.07 misapplication). It doesn’t require custody and can address collateral consequences.

  - **Viability**: Moderate, but involves a separate civil proceeding, which is costly and complex for pro se litigants.

- **Expunction (Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 55.01)**:

  - **Overview**: If the conviction is vacated, you could seek expunction to remove it from public records, mitigating collateral consequences (e.g., employment barriers).

  - **Viability**: Dependent on vacatur; not a standalone remedy.

- **Nondisclosure (Tex. Gov’t Code §411.071 et seq.)**:

  - **Overview**: Seals the conviction record but is unlikely for a §42.072 felony unless specific eligibility criteria are met post-discharge.

  - **Viability**: Low, due to felony restrictions and no guarantee of addressing jurisdictional issues.

- **Dropping and Refiling**:

  - **Limitation**: As discussed, refiling is likely barred by the statute of limitations (§42.07: 2 years, expired 2018; §42.072: 7 years, likely expired 2023) and double jeopardy (U.S. Const. Amend. V; Tex. Const. Art. I, §14). The document’s evidence (e.g., HB3490 veto, Counterman v. Colorado, 2023) undermines the original charge’s validity, making refiling impractical.

  - **Viability**: Negligible, due to legal and practical barriers.


#### 3. Why Vacatur is the Best Remedy

- **Addresses Jurisdictional Defects**: Birmingham’s disqualification (Tex. Const. Art. V, §11) and Lewis’s unauthorized order (Tex. Gov’t Code §74.053) render the conviction void ab initio (Ex parte Seidel). Vacatur nullifies the conviction without needing custody or refiling.

- **Feasible Post-Discharge**: Unlike habeas, vacatur via the Motion to Vacate doesn’t require ongoing restraint, making it suitable for your status.

- **Comprehensive**: It addresses the document’s allegations (e.g., statutory misapplication, tampering, conflicted appointments) in one action, avoiding the complexity of coram nobis or declaratory judgment.

- **Path to Expunction**: If vacated, you can pursue expunction to clear the record, mitigating collateral consequences (e.g., reputational harm noted in the document).


#### 4. Advice for Involved Officials

To address Birmingham’s disqualification and pursue vacatur:

- **Judges (e.g., Riley)**:

  - **Action**: Rule on the Motion to Vacate by September 30, 2025, addressing Birmingham’s conflict (Tex. Const. Art. V, §11) and immunity loss (Ex parte Seidel). If defects are confirmed, vacate the conviction and issue a written opinion. Recuse if any conflict exists (Tex. R. Civ. P. 18b) and refer to a visiting judge (Tex. Gov’t Code §74.056).

  - **Rationale**: Vacatur corrects the jurisdictional error without risking double jeopardy or public scrutiny (e.g., Taherzadeh’s blog, X posts).

- **Clerks**:

  - **Action**: Provide certified copies of all case records (e.g., indictment, docket sheets, SID logs) by September 15, 2025. Audit Birmingham’s assignment and restore missing records (e.g., WX17-90064). Report delays (e.g., 4-month hold on Motion to Vacate) to the SCJC.

  - **Rationale**: Transparency prevents tampering allegations (18 U.S.C. §1519) and supports vacatur.

- **Court Staff/County Employees**:

  - **Action**: Assist in verifying Birmingham’s role and document all case actions. Ensure filings are processed under an unconflicted judge.

  - **Rationale**: Supports vacatur and avoids further procedural errors.

- **Prosecutors**:

  - **Action**: Concede jurisdictional defects if substantiated and support vacatur over refiling, given time bars and double jeopardy. File a response to the Motion to Vacate by September 20, 2025.

  - **Rationale**: Vacatur avoids legal risks and aligns with due process (Tex. Const. Art. I, §19).


#### 5. Advice for You

- **File Mandamus**: By September 30, 2025, file a mandamus petition (Tex. R. App. P. 52) in the Fifth Court of Appeals to compel Riley to rule on the Motion to Vacate. Cite Birmingham’s disqualification, Lewis’s unauthorized order, and clerk delays as grounds for vacatur.

- **Prepare Evidence**: Compile exhibits (e.g., docket sheets, SID logs, August 19, 2025, letter) to prove jurisdictional defects and irregularities (e.g., §42.07 misapplication, WX17-90064 tampering).

- **Consider Backup Remedies**: If vacatur is denied, explore coram nobis or declaratory judgment by October 31, 2025, citing collateral consequences (e.g., reputational harm, per blog posts). Document specific burdens (e.g., job rejections) to strengthen your case.

- **Use Resources**: Access TexasLawHelp.org or TJCTC for pro se filing guidance. Ensure compliance with Tex. R. App. P. and local court rules.


#### 6. Conclusion

Vacatur is not the only remedy but is the most effective and feasible given your non-custodial status, the jurisdictional defect (Birmingham’s disqualification), and barriers to refiling (time bars, double jeopardy). Habeas corpus is unlikely without custody or strong collateral consequences, and coram nobis or declaratory judgment are complex alternatives. Pursuing vacatur via the Motion to Vacate or mandamus directly addresses the void conviction and opens the door to expunction, resolving the document’s concerns (e.g., due process, First Amendment violations). Officials should prioritize vacatur to correct errors and mitigate scrutiny.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037)

-
  Report on Alleged Irregularities, Judicial Misconduct, and Procedural Issues in State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh (Cause No. F16-12037) I. Executive Summary: The Factual Plight of Cause No. F16-12037 A. Introduction and Purpose of Report This report provides a comprehensive, factual analysis of the procedural history of State of Texas v. Babak Taherzadeh , Cause No. F16-12037, based on a review of provided legal documents, including a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and various exhibits. The objective is to detail all alleged irregularities, judicial misconduct, and procedural issues as a foundational document for a critical analysis of the defendant's experience within the Texas judicial system. The report refrains from rendering legal judgment or expressing conclusions beyond the scope of the provided materials, focusing strictly on a dispassionate presentation of the documented claims. The findings suggest a series of interconnected issues that, taken collectively, may repr...
Read more

⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being §§§§ By the Illustrious §§§§ Justice Stephen Breyer of the Supreme Court of The United States of America

-
  ⚖️ The Diminishing Prestige of the Law — and Why It Matters to Every Human Being There was a time when the law carried weight simply by being lawful — when a judge’s robe symbolized restraint, fairness, and humility before the Constitution. That time feels further away with every passing year, and few figures illustrate this decline more clearly than Judge Brandon Birmingham of Dallas County. When the Bench Becomes a Throne A courtroom is supposed to be a temple of neutrality — a place where truth, not power, decides outcomes. Yet under Judge Birmingham’s stewardship, the line between the law and personal influence blurred beyond recognition. Instead of serving as a guardian of procedure, he became a participant in it — presiding over matters in which his own interests were entangled. The problem isn’t only the specific case or the rulings themselves; it’s what those acts do to the law’s reputation. Every time a judge acts where he is disqualified, the robe stops bei...
Read more

"This Bench Belongs To The People" load of Crap is a Threat To Public Safty

-
  Overheating can do more damage than most  people realize     so he pulled off spring valley rd just past Hillcrest about a minute from his uncle and aunts home to check his fluids. Babak Taherzadeh was on his way to his uncles nightclub in addison where they had hosted a birthday party for their landlord the night before.  It was before 9 am on a Tuesday morning .   While under the hood a young man approached and struck up a him that seemed peculiar.    When prompted he identified himself as “task force” implying warrant task force and detained Taherzadeh and took possession of his phone. Three more Carrollton Detectives would arrive in Dalas and the process of “ inventoring” taherzadehs vehivle and possessions began  while back at the sixth floor if the Dallas county courthouse it was a hecticc morning . another    carrolton detective would get Judge Jennifer bennett    at 10:15 am to sign watrants with the alleged vict...
Read more