Florida Senate - 2011 (NP) SB 2212 By Senator Braynon 33-02792-11 20112212__ 1 A bill to be entitled 2 An act for the relief of Brian Pitts; directing the 3 Division of Administrative Hearings to appoint an 4 administrative law judge to determine a basis for 5 equitable relief for the purpose of compensating Mr. 6 Pitts for any wrongful act or omission by the State of 7 Florida or officials thereof; requiring a report to 8 the Legislature; authorizing compensation upon a 9 determination by the administrative law judge; 10 providing an appropriation to compensate Mr. Pitts for 11 injuries and damages sustained; providing a limitation 12 on the payment of fees and costs; directing that 13 certain court orders and judgments to be declared null 14 and void; prohibiting certain specified clerks of 15 court from restricting access to court papers relating 16 to Mr. Pitts; authorizing Mr. Pitts to practice law 17 under certain circumstances; directing the Department 18 of Law Enforcement to investigate certain illegal acts 19 committed by certain persons; providing an effective 20 date. 21 22 WHEREAS, this state has clearly recognized the practice of 23 law by lay persons since at least 1980 as declared in The 24 Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 2d 412, 416-418 (Fla. 1980) and 25 The Florida Bar re Advisory Opinion on Nonlawyer Representation 26 in Securities Arbitration, 696 So. 2d 1178, 1180-1181, 1183-1184 27 (Fla. 1997), the Legislature and judiciary having concurrent 28 jurisdiction to regulate such, and 29 WHEREAS, Mr. Pitts has exercised this privilege since 2001 30 in Pinellas County, and his practice was later confirmed by the 31 Florida Supreme Court in case number SC02-247, in a final order 32 dated November 6, 2003, at clause (1) declaring “unless 33 otherwise authorized by Florida statutes, court rule, case law, 34 administrative rule, or the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,” 35 and 36 WHEREAS, since the inception of Mr. Pitts’ practice, the 37 Second District Court of Appeal, the Sixth Judicial Circuit of 38 Florida serving Pasco and Pinellas Counties, the state attorney 39 for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida, and The Florida Bar 40 have, without cause, continued to deprive Mr. Pitts of the 41 privilege of practicing law as prescribed by the Legislature and 42 Florida Supreme Court, subjecting him to civil and criminal 43 proceedings and penalties on an ongoing basis, and 44 WHEREAS, the Florida Supreme Court, by virtue of the broad, 45 general, and ambiguous language of its 2003 final order in case 46 number SC02-247, has subjected Mr. Pitts to entrapment, and has 47 needlessly and unjustly avoided and failed upon many requests by 48 Mr. Pitts to clarify or amend the final order or to promulgate 49 court rules through The Florida Bar following original 50 proceedings brought or suggested by Mr. Pitts to correct the 51 matter, and 52 WHEREAS, this course of misconduct has been ongoing from 53 2001 to 2010, such that the courts, The Florida Bar, and the 54 state attorney’s office for Pinellas County being in continual 55 collusion against Mr. Pitts in cases SC02-247, SC06-1279, CRCAB 56 65835CFANO, CRCAB-90407CFANO, CRC07-12964CFANO, CTC07-03965 57 MMANO, CTC03-01885MMANO, CTC03-01887MMANO, and CTC03-09855MMANO, 58 and such action has resulted in wrongful and unlawful 59 incarcerations of Mr. Pitts in the Pinellas County jail for a 60 total of nearly one year, and 61 WHEREAS, the purpose of this course of misconduct was to 62 retaliate against Mr. Pitts and, by way of his detainment, to 63 thwart his pending pro se actions for relief from said collusion 64 by civil, appellate, or original proceedings directed to or from 65 the above criminal cases, and 66 WHEREAS, appearing pro se in many of his cases, Mr. Pitts 67 was complimented by several judges of the Sixth Judicial Circuit 68 for his exceptional degree of technical and performance 69 competence that would be expected of any trained and experienced 70 member of The Florida Bar, yet he was informed by express or 71 implied communication that he would not receive the relief 72 requested in any given proceeding unless represented by a member 73 of The Florida Bar, as a matter of camaraderie, and 74 WHEREAS, though appearing pro se in said cases and other 75 actions seeking relief from said collusion, Mr. Pitts was at 76 times represented by appointed counsel, however such proceedings 77 proved to be futile because the proceedings were staged by the 78 courts and state attorney to be illusory, and the courts failed 79 to abide by binding precedent and stare decisis, where 80 applicable, as well as Florida Rules of Court, as evidenced by 81 the series of filings in each case by Mr. Pitts, and then his 82 appointed counsel engaged in similar misconduct, hence depriving 83 Mr. Pitts of procedural and substantive due process, equal 84 protection of the law, self-representation, and representation 85 by counsel under the United States Constitution, and 86 WHEREAS, the Second District Court of Appeal has declared 87 in Denson v. State, 711 So. 2d 1225, 1230 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) 88 that “appellate judges take an oath to uphold the law and the 89 constitution of this state. The citizens of this state properly 90 expect these judges to protect their rights. When reviewing an 91 appeal with a preserved issue, if we discover that a person has 92 been subjected to a patently illegal sentence to which no 93 objection was lodged in the trial court, neither the 94 constitution nor our own consciences will allow us to remain 95 silent and hope that the prisoner, untrained in the law, will 96 somehow discover the error and request its correction. If three 97 appellate judges, like a statue of the ‘see no evil, hear no 98 evil, speak no evil’ monkeys, declined to consider such serious, 99 patent errors, we would jeopardize the public’s trust and 100 confidence in the institution of courts of law”, compare Bedford 101 v. State, 633 So. 2d 13, 14 (Fla. 1994), yet they have 102 deliberately and intentionally, in concert with the Florida 103 Supreme Court justices, failed to abide by said rules of law as 104 to Mr. Pitts’ cases on appeal or by original proceedings brought 105 and maintained by him or his counsel, and 106 WHEREAS, the sheriff of Pinellas County further 107 participated in the concerted effort of the courts, The Florida 108 Bar, and the state attorney’s office by illegally incarcerating 109 Mr. Pitts in the Pinellas County jail during the time periods of 110 January 2003 through April 2004 and March 22, 2010, through July 111 4, 2010, and by refusing him administrative alternative 112 sentencing without cause, and by subjecting him to living 113 conditions and circumstances in violation of Florida Model Jail 114 Standards (2.15)(c), (9.08), (9.06)(b), (5.08)(a)&(c)(1)-(8), 115 (12.03)(d)-(g)&(i), (12.06), (5.08)(j), (10.01), (6.02), 116 (11.12), (11.16), Appendix A, (4.12), (4.13), (4.15), and (9.10) 117 and in violation of ss. 951.03 and 951.033(3), Florida Statutes, 118 and by extending his sentence an additional 40 and 10 days of 119 detention over the ordered sentences in violation of Inmate 120 Handbook XI. A., Florida Model Jail Standard (4.16), ss. 121 951.21(1) and 921.16(1), Florida Statutes, thereby subjecting 122 him to cruel and unusual punishment, subjecting him to false 123 imprisonment, and denying him due process and equal protection 124 of the law. See Miller v. Carson, 599 F.2d 742 (5th Cir. 1979); 125 Miller v. Carson, 563 F.2d 757 (5th Cir. 1977); Miller v. 126 Carson, 563 F.2d 741 (5th Cir. 1977); Miller v. Carson, 401 F. 127 Supp. 835 (M.D. Fla. 1975); Miller v. Carson, 392 F. Supp. 515 128 (M.D. Fla. 1975); Solomos v. Jenne, 776 So. 2d 953 (Fla. 4th DCA 129 2000); Douthit v. Jones, 619 F.2d 527 (5th Cir. 1980), and 130 WHEREAS, such conditions and circumstances of the jail are 131 reflected in the St. Petersburg Times article dated July 5, 132 2010, and titled “Thousands of Pinellas jail inmates released 133 without a judge ever setting bail”, which was complemented by a 134 series of articles released by the Orlando Sentinel, including 135 “Florida’s suspect jails: The state’s hands-off approach to 136 inspecting jails leaves them vulnerable” dated April 8, 2010, 137 “Jail-standards chief defends system of checks” dated May 15, 138 2010, “If all Central Florida jails rate an A, is it deserved?” 139 dated May 15, 2010, and “Beef up jail oversight: Florida jails 140 need tough oversight, not coddling” dated May 18, 2010, and 141 WHEREAS, such misconduct is a clear abuse of judicial, 142 executive, and administrative authority as to the state court 143 system and local government, including the state attorney and 144 sheriff of Pinellas County, thereby resulting in a public 145 embarrassment to this state since said authorities knew there 146 was no basis in fact or law for their unlawful acts against Mr. 147 Pitts, and 148 WHEREAS, Mr. Pitts’ good name and reputation have been 149 damaged and he has been deprived of due process, the ability to 150 conduct a lawful business, freedom of speech, property, liberty, 151 and equal protection of the law, and neither has he benefited 152 from constitutional protections against unlawful trusts by 153 public officers and employees (oath of office) and double 154 jeopardy as to criminal proceedings and sanctions, and he has 155 further suffered mental anguish and emotional distress as the 156 result of the intentional misconduct and gross negligence of the 157 courts, the state attorney’s office, The Florida Bar, and the 158 sheriff of Pinellas County relating to his practice of law as a 159 nonlawyer in this state, and further there is no state action 160 exception to the resulting violation of anti-trust laws (Sherman 161 Act), and 162 WHEREAS, Mr. Pitts has suffered, and continues to suffer, 163 significant monetary damage by means of lost income, property, 164 time, expenses, fees, fines, costs, and restitution resulting 165 from the civil and criminal proceedings relating to his alleged 166 unauthorized or unlicensed practice of law, and 167 WHEREAS, Mr. Pitts, on many occasions, appears before the 168 Legislature to instruct, advise, inform, and advocate for or 169 against proposed legislation covering a large spectrum of topics 170 and subject matter in fact and law in a exceptional degree of 171 technical and performance competence that would be expected of 172 any trained and experienced member of The Florida Bar, and 173 WHEREAS, the Legislature recognizes that no system of 174 justice is impervious to human error, and 175 WHEREAS, the Legislature acknowledges that the state’s 176 system of justice sometimes yields imperfect results that may 177 have tragic consequences, and 178 WHEREAS, this claim is based on a moral and legal 179 obligation of the Legislature to acknowledge its own acts and 180 inherent authority to correct a wrong whereby normal or other 181 state authority, remedy, or resolution has been intentionally 182 avoided and denied in an arbitrary and capricious manner, 183 resulting in a manifest injustice or disregard for the law, and 184 WHEREAS, this is in accord with rulings of the courts 185 concerning legislative claim bills as expressed in Circuit Court 186 of Twelfth Judicial Circuit v. Dep’t of Natural Res., 339 So. 2d 187 1113, 1116-1117 (Fla. 1976) (One may seek a claim bill through 188 the legislature, for “[a]bsent legislation waiving the state’s 189 sovereign immunity . . . this Court cannot authorize relief 190 through the judicial process”); Gerard v. Dep’t of Transp., 472 191 So. 2d 1170, 1172 (Fla. 1985) (“we agree with the Department of 192 Transportation’s assertion that a judgment in this case was not 193 a prerequisite to Gerard’s filing a claims bill in the 194 legislature”); Jetton v. Jacksonville Elec. Auth., 399 So. 2d 195 396, 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (while the Legislature has placed 196 limits on recovery, “claimants remain free to seek legislative 197 relief bills, as they did during days of complete sovereign 198 immunity”); and Dickinson v. Bradley, 298 So. 2d 352, 354 (Fla. 199 1974) (“any claim bill is restricted to less than the general 200 public and its purpose is to discharge the state’s moral 201 obligation to any individual or other entity whom or which the 202 legislature recognizes as being entitled to such. . . . The 203 legislature may enact a claim bill for what would be a tort if a 204 private party was involved just as effectively as for what would 205 constitute a contractual debt.”), and 206 WHEREAS, the Legislature intends that any compensation made 207 pursuant to this act be the sole compensation to be provided by 208 the state for any and all present and future claims arising out 209 of the facts presented in this act, NOW, THEREFORE, 210 211 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida: 212 213 Section 1. The facts stated in the preamble to this act are 214 found and declared to be true, and all remedies were exhausted 215 as of May 12, 2010, and July 4, 2010, both judicially and 216 administratively, respectively. 217 Section 2. The Division of Administrative Hearings shall 218 appoint an administrative law judge or special master to conduct 219 a hearing and determine a basis for equitable relief for the 220 purpose of compensating Mr. Pitts for any wrongful act or 221 omission of the State of Florida, the state attorney of Pinellas 222 County, or the sheriff of Pinellas County in proportion to what 223 occurred in the investigations, the civil and criminal 224 proceedings relating to Mr. Pitts’ alleged unlicensed or 225 unauthorized practice of law, and his incarcerations totaling 226 nearly 12 months, if not longer, from 2001 to 2010. 227 Section 3. (1) The administrative law judge or special 228 master is to determine by a preponderance of the evidence that 229 the State of Florida, the state attorney of Pinellas County, or 230 the sheriff of Pinellas County committed a wrongful act or 231 omission and that a basis for equitable relief exists, and the 232 administrative law judge or special master shall award Mr. Pitts 233 an amount of $7 million, unless it is determined that a lesser 234 award is in order which shall be no less than $1 million in 235 proportionate shares to be paid in lump sum or payments over a 236 period of no more than 10 years. 237 (2) The administrative law judge or special master shall 238 report his or her determination to the President of the Senate 239 and the Speaker of the House of Representatives no later than 240 July 1, 2011. The Chief Financial Officer is directed to draw a 241 warrant in satisfaction of the relief awarded by the 242 administrative law judge or special master, as provided in this 243 act, and to pay the warrant out of the state courts trust fund 244 and state attorneys trust fund in the State Treasury to be 245 payable to Brian Pitts. Pinellas County is directed to and shall 246 pay the warrant out of its general revenue fund of the county or 247 by other means it has provided for to pay valid claims against 248 said local government as pertains to the sheriff of Pinellas 249 County, as to its share to be payable to Mr. Pitts. 250 (3) This award is intended to provide the sole compensation 251 for all present and future claims arising out of the factual 252 situation described in this act which resulted in unlawful or 253 unconstitutional acts committed against Mr. Pitts in connection 254 with allegations, judgments, and convictions of the unlicensed 255 or unauthorized practice of law and his incarcerations totaling 256 nearly 12 months, if not longer, from 2001 through 2010. The 257 total amount paid for attorney’s fees, lobbying fees, costs, and 258 other similar expenses relating to this claim may not exceed 25 259 percent of the amount awarded under this act. 260 (4) All final orders, judgments, decrees, and convictions, 261 and orders or liens as to fees, fines, costs, and restitution 262 rendered in cases SC06-1279, SC02-247, CRCAB-90407CFANO, CRCAB 263 65835CFANO, CRC07-12964CFANO, CTC07-03965MMANO, CTC03 264 09855MMANO, CTC03-01885MMANO, CTC03-01887MMANO, wherein Mr. 265 Pitts is the respondent or defendant, are hereby null and void 266 and are annulled by this act by virtue of the doctrine of 267 separation of powers because the courts failed to recognize the 268 Legislature’s lawful and valid enactments authorizing lay 269 representation as expressed in The Florida Bar v. Moses, 380 So. 270 2d 412, 416-418 (Fla. 1980); by virtue of inherent authority of 271 this Legislature as expressed in Florida House of 272 Representatives v. Crist, 999 So. 2d 601, 611 (Fla. 2008), 273 Trianon Park Condo. Ass’n v. City of Hialeah, 468 So. 2d 912, 274 918, 919 (Fla. 1985); and by virtue of checks and balances 275 exercised by this Legislature as expressed in State Ex Rel. 276 Young v. Duval County, 79 So. 692, 697 (Fla. 1918) (“A clear 277 violation of the constitutional provisions dividing the powers 278 of government into departments should be checked and remedied”). 279 As declared in State v. City of Stuart, 120 So. 335, 346 (Fla. 280 1929), “[t]he general rule is that the Legislature is supreme in 281 the legislative field, which is the most powerful branch of 282 government, so long as it does not violate any of the provisions 283 of the organic law. There is to our minds no justifiable 284 exception of any class of legislation from this all-pervasive 285 and fundamental principle.” 286 (5) The clerk of the court for the Florida Supreme Court, 287 as to cases SC06-1279 and SC02-247, and the clerk of the court 288 for the Sixth Judicial Circuit, as to cases CRCAB-90407CFANO, 289 CRCAB-65835CFANO, CRC07-12964CFANO, CTC07-03965MMANO, CTC03 290 09855MMANO, CTC03-01885MMANO, and CTC03-01887MMANO, relating to 291 Mr. Pitts, are hereby directed to remove from public and private 292 access all dockets, records, documents, and recorded orders or 293 liens on said cases handing said records or documents over to 294 the Department of Law Enforcement to fulfill their duties under 295 section 6 of this act. The Department of Law Enforcement is 296 hereby directed to remove from public and private access all 297 record history and information of a criminal nature concerning 298 Mr. Pitts. This includes, but is not limited to, fingerprints, 299 felon registration, and all other matters concerning the case 300 numbers cited in this subsection. Said records, information, or 301 documents are prohibited from being used by or accessed for any 302 purpose by anyone unless inquired to by federal authorities or 303 for investigations under section 6 of this act. 304 (6) The Department of Law Enforcement is directed to ensure 305 the compliance, execution, and enforcement of subsections (4) 306 and (5) of this section, and shall and is directed to provide 307 protective services to Mr. Pitts ensuring his rights, 308 privileges, and safety under sections 4, 5, and 6 of this act. 309 Section 4. In accordance with the Florida Supreme Court’s 310 final order in case number SC02-247 and the exception contained 311 in clause (1) therein declaring “unless otherwise authorized by 312 Florida statutes, court rule, case law, administrative rule, or 313 the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar,” thereby authorizing Mr. 314 Pitts to practice law in this state, the Legislature authorizes 315 Mr. Pitts to practice law in this state under the following 316 designations, titles, rules, decisions, or acts in the capacity 317 as a lay counselor or lay representative: 318 (1) Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, relating to a qualified 319 representative. 320 (2) Chapter 44, Florida Statutes, relating to a designated 321 representative. 322 (3) Section 709.08, Florida Statutes, relating to an 323 attorney-in-fact. 324 (4) Decisions or rules of the Florida Supreme Court 325 relating to representation by a realty property manager. 326 (5) Decisions or rules of the Florida Supreme Court 327 relating to a nonlawyer using approved forms. 328 (6) Decisions or rules of the Florida Supreme Court 329 relating to representation in county or small claims civil 330 proceedings. 331 (7) Decisions or rules of the Florida Supreme Court 332 relating to third party standing representation. 333 (8) Rule 5-15, Rules Relating to Admission to The Florida 334 Bar. 335 (9) Judicial discretion under the inherent authority 336 doctrine. 337 (10) Federal law or any other clearly expressed rule, 338 statute, or court or administrative decision or order under 339 other federal, state, or local law and authority. 340 Section 5. Any appearance or public testimony given by Mr. 341 Pitts on bills or matters before the Legislature, wherever held 342 or convened throughout this state, does not constitute the 343 practice of law. In all circumstances, Mr. Pitts retains the 344 right anytime he has valid standing supported by law or, if he 345 is the subject of civil, administrative, or criminal 346 proceedings, retains the right to represent himself without a 347 lawyer in court and administrative actions or cases. 348 Section 6. Due to the period of ongoing misconduct against 349 Mr. Pitts as described in this act, the Legislature directs the 350 Department of Law Enforcement, assisted by Mr. Pitts, to 351 investigate these acts committed by: 352 (1) The Florida Supreme Court justices for violations of 353 ss. 914.22(2)(f) or 914.22(4)(f), Florida Statutes, and 18 354 U.S.C. 1512 relating to their final ruling rendered February 22, 355 2010, in case SC06-1279 for the incarceration of Mr. Pitts on 356 the eve of the 2010 legislative session pending Senate bill 58 357 proceedings. 358 (2) The Second District Court of Appeal judges assigned to 359 Mr. Pitts’ cases on motions, reviews, and original proceedings; 360 the Sixth Judicial Circuit judges; and the state attorneys 361 involved for violations of ss. 775.15(12)(b), 843.0855(2) and 362 (3), 839.13(1), 839.24, 918.13, 836.05, 843.03, 777.04(2) and 363 (3), and 895.03, Florida Statutes, and 18 U.S.C. 241, 242, 1951, 364 and 1962. 365 (3) The Florida Bar and their unlicensed practice of law 366 prosecutors involved for violations of ss. 839.13(1), 918.13, 367 836.05, 777.04(2) and (3), and 895.03, Florida Statutes, and 18 368 U.S.C. 241, 242, 1951, and 1962, as well as s. 542.21(2), 369 Florida Statutes, and 15 U.S.C. 1, 2, and 3 relating to the 370 practice of law by lawyers and nonlawyers. 371 (4) The sheriff of Pinellas County for violations of ss. 372 775.15(12)(b), 843.0855(2) and (3), 843.03, 839.13(1), 950.09, 373 and 951.14, Florida Statutes, and 18 U.S.C. 241 or 242. 374 375 The Department of Law Enforcement shall exercise all authority 376 it has under general law to pursue criminal violations under 377 this act and refer the evidence of such crimes to the officials 378 authorized to conduct the prosecution which shall be placed 379 before a grand jury to be impaneled in Leon County to make 380 presentment as to the criminal matters under this section of the 381 act within one year. 382 Section 7. The President of the Senate, the Speaker of the 383 House of Representatives, or the Governor may sever in whole or 384 in part any section of this act, excluding this section 7, which 385 remaining parts shall be in full force and effect upon becoming 386 law. Notwithstanding severance, Mr. Pitts shall retain the right 387 or privilege in future Legislatures to request the relief 388 severed in part or whole by virtue of this section until fully 389 remedied. 390 Section 8. This act shall take effect upon becoming a law.