Judge Donald L. Graham

Chief Judge Federico A. Moreno Refuses to Endorse Judge Graham's Behavior

Chief Judge Federico A. Moreno who when told of these same
allegations via us Mail, and email, and the Internet stated:

I am in receipt of your letter written to me as a Chief Judge of the Southern District of Florida about actions by Judge Donald Graham. In that letter, you also complained about the Chief Circuit Judge J.L. Edmondson. As you can understand one district judge cannot review the actions of another district judge. This rule applies to the Chief Judge of the District as well. It is before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta that any complaint as to a ruling made by a District Judge can be made, I assure you that any decision rendered by Judge Graham was made in good faith upon what he perceived to be the law. Judge Graham has an impeccable reputation. However, if you feel that a judge has erred, the appellate judges in Atlanta are the ones who can decide what to do about it. Thank you for writing.

SeeLetter from Chief Judge Federico A. Moreno. Notice that this is not an endorsement, nor a denial that should tell you something.

---

March 25, 2008
214 Atteberry Drive
Sebring, FL 33870

Federico A. Moreno
Chief United States District Judge
99 N.E. 4th Street #1061
Miami, Fl 33132

Dear Judge Moreno:

RE: Judge Donald L. Graham: An Expose In Hubris, Misconduct, and Criminality

Firstly, I have made this letter publicly available online at

My ultimate goal is to have Judge Donald L. Graham impeached and have his pension forfeited. I would like nothing better than to see Judge Graham called before a Congressional committee to testify under oath about his behavior. To this end, I have been and continue to be relentless in pursuit of these goals.

I know that you have a great deal of expertise on federal judicial misconduct. When the time permits, I would appreciate it if you would read the information and links provided. Upon verifying the veracity of these allegations, I would appreciate it if you would pass this information along to the proper authorities.

One of the most serious allegations is that Judge Donald L. Graham framed a man with the help of the U.S. Attorney. This is a quick read less than five minutes. See http://mmason.freeshell.org/framed.htm/#quick .

The misconduct is really a two part story consisting of Judge Graham's misconduct and his colleagues efforts to conceal it. One of the problems I have had is not documenting these allegations, but organizing them. I have a massive amount of information on a website. mmason.freeshell.org.

I have a page called Core Allegations of Misconduct at : http://mmason.freeshell.org/CoreAllegations.htm .
This page contains links that document the following:

• Judge Graham lied and intentionally misrepresented the law.


• Judge Graham and his Magistrate usurped legal authority by allowing a Magistrate to issue an injunction which is prohibited under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(a) and ordering Mason not to communicate with his government, Highlands County Board of County Communications.


• Judge Graham refused to rule on a motion for a preliminary injunction by Marcellus Mason that had been pending for more than 17 months. As a matter of fact, the Eleventh Circuit refused to make Judge Graham ruled on the motion by denying mandamus even after the motion had been pending for about 15 months.


• Judge Graham allowed scores of other important motions to simply linger without addressing them.


• Judge Graham abused the criminal contempt procedure by taking a void sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction and making it the basis of a criminal contempt information.


• Judge Graham used the criminal contempt process to force the withdrawal of a lawsuit.


• Judge Graham awarded a massive $200,000 in attorney's fees to Highlands County against an indigent plaintiff, Marcellus Mason, not on the quality of the underlying lawsuit, but based upon Judge Graham's speculation about Mason's motive.
  Judge Graham has repeatedly improperly denied access to the courts by arbitrarily denying in forma pauperis, "IFP", petitions. As a consequence, Judge Graham has necessarily arrogated his authority by denying appellate review of his lawless decisions.


• Judge Graham falsely completed a Civil Justice Reform Act Report, "CJRA" in order to conceal the fact the fact that he had a motion for a preliminary injunction pending for more than 17 months.

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT, U.S. COURT OF APPEAL

The Eleventh Circuit has used every trick in the book to avoid scrutinizing the behavior of Judge Graham. It has been unwilling to test these allegations. The Eleventh Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeal, has refused to test these allegations of misconduct for veracity, much less remedy them. This is really an incredible story of dishonesty. The methods employed by the Eleventh Circuit to circumvent legitimate appellate review are many and seem to be only limited by the Eleventh Circuit's imagination. See mmason.freeshell.org/methods.htm.

Additionally, the Eleventh Circuit, primarily Chief Judge J.L. Edmondson, has mocked and contorted the Judicial Misconduct Act by refusing to investigate these allegations of misconduct against Judge Graham even though he knows full well that the appellate process has refused to address these allegations of misconduct. See Judicial Misconduct Home Page.

UNFAIRNESS TO OTHER FEDERAL JUDGES

Judge Graham appears to be a favored judge in that Judge Graham has been affirmed on appeal at the Eleventh Circuit, while some of his other colleagues at the S.D. Fla. and other District Courts have been reversed and excoriated on appeal for the same set of facts. This allegation is fully documented at http://mmason.freeshell.org/tale.htm . This page contains links to other web pages that demonstrate how judges U.S. District Judge Ursula Ungaro-Benages, S.D. Fla., mmason.freeshell.org/WorldThrust.htm , U.S. District Judge John Antoon II, M.D. Fla., http://mmason.freeshell.org/collins.htm, U.S. District Judge Daniel T. K. Hurley, mmason.freeshell.org/martinez.htm ,S.D. Fla., U.S. District Judge Marvin H. Shoob, N. D. of Georgia, mmason.freeshell.org/pleming.htm, all were reversed and excoriated on appeal while Judge Graham was affirmed for the exact same set of facts.

U.S. Dist. Judge Donald L. Graham, US Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, AUSA Theodore Cooperstein, and AUSA Robert Waters used a clearly void sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction to form the basis of a criminal contempt complaint. On September 20, 2001 [Civil Case No. 99-14027-CV-Graham, Mason v. Highlands County], Judge Graham rendered a pre-fling injunction sua sponte, or on his motion and without notice to the litigant Marcellus M. Mason. See Docket Entry Number 878, (D.E. # 878,Page 3 ) . Page 3 of this document boldly asserts: "THIS CAUSE came before the Court sua sponte." The law is quite clear and unequivocal in that a filing injunction requires notice and opportunity to be prior to its issuance. See U.S. v. Powerstein, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 14928,*;185 Fed. Appx. 811 (11th Cir. 2006)("litigant entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before the court imposed the injunctive order"). See Case Law, below. "Generally, a judgment is void under Rule 60(b)(4) “if the court that rendered it lacked jurisdiction of the subject matter, or of the parties, or if it acted in a manner inconsistent with due process of law.”" Burke v. Smith, 252 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2001). Additionally, this sua sponte issued filing injunction made a so-called finding of "bad faith" that also requires due process.
Bad Faith
It has become clear to the Court that Mason is proceeding in bad faith. Indeed, he has admitted as much in his own pleadings and correspondence. See Docket Entry Number 878, (D.E. # 878,Page 3 ). See law on bad faith finding. It is black letter law and a bedrock legal principal that an order issued in violation of due process is void and a legal nullity. See Definition of Void, below. On December 3, 2002 [Case No. 02-14020-CR-Moore], AUSA Robert Waters initiated a contempt complaint by way of an information with this clearly void sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction of September 20, 2001. See Information, below. “A void judgment is from its inception a legal nullity.” U.S. v. Boch Oldsmobile, 909 F.2d 657, 661 (1st Cir. 1990). A criminal contempt conviction was obtained on based upon this sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction of September 20, 2001by way of a bench trial. This criminal contempt conviction led to Marcellus Mason being jailed for 41 days and sentenced to 5 years of supervised probation. See Probation.
The consequences of this sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction has been devastating and disastrous. For an example, this sua sponte issued pre-filing injunction was used to award $200,000 against Marcellus Mason who was and is indigent.