RE: Hideyo's court case 19th??

[Hideyo Yamamoto]

Also, Michelle, here’s the intent statement of the ordinance:   9-2-1-1  SHORT TITLE AND LEGISLATIVE INTENT.      (A)     This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Albuquerque Animal Services Ordinance."      (B)     It is the intent of the City Council that enactment of this article will protect animals from neglect and abuse, will protect residents from annoyance and injury, will encourage responsible ownership of animals as pets, will assist in providing housing for animals in a control center and will partially finance the Animal Service Center's functions of housing, licensing, enforcement, and recovery. And I am going to argue that I am not violating any of the intents of the law – I am questioning their way of “enforcing” the law based on how they currently calculate the number of animals one can have.   I am also working on the city counselor who is re-writing the ordinance – the new ordinance will not include the portion of the stupid law I mentioned in earlier message – the bill has not bee presented or passed yet.. but right now, I am stuck with the current ordinance.   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 08, 2005 5:03 PM To: felvtalk@felineleukemia.org Subject: Re: Hideyo's court case 19th??   Hideyo,       Thank you. I read it. The link is not to the decision itself, but to a summary of the decision. And it was not a federal court, but a state court that struck down the ordinance.       Does your town have a limit on the number of animals? Or was this just a case-by-case decision denying you the permits you need? If you are being charged criminally for not having the requisite permits and they would not give them to you based on numbers alone, I am not sure I would plead guilty.  I think I might argue that there was no basis for denying you the permits and therefore no basis to charge you criminally, or that the denial was unconstitutional.  But I really do think you will need legal help in order to make these arguments and should try to get a lawyer.  In the civil case, I definitely think you should raise this argument. But you should get the other cases the ALDF member mentioned, because the more courts that have made similar determinations, the more persuasive the argument will be.       Again, though, I really do not have enough information about the laws and government actions in your case to figure out exactly how to argue the case. You need someone who can get involved on a local level, if possible.      When I worked in NM briefly, I found the legal system pretty appalling.  I worked on the state court level, probably above the level of the court you are going to, and even on that level I was amazed.  Common law (legal principles developed by courts) were not very developed compared to MA, and some of the courts did not seem familiar with U.S. Supreme Court cases that I learned about in first year of law school.  The state court in one county was refusing to waive filing fees for divorce cases when people were too poor to pay the fees, and the U.S. Supreme Court had stated this was unconstitutional way back in the 70's!  All of which is to say that you may have to educate the court a bit.   Michelle   In a message dated 12/8/2005 6:15:57 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/limitlawpennsylvania.htm here you go.. please read and if it will help my case, michelle.