(REVISION Q1 2123) FSA Rules of Court

These rules are entitled Free State of California Rules of Court. The publish version is for the year of 2022 and shall be considered valid unless stated otherwise by the Office of the Chief Justice of the Free State of California Supreme Court. It may be referred to as Rules of Court, Free State of California Rules of Court, Court Operating Rules. These rules shall be the prevailing text in determining procedure for detailed processes within this document. If such a procedure is not detailed herein, it shall defer to the Federal Rules of Procedure, subject to discretion of the presiding judicial official.

These rules do not supersede U.S. constitutional guarantees. The application of the rules shall be within all facets of the Free State of California Court system, inclusive of all incorporated and unincorporated counties.

These rules of court are still a work-in-progress, thus future additions shall be detailed on the second page. Every update shall have relevant parties notified.
Construction of Rules and Standards [1.1]

(a) Construction

The rules prescribed within this document shall be only liberally construed to ensure just and speedy proceedings.

(b) Terminology

The terms below shall be defined as:
(1) "Should" expresses a preference and nonbinding recommendation;
(2) "Might" expresses a nonbinding recommendation;
(3) "Will" expresses a mandatory action;
(4) "Must" expresses a mandatory action;
(5) "May Not" means not permitted;
(6) "Should Not" means not permitted, albeit subject to discretion of presiding judicial official;
(7) "Discovery" shall entail a phase of the case that lasts no longer than two weeks, unless both parties agree or one week in criminal cases. The discovery phase shall be used to collect evidence, pre-trial motions and to build up a case.

(c) Definition and usage of terms

As used in an official setting, these terms are defined as, unless stated otherwise:

(1) "Judge" refers to a judicial official in the acting capacity of a judge of the superior court;
(2) "Presiding judge" refers to a judicial official in the capacity of a judge presiding over a specific referenced legal action;
(3) "Attorney" refers to a member of the Free State of California State Bar;
(4) "Practice" shall refer to a person representing legal interests in the court;
(5) Further definitions may be regularly updated.


Regulation of Practice [1.3]

In order to practice within any area of the Free State of California Court, inclusive of the New Frontera County Court, the person representing another person or themselves or a company shall be licensed within the Free State of California State Bar. The exception to practicing within the state of Free State of California and its counties, a person may represent themselves in the Criminal Division of the Superior Court, albeit any further or higher court would require a licensed attorney.
Regulation of Motions [1.4]

A motion is a request to obtain a desired ruling or order.

Motion to Dismiss shall be a motion made as a formal request to dismiss a case. For such a motion to be enacted, the movant party must prove one of the following: (1) lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; (2) a lack of personal jurisdiction; (3) improper venue; (4) insufficient process; (5) insufficient service of process; (6) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

The aforementioned motion can be filed with prejudice or without. With prejudice is the implication that it cannot be filed again and without, means it can be. The grounds for "with prejudice" is a heavy-burden. To challenge the acceptance of such a motion, the non-movant party must file a case with the Court of Appeals.

Motion for Summary Judgment shall be a motion made as a formal request to make a judgement on at least one claim (in civil court) or otherwise the entire case. It shall not be a recognized motion in criminal court, unless both parties agree for it to be filed and the Defendant waives their right to a trial. A motion for summary judgment must be filed only after discovery and must prove that no genuine issue of fact exists.

Motion in Limine shall be a motion made as a formal request to that certain evidence is found to be inadmissible pursuant to a legal principle. It cannot be referenced in trial if accepted.

Motion to Recuse Judge shall be a motion made as a formal request that the presiding judge be recused on basis of one of the following: (1) there is a concurrent conflict of interest from the judge; (2) the presiding judge has been unprofessional; (3) the presiding judge has failed on multiple to detail their detailing on motions or otherwise justify their actions with legal basis.

A motion to recuse a judge is handled by the office of the Chief Justice or otherwise a designated person. For the third section, it would refer to a judge ruling on a motion and not clarifying why they have ruled as such. The judge shall have the opportunity, at the request of the non-movant or movant party to clarify the legal groundwork behind the ruling, but if they continue to fail and clarify their legal opinion, then the third section shall apply and the judge may be motioned to be disqualified.

Motion to Recuse Opposing Counsel shall be a motion made as a formal request that the opposing attorney be recused on the basis of one of the following: (1) there is an inherent conflict of interest; (2) the opposing counsel has been an attorney for the same matter on the opposing side; (3) the opposing counsel has adverse material interest in the lawsuit.

For the third, it would mean that the case would have the opposing counsel obtain something if he were to lose, e.g. merger of a company. A motion to recuse opposing counsel may be countered by a waiver signed by the non-movant party that they waive their right to be free of a conflict of interest.

Motion to Compel shall be a motion made as a formal request to have the opposing party enact a certain action, e.g. respond to a subpoena under some sort of penalty. This would typically refer to if the opposing side has produced evidence, but it is believed there is further.


Pursuant to this document, the Rules & Procedures of the Criminal Division shall be applicable to all courts within the state of Free State of California and thus, this shall be the binding regulations that govern all criminal proceedings within the state alongside applicable case laws and state laws.


RPCD — The Complaint / Arraignment [2.1]

The Complaint shall refer to the official document filed in as a Criminal Complaint against an individual that is being prosecuted. The prerequisites for a complaint to be submitted to the court shall be:

It must contain a narrative of which provides probable cause;
It must contain evidence in support of the aforementioned narrative;
It should be filed within 72 hours;
It must include a petition of bail, recommending whether bail is allowed or denied to the Defendant;
It must accurately list the criminal charges and other punishments being recommended;
It must include all evidence available to the prosecution.

Point 1 would refer to a narrative of what occurred. This can be substituted with a brief summary

Point 6 would refer to the disclosure of all evidence against the accused, it would mean that if the prosecution has evidence, it cannot be withheld whether inculpatory or exculpatory.

If the complaint/arraignment is submitted pursuant to an arrest warrant apprehension, such a document shall be included and submitted as evidence; refer to Rules & Procedures of Evidence.

The docket for criminal complaints in the Superior Court, Appellate Court and Supreme Court shall be titled as instructed by the formats. Should a case be remanded from a higher court to a lower court, it shall bear the appropriate docket from the higher court within the lower court.


RPCD — Summary of Process [2.2]

The process of the Criminal Division of the Superior Court shall be outlined as follows:

Complaint / Arraignment is filed;
Case is accepted; (If denied, it shall be denied with prejudice or without and a clarification of the reasoning shall be detailed by the handling judge.)
Discovery phase (last portion = witnesses);
Opening Statements; (Prosecution goes first to present case. 72 hours is the allowed time)
Rebuttals; (Prosecution provides first rebuttal.)
Closing Statements; (Prosecution provides last closing statement.)
Judgment rendered within 60 hours of last closing statement.

A judge, at their discretion, may alter the proceedings as to allow witnesses after opening statements.

In criminal proceedings through the Superior Court, the manner in which a judgment shall be rendered will take into account the mitigating aggravating factors. The Plaintiff (Prosecution) shall be burdened with the weight of evidence. The Defendant shall under no circumstances be expected to produce evidence except when it is relevant to their defense i.e. alibi. Burden of production shall only apply in cases where a specific defense is being applied; a Defendant cannot make a claim of an alibi without evidence to support that, for example.

With this in mind, the process shall be streamlined into the Plaintiff (Prosecution) being made (mandatory) to divulge all evidence into the criminal complaint from the start, pursuant to the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, throughout the proceedings, the presiding judge shall constantly evaluate the arguments made and ensure they do not jeopardize the impartiality of the trial or case through making premature remarks which could be discerned as agreeing with a certain party; the exception being a motion needs an opinion rendered, but rendered in a manner which would not be revealing to the final judgement.
RPCD — Guarantees [2.3]

The Plaintiff (Prosecution) shall be afforded the following rights:

The right to an impartial presiding judge;
The right to have motions and legal arguments be thoroughly rendered a judgement on in detail;
The right to challenge and appeal decisions, without hinderance to Double Jeopardy.

The Defendant shall be afforded the following rights:

The right to an impartial presiding judge;
The right to have motions and legal arguments be thoroughly rendered a judgement on in detail;
The right to challenge and appeal decisions to a higher court;
The right to all evidence against oneself (incl. witnesses)*;
The right to challenge bail petition decisions through a Motion of Reconsideration;
The right to be afforded an attorney by the state*;
The right to have a full trial, summary judgment shall not be applicable in criminal court. (( * ))

Asterisk (*) indicates that this may be up to interpretation by other applicable law. These afforded rights do not trample other guarantees enumerated in other laws or regulations.

(( Point 7 shall be nullified if the case is inactive on the Defendant's side. ))


The process of rendering a judgment through the criminal division is inclusive of taking into account the mitigating and aggravating factors. The person handing down the judgment (sentence) shall consider all legal arguments made and evaluate the mitigating factors present as well as the aggravating factors of the crime(s). The sentencing shall also consider applicable common law clauses such as Multiplicity and Lesser Included Offenses principles.

Wherein, sentence recommendations are submitted by the prosecution, the presiding judge may treat it as such; a mere recommendation and thus render their own sentence or otherwise commute it based on mitigating factors. Sentences shall not include capital punishment as it is not a recognized concept in the State of Free State of California.

Otherwise, sentencing shall follow a common sense mindset where punishments shall not be arbitrary in nature and shall be just to the crime committed.

For rendering a judgment in a criminal case, the one handing down the judgment shall provide a detailed summary of their decision and shall address all legal arguments presented in opening statements, rebuttals and closing statements. The presiding judge must provide why a legal argument applies or does not apply; they cannot disregard and not address legal defenses or arguments brought up. Thus, the judgment must address all elements of the case.


RPCD — MOTION TO DISMISS FOR A SPEEDY TRIAL VIOLATION [2.5]

A motion to dismiss for a speedy trial violation shall be in the court's form repository. The requirement(s) for a petition to be filed is as followed:

72 hours have passed and no arraignment has been filed.
(( The criminal offense provided mandates a case go through the courts ));
(( The Defendant has plead not guilty. ))

Upon acceptance of the petition, the presiding judge shall issue a show cause order and it shall loosely follow the following format issued to the arresting body or otherwise all arresting bodies who may have the party in interest in custody.

The further notions section shall entail further instructions or otherwise possible repercussions of otherwise not showing cause. Motions to dismiss for a speedy trial violation shall be discarded once a criminal complaint is filed.


Rules & Procedures of the Civil Division [3.0]

Pursuant to this document, the Rules & Procedures of the Civil Division shall be applicable to all courts within the state of Free State of California and thus, this shall be the binding regulations that govern all civil proceedings within the state alongside applicable case laws and state laws.


RPCD — Civil Complaint [3.1]

The (Civil) Complaint shall refer to the form filed against an individual or organization for the purpose of an allegation of civil tort. It shall articulate the cause of action and shall be supplemented with necessary baseline evidence to support such cause(s) of action. This shall civil complaint shall not be mistaken with other petitions such as Restraining Orders, et cetera.

These shall be the prerequisites for a civil complaint to be filed.

It must be filed with the Court Clerk and have the correct case docket;
It must articulate a recognized cause of action through common law (tort);
It must further articulate the elements of the cause of action and how they apply;
It must include evidence to support causes of action;
It must articulate the restitution sought after.

If the complaint meets those requirements, it shall proceed to the presiding judge's review on whether or not it meets specific parameters defined in this document or whether or not the correct person is being named in the suit.

On the matter of evidence, when a person alleges an injurious cause of action, they must include evidence to prove such a cause of action. One cannot assert a cause of action of injury when no evidence is submitted that proves there is an injury. The same shall be said for proving financial loss subsequent an action by the Defendant, there must be evidence to support the restitution requested.


RPCD — Causes of Action [3.1.1]

The cause of action shall be the backbone of a civil complaint. The recognized causes of action shall be detailed through Common Law and shall not be an ambiguous narrative of wronging. The recognized causes of action shall be, but not limited to:

(D=defendant; P=plaintiff)

Trespass; (D had intent to invade the land; D invaded the land; P possessed the land and had not given consent)
Battery; (D acts; D intends to cause contact with P; D's touch is harmful or offensive (objective test); P does not consent to the touch)
Assault; (D acts; D intentionally acts so as to cause P to apprehend (not fear) imminent harmful or offensive contact with P)
False Imprisonment; (D willfully acts; D intends to confine P w/o P's consent & w/o authority of law; P is aware of the confinement)
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; (D acts; D's conduct is outrageous; D acts for the purpose of causing the victim distress so severe that it could be expected to adversely affect mental health; D’s conduct causes such distress)
Negligence; (D owed P a duty of reasonable care; D breached that duty; P suffers an injury; D's breach caused P's injury)
Malicious Prosecution; (D acts as to prosecute P without probable cause; D acts with malice; D acts as to abuse the process afforded to them to maliciously prosecute P; P suffers confinement during the duration of the malicious prosecution or otherwise suffers a loss as a result of the abuse of process)

While the aforementioned list is prima facie for the cause of action, it is an incomplete list of torts; it shall be up to the presiding judge to determine whether or not a cause of action not listed here has prima facie to continue.


RPCD — Restitution/Damages [3.1.2]

The idea of restitution and or damages is divided into several segments. The foundation behind it is it is used in civil suits to obtain compensation or otherwise impose punitive damages. It shall be the discretion of the judge to evaluate the enumerated restitution and the grounds for it. The recognized restitution types are, but not limited to:

Compensatory Damages;
Nominal;
Punitive.

Compensatory damages shall be awarded to the Plaintiff if the presiding judge deems it fit. These typically are after damages were made that caused financial loss to the Plaintiff.

Nominal damages shall be awarded to the Plaintiff if the presiding judge deems it fit. These typically are awarded after damages were caused to the Plaintiff by legal wrongdoing, but no financial loss was present.

Punitive damages shall be awarded either to the Plaintiff or State/concerned party if the presiding judge deems it fit. These are typically issued in conjunction with another type of damage in a punitive-manner if there was found to be gross misconduct.


RPCD — Injunctive Order Petition [3.2]

An injunctive order petition shall be filed by a petitioner to enjoin the respondent to be ordered to refrain a specified action. It shall come in multiple forms.

Permanent Injunctions;
(Temporary) Restraining Orders;
Preliminary Injunctions.

A temporary restraining order, may be noticed without notice, based on a declaration to the court, that shows reasonable proof of harassment of the petitioner by the respondent and that great harm would result to the petitioner if a restraining order is not enacted. A temporary restraining order shall be valid for a maximum of 21 days; after that a permanent restraining order must be petitioned for, where a hearing will be heard and the respondent must be present.

The process for a temporary restraining order petition shall be:

File a petition detailing proof of harassment;
Show cause for action;
Presiding judge makes judgment within the day on the petition and issues it for 21 days as a maximum, or otherwise declines it;
After 21 days, petition is discarded if it was accepted.

The process as detailed above shall be very straightforward and without a hearing as in nature it shall be considered an emergent petition. The presiding judge must detail a distance that the respondent is to keep from the petitioner. The presiding judge shall publish the order to law enforcement and ensure that the respondent is served by the Court Services.

A permanent injunction order shall be issued with notice and served on the same standard of a civil complaint as it shall be permanent in nature. A permanent injunction order is an extraordinary action used as a remedy to permanently requiring the respondent to omit doing a specific action in order to prevent possible injustice or irreversible harm to the petitioner.

A balancing test is applied when petitioning the court for a permanent injunction order. It determines whether or not a permanent injunction petition may be filed. The plaintiff (petitioner) must pass the four-step test: (1) that the plaintiff has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for the injury; (3) that the remedy in equity is warranted upon consideration of the balance of hardships between the plaintiff and defendant; and (4) that the permanent injunction being sought would not hurt public interest.

A preliminary injunction shall follow the same four-step test. Presiding judges shall follow the very same concept: (1) the plaintiff's likelihood of prevailing on the merits; (2) a showing of irreparable injury to plaintiff if relief is not granted; (3) the threatened injury to the movant is demonstrated to outweigh whatever damage the proposed injunction may cause the opposing party; and (4) the balancing of equities.