≡ Menu

COA affirms conviction over pro se defendant’s quasi-jurisidictional defenses

State v. Allan Nathan Carroll, Jr. A/K/A/ U’si Ch-ab, 2023AP870, 3/20/24, District 2 (one-judge appeal; ineligible for publication); case activity

Carroll, Jr., a.k.a. Ch-ab, pro se, appeals a jury verdict convicting him of resisting or obstructing an officer. Ch-ab raises two claims on appeal: (1) that his constitutional rights were violated during a traffic stop that led to his arrest and conviction and (2) that his “status as an ‘Indigenous Aborigine American’ relieved him of the obligation to comply with Wisconsin law requiring that motor vehicles operating on Wisconsin roads be registered and display license plates.” The court rejects his arguments on appeal and affirms.

The decision begins with the court noting that it could have dismissed Ch-ab’s appeal based on multiple violations of the rules of appellate procedure, but the court exercises its discretion and addresses the merits of Ch-ab’s appeal. Op., ¶2. After a brief summary of the facts, the court responds to Ch-ab’s first argument: that the arresting officer violated his constitutional right to due process and his ‘unalienable right to travel on [his] ancestral lands’ by stopping and subsequently arresting him.” Op., ¶7.  The court disagrees and holds that the traffic stop at issue did not violate Ch-ab’s substantive due process rights. Op., ¶¶8-10.

Next, the court rejects Ch-ab’s claim that the circuit court should have suppressed the evidence against him because probable cause existed to stop and arrest Ch-ab. Op., ¶11. Specifically, the court rejects Ch-ab’s argument related to his “Indigenous Aborigine American automobile plates,” which were apparently made of cardboard, did not comply with Wisconsin, or any tribal law. Further, the court rejects Ch-ab’s arguments that his claimed status as an Indigenous Aborigine American relieved him of any obligation to comply with Wisconsin law. Op., ¶¶12-15.



{ 0 comments… add one }

Leave a Comment