Categorized | Articles, Success Stories

Texas Prosecutor Cannot Prove Laws Apply – Ticket Kicked Out

Posted on June 4th, 2015 by Marc Stevens

A big congrats to Tim for standing up to the predators and getting another bogus ticket kicked out.  Tim filed the motion to dismiss and discovery request.  All we do is point out the prosecutor’s argument does not have any evidence to support.  The discovery request is used to really make this clear.


Rather than try to prove the impossible, that the laws of the Texas government apply to Tim because he’s physically in Texas, the prosecutor, Pat Griffith, moved to dismiss, which as the document below proved, was granted.

Because proving the laws apply because you’re physically in Texas is so easy that instead of providing the evidence, you move to dismiss in the interest of justice.  Yeah, they were motivated by justice.

Thanks to Tim for sending me the documentary proof.  And for the critics, if you think you can prove the laws apply to us just because we’re physically in Texas, please post your evidence and feel free to call into the No State Project.  We welcome the opportunity to hear what every single bureaucrat and politician we’ve confronted has been unable to do; actually prove political laws apply to us.



10 Comments For This Post

  1. Daniel Says:

    Nice job Tim. Big props. I’m still going through waiting for a decision on my appeal. I went in there and they did everything you could think of for Judicial misconduct. Denied cross examination. Judge testifying for cop. Judge said there was no conflict of interest after I binded him with who he represents and the prosecuter. Assuming facts not in evidence that codes apply. Threatens with contempt. And so much more. It is a fight. I love seeing these dismissals. Big Congrats to you Tim. And as always a big round of applause to Marc for his willingness and integrity with helping others.

  2. Andy Says:

    Marc wrote: “Because proving the laws apply because you’re physically in Texas is so easy that instead of providing the evidence, you move to dismiss in the interest of justice. Yeah, they were motivated by justice.”

    Motivated by interest of just-us… just them.

  3. Brad Says:

    im a big fan Marc.. Keep up the good work.

  4. Bruce Says:

    Where can we get a Discovery Request document he used? I have your motion to dismiss from a few years ago.

    Thank you.

  5. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Bruce, email me and I’ll send it.

  6. oatstao Says:

    You should post a link to the abomination you partook in at gnosticmedia.

    I’m up for a healthy debate ANY day of the week but for Clint and Jan to ambush you regardless of your position is quite appalling.

    I would love to see Clint caught off guard from his research. Research is always narrowly defined due to time parameters and it was clear to me they created a confusing situation regardless of the facts or citations .

    Half of the time after the smoke screen – Clint sounds like he is lecturing you. wTF.

    Maybe you will take time to talk about this experience.


  7. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ oatstao – I’m going to be doing a short video debunking his main argument, hopefully that will end this. I’m sick of seeing his name coming up still.

  8. JeHeretic Says:

    I was hoping to have a story like this but they never even went to court after all was said and done. They jailed me and all, maybe what I said stopped it before court? I am not sure, but Marc has been doing this a long time and is not into the freeman on the land lingo and does not worry about logical fallacies, what we are after is the TRUTH! SHOW ME YOUR LAWS APPLY AND WE WILL GO FROM THERE. Its the basics of subject matter jurisdiction, they have to prove first how what when where and why their codes apply to you, then once they have established that they then can move forward. So instead of taking up the burden of proof and presenting your argument, you are now making them prove their argument, they are making the claim the burden is upon them, no matter which way you look at it, use their rules against them. PROVE YOU HAVE A CLIENT, PROVE THE STATE EXISTS, PROVE YOUR CODES APPLY TO ME, PROVE YOUR CLAIMS OR SHUT THE HELL UP AND LEAVE ME ALONE!

  9. Tavares Says:

    The court picked the most ambiguous selection. I think thats funny

  10. Brooks Says:

    Always nice to see someone beat a ticket.

    This document doesn’t, however, prove the “laws apply because you’re physically in Texas” argument.

    “Dismissed in the interest of justice” could mean it was thrown out because the prosecution lacked sufficient evidence, but it could be because of other reasons as well.

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, or Skype-in, with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399, or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and he can add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream now broadcast via You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.

Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.

Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter

Advertise Here