Categorized | Articles, Featured, Video

Wesley Serra – Disgraceful New York Lawyer

Posted on August 21st, 2017 by Marc Stevens

While I spoke about this on the show, I want a more clear, to the point, article about this disgraceful lawyer, Wesley Serra.  The facts clearly show this lawyer has a serious problem with the truth.  I’m all for dissent, but lying is not dissent.

One of Wesley’s favorite lies is that every time a court addresses my material, it is rejected.  It doesn’t matter the motion has been granted as shown below, Wesley just dismisses it with an assumption and continues to lie.






Wesley has no evidence and but still insists the only explanation is a pissed off judge.  Never mind the prosecutor responded in the same manner Wesley has.  Wesley also fails to mention that since my material is gibberish, that no judge in his right mind would order a response.  They would have just denied it without explanation.

But Wesley sinks even lower in his effort to discredit my work.  He not only reveals the defendant’s name, he deliberately cherry picks the evidence.  I knew Wesley was dishonest, but this is low even for him. 





When you first read this, it really makes me look bad, like I deliberately withheld information.  But, Wesley is doing precisely what he’s accusing me of, it’s called cherry picking and it’s really dishonest.  I corrected my article when I had the additional information.

Yes, there was a trial, conviction and appeal, that’s correct.  What Wesley deliberately left out was that in West Virginia an appeal from a misdemeanor conviction is heard as a trial de novo, a new trial, not appellate review.   The law showing this is:

An appeal of a criminal proceeding tried before a magistrate without a jury shall be by trial de novo in circuit court without a jury.

Because it was a misdemeanor trial without a jury, a new trial was ordered.  Because there was a new trial, the motion to dismiss the original complaint, the subject of the new trial, was filed again.

The motion was granted dismissing the original complaint with prejudice, not the appeal as Wesley claimed.  This is not a harmless oversight either as I can prove.

Because Wesley knew the defendant’s name, he has to have access to the docket online.  Unlike many courts, this court’s docket is not available online to the public.  Since he’s an attorney, he’s probably using a service like Lexis-Nexis to access this court’s docket.  Wesley knew there was a new trial and the motion was granted dismissing the cop’s complaint.  Wesley Serra deliberately left this important information out.  That is despicable, but typical for a lawyer, especially a former prosecutor.

We know Wesley says he is a former prosecutor.  If he’s willing to sink to such levels against me on an insignificant forum, then what about the people he prosecuted when it was about his career?  How many times did he cherry pick evidence and prosecute people he knew were innocent?  If he can be so petty and suppress evidence when there’s nothing at stake, then what about when it concerns his career as a lawyer?  Prosecutors are all about convictions and routinely withhold evidence; so it’s fair question.  Are we to assume that Wesley only lacks ethics on the internet?

While there will be no investigation into Wesley Serra’s prosecutions, one thing is certain, he has provided evidence of his dishonesty, again.  Anyone giving this lawyer a shred of credibility does so at their own peril.


9 Comments For This Post

  1. wserra Says:

    So I’m “despicable”. I “cherry pick[ed] evidence and prosecute[d] people [I] knew were innocent”. I’m “petty”. I “suppress evidence”. I “lack ethics”. I’m “dishonest”.

    After seeing Stevens accuse me of those things, now, good reader, suppose I was right all along. I was, by the way. See – or, if that’s no longer there, see

    What does that make Stevens?

  2. Marc Stevens Says:

    You’re a liar as you keep insisting I’ve not had any success, that every time my material is used it loses. Why not join me on a call in real time there Wes? You failed to mention it was a trial denovo, why?

  3. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    While you’re posting links for people to read, Mr. Serra, don’t forget to post this one that you continue to ignore.

  4. Andy Says:

    Woe Unto You Lawyers, by FRED RODELL
    Professor of Law, Yale University
    Written in 1939

    “When I was mulling over the notion of writing this book, I outlined my ideas about the book, and about the law, to a lawyer who is not only able but also extraordinarily frank and perceptive about his profession. “Sure,” he said, “but why give the show away?” That clinched it.”

    Read and or download the book here: here:

  5. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    Good read posted by Andy.

    Kinda explains why Wes Serra refuses to address certain questions.

    Cat’s out of the bag Serra.

    I’ll stop typing now…

  6. Dave Beaulieu Says:

    Hey Sierra, if you work for or within the current system, which was Unconstitutionally, and therefore treasonously hidden in the corporate UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, (not to be confused with the Constitutional Republic “The United States of America”) then you are a co-conspirator of subterfuge, fraud, conspiracy and treason! The entire system is a shakedown, nothing more and it needs to be dismantled! Being any part of it, even as a attorney, you are part of the problem!

  7. Habenae Est Dominatus Says:

    @ Dave Beaulieu,
    Free Clue regarding the CONstitution:

    Do you have any evidence proving the CONstitution applies to anybody just because they are at a location?

  8. Gaslighter Says:

    Qualificatiobs to be a lawyer: You have to be a ler, just like Sierra.

  9. Gaslighter Says:

    Qualifications to be a lawyer: You have to be a lier, just like Sierra.

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 we can also 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. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.

Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter

Advertise Here