Judicial Notice of Non-Consent to Administrative Procedures and Demand for Constitutional Due Process

Judicial Notice of Non-Consent to Administrative Procedures and Demand for Constitutional Due Process

From:

Naomi Johnson, Sui Juris, One of the People

To:

Whatever Administrative Tribunal or Municipal Court Officer presiding in this matter

NOTICE

I, Naomi Johnson, a private disabled woman and one of the People of New Jersey, hereby give formal Judicial Notice that I do not consent to administrative or quasi-legislative procedures being imposed upon me in place of a lawful judicial tribunal.

The People are entitled to a judicial tribunal, not a legislative or administrative one. See Tull v. United States, 481 U.S. 412 (1987). Judicial notice is a form of evidence. See Mann v. Mann, 172 P.2d 329, 275, 76 (a) Ap. 2d 32.

This Notice eliminates plausible deniability and places all officers and agents on record: any continued action against me in absence of lawful jurisdiction shall be deemed as personal acts, outside the scope of official immunity.

STATEMENT OF FACTS & NON-CONSENT

1. On February 24, 2025, I was stopped by Sgt. Anthony Mazza of the Glen Ridge Police Department, and my vehicle was unlawfully towed without a judicial warrant. As a disabled woman with handicap plates, I was forced to walk home in pain, in direct violation of the ADA (42 U.S.C. §12132; 28 C.F.R. §35.130(b)(7)).

2. I received two traffic tickets that did not require a mandatory court appearance. Despite this, the Glen Ridge Municipal Court issued an unlawful $500 bench warrant for alleged failure to appear.

3. From March through August 2025, I filed multiple lawful documents, including but not limited to:

◦ Motions to Dismiss, Motion to Quash Warrant, Affidavits of Truth, Writ of Replevin, Notice of Claim for Damages, Judicial Notices, ADA Notices, and Constitutional Affidavits.

◦ None were answered on the merits. Instead, I received coercive letters and threats of arrest.

4. The Municipal Court, as a concurrent criminal and quasi-criminal jurisdiction, is obligated to provide due process, exculpatory evidence (Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963)), and a fair tribunal. Instead:

◦ The judge issued contradictory written orders: first stating no appearance was required, then conditioning dismissal of the warrant on either payment or appearance.

◦ No corpus delecti, no injured party, and no verified complaint has been produced.

◦ The prosecutor has failed to show intent, probable cause, or lawful jurisdiction.

5. My driver’s license remains unlawfully suspended as a result of these actions. My constitutional rights under the U.S. Constitution and New Jersey Constitution are violated daily.

DEMAND FOR DUE PROCESS

Accordingly, I hereby demand:

1. Immediate dismissal of all citations and the unlawful bench warrant.

2. Immediate reinstatement of my driver’s license.

3. Full compliance with Brady v. Maryland, including disclosure of all exculpatory evidence.

4. Written confirmation that I will not be subjected to administrative coercion, but afforded the judicial tribunal guaranteed by the Constitution.

5. Accountability for all officers, judges, prosecutors, and clerks acting outside jurisdiction or in violation of oath.

NOTICE OF LIABILITY

Be advised:

• 42 U.S.C. §1983 establishes liability for deprivation of rights under color of law.

• Judicial, prosecutorial, or administrative immunity does not apply where jurisdiction is lacking or constitutional rights are knowingly violated.

• Any further coercive actions absent jurisdiction shall be deemed personal acts.

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL; NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

Respectfully submitted this ___ day of __________ 2025.

Naomi Johnson, Sui Juris

One of the People, Beneficial Owner

[Notary Acknowledgment Block]