USDOT Services Information

Report All Crimes!

Department of Transportation EO:13175

DO NOT STOP, DO NOT ARREST, DO NOT DETAIN: THIS NATIONAL IS PROTECTED UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW.

“NO STATES SHALL CONVERT A LIBERTY INTO A PRIVILEGE”
LICENSE IT, AND ATTACH A FEE TO IT.”
MURDOCK V. PENN., 319 US 105


“Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle, 50 Cal.  App. 3,step 1, 123 Cal.Rptr. 636,639

.“Speeding, driving without a license, wrong plates or no plates, no registration, no tags, etc., Have been held to be “non-arrestable offenses” (Cal V. Farley, 98 Cal. Rep. 89, 20 CA 3d 1032.

Search document
California DMV REQUIRED by CALIFORNIA LAW to issue CA EXEMPT License plates to non-commercial automobile users

120D9W
Time of Request:
Tuesday, September 29, 2015 20:36:28 EST
Client ID/Project Name: Number of Lines:
102
Job Number:
1825:531144535

Research Information
Service:
Terms and Connectors Search
Print Request:
Current Document: 1
Source:
CA Published State Cases – Unenhanced
Search Terms:
cite(188 Cal. 734)
Send to:
OFFICIAL REPORTS, CALIFORNIA 2CALIFORNIA OFFICIAL REPORTS9443 SPRINGBORO PIKEMIAMISBURG, OH 45342-4425

1 of 1 DOCUMENTCautionAs of: Sep 29, 2015
MARIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, Petitioner, v. CHARLES J. CHENU,etc., RespondentS. F. No. 10,210Supreme Court of California
188 Cal. 734
;
207 P. 251
;
1922 Cal. LEXIS 477
May 16, 1922PRIOR-HISTORY:
APPLICATION for a Writ of Mandate to compel the issuance of automobile license plates and certificates.
COUNSEL:
George H. Harlan, for Petitioner.U. S. Webb, Attorney-General, for Respondent.
JUDGES:
In Bank. Shaw, C. J. Lennon, J., Wilbur, J.,Shurtleff, J., Lawlor, J., Sloane, J., and Richards, J.,
protem
., concurred.
OPINION BY:
SHAW
OPINION
The plaintiff applies to this court for a writ of mandate directing the defendant, as chief of the division of motor vehicles of the department of finance of the state of California, to issue to the plaintiff certain license plates, with the accompanying certificates, such license plates to be attached to certain automobiles owned by the plaintiff, as required by the Motor Vehicle Act. The plaintiff is a municipal water district, organized under the act of May 11, 1911, and amendments thereto. (Stats.1911, p. 1290; Stats. Ex. Sess. 1911, p. 92.) By the act of April 6, 1915, the organization of said district was declared valid and it was declared to be duly created as a public corporation. (Stats. 1915, p. 84.) The plaintiff has constructed and completed a large water collecting,storing, and distributing system, and is operating the same in accordance with said act, by collecting, selling,and distributing water to the inhabitants of the district and others. In carrying out its public duties and obligations under the act, as required, it is necessary for it to use thirteen motor vehicles, all of which are used exclusively by it in the discharge of its public duties. It applied to the defendant for the necessary licenses, certificates, and license plates, as required by the Motor Vehicle Act from persons operating and owning motor vehicles. The defendant refused to issue the licenses, certificates, or plates except upon the payment of the license fees prescribed by the Motor Vehicle Act, amounting to $133.60, whereupon the plaintiff began this proceeding in
mandamus
.Section 3 of the Motor Vehicle Act (Stats. 1915, p.Page 1

400) provides that “every owner of a motor vehicle which shall be operated or driven upon the public highways shall” cause the same to be registered with the motor vehicle department and shall deposit with his application for a certificate “the proper registration fee as provided in section 7 of this act.” Section 7 of the act (Stats. 1919, p.198) specifies the fees to be paid to the motor vehicle department upon the registration of such motor vehicle. It is conceded that the amount demanded by the defendant was the proper amount for the vehicles belonging to the plaintiff, if the plaintiff is liable therefor. The section also provides that a number plate shall be given to the person registering the vehicle upon the payment of such fees. Section 8 (Stats. 1919, p. 199) provides that a certificate of registration shall also be issued by the motor vehicle department showing the name of the registered owner and other particulars.The act further provides that all moneys received by the department from such license fees shall be paid into the state treasury to the credit of a fund designated as the motor vehicle fund; that one-half of said fund shall be paid to the counties from which the moneys were received, as determined by the residence of the persons paying the same, for the benefit of the road funds of such counties; that the other one-half, after deducting certain moneys for the expenses of the department, shall be expended by the state department of engineering for the maintenance of roads, highways and parks in this state. It will be seen, therefore, that the moneys are to be used for public purposes and that the license fees are in the nature of a tax. (
Madera v. Black, 181 Cal. 310 [184 Pac.397]
.)The claim of the plaintiff is that it is a public corporation, municipal in character, established and organized for the purpose of carrying on within the district the public service of furnishing water to the public; that it is a state agency for that purpose, and that under the well-established rule that words in a statute providing for the payment of fees or imposing burdens on property shall not be deemed to apply to public agencies or public property, unless such intent is clearly expressed,the language of this act providing for the payment of license fees cannot be considered as having been intended to include or apply to water districts organized under the act first referred to. This doctrine has been frequently expounded and applied in this state (
Balthasar v. Pacific Elec. Ry. Co., 187 Cal. 302 [19 A. L. R. 452, 202 Pac.37]
), where it was held that the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act did not apply to or include motor vehicles belonging to the fire and police departments of municipalities of the state. Other illustrations of the rule are found in the citations and quotations made in that case. The defendant claims that the rule is inapplicable in this case because of the provisions of section 2 of the Motor Vehicle Act. This section provides that: “All motor vehicles owned and used in the transaction of official business by the representatives of foreign powers or by officers, boards or departments of the government of the United States, and all motor vehicles owned by and used in the operative work of such corporations as are taxed solely for state purposes under the provisions of the constitution of this state, and such self-propelling vehicles as are used neither for the conveyance of persons for hire, pleasure, or business, nor for the transportation of freight, are hereby exempted from the payment of the fees in this act prescribed. The department shall furnish,free of charge, distinguishing plates for motor vehicles thus exempt.”The claim is that by this specification of vehicles which are to be exempt the statute evinces an intention to exclude all other vehicles and persons from the exemption.We think that section 2, instead of justifying the position of the defendant, is positive evidence against the same. It excludes specifically all motor vehicles that are not used for the conveyance of persons for hire, for pleasure or for business. There is a companion rule of construction to that above mentioned, to the effect that exceptions in a statute imposing burdens are to be liberally construed in favor of the public. Even without the aid of this rule, however, we think a motor vehicle owned and used by a municipal water district organized under the law for the purpose of collecting and distributing water to the public, and for the management of its works and system in discharging its public duties is not used in “business” as that term is used in section 2 a fore said. The municipal water district is not a commercial corporation. It does not operate for profit. It is not intended that it shall earn any money in excess of the necessary operating expenses of the plant devoted to the public use and for the acquisition of property necessary thereto. While the operations of such a public corporation are sometimes referred to as its “business,” it is nevertheless true that the context indicates that the Page 2

BLACK LAW DICTIONARY
U.S. Title 18 USC 31:”Motor vehicle driver” means every description or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, or passengers and property.


FEDERAL LAW Resolution 217 A (III).

All States shall recognize the urgent need to respect and promote the rights of indigenous peoples affirmed in PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangementswith All States.

“Encouraging All States to comply with and effectively implement all their obligations as they apply to indigenous peoples under international instruments, in particular those related to human rights, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned.”


CHAPTER 2—CONSULAR COURTS

§§141 to 143. Repealed. Aug. 1, 1956, ch. 807, 70 Stat. 774

Act Aug. 1, 1956, repealed sections 141 to 143 effective upon the date which the President determined to be appropriate for the relinquishment of jurisdiction of the United States in Morocco. Jurisdiction of the United States in Morocco was relinquished by memorandum of President Eisenhower dated Sept. 15, 1956. Notice was given to Morocco on Oct. 6, 1956, and all pending cases were disposed of by 1960. See Bulletin of the State Department Vol. 35:909, page 844.

Section 141, R.S. §§4083, 4125, 4126, 4127; act June 14, 1878, ch. 193, 20 Stat. 131, related to judicial authority generally of ministers and consuls of United States in China, Siam, Turkey, Morocco, Muscat, Yahsharahla ,Abyssinia, Persia, and territories formerly part of Ottoman Empire including Egypt. Duly appointed to reside therein. Shall. In addition to other powers and duties imposed upon them. Respectively, by the provisions of such treaties, respectively, be invested with judicial authority described in this chapter, which shall appertain to the office
of minister and consul, and be a part of the duties belonging thereto, wherein, and so far as, the same is allowed by treaty, and in accordance with the usages of the countries in their intercourse with the Franks or other foreign Christian nations. (R. S. §§ 4083, 4125, 4126, 4127; June 14, 1878. c. 193. 20 Stat. 131.)

Section 142, R.S. §4084, related to general criminal jurisdiction of ministers and consuls of United States.

Section 143, R.S. §4085, related to general jurisdiction of ministers and consuls of United States and venue in civil cases.

Truth Affidavit Regarding Right To Travel
Private Attorney General Information
Index to Defending Your Right to Travel…
Paul Andrew Mitchell’s case is officially terminated
Judicial Notice of My Right to Travel Exhibit
Constitutional drivers license
35541510 Updated Notice to Hwy Police and Common Law Right to Free Travel Final
Traffic Ticket Response
Property Study
PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus and Quo Warranto filed by Paul Andrew Mitchell a/k/a/ Mitchell Paul Modeleski. (Attachment
how to rescind your voter registration
Drivers License Notice to Police
What Happened to Unjust Enrichment in California – The Rapid Deterioration of Equity in the California Courts
DMV Cites No Registration
Contract on Driver License
Court Negative Averment Format Criminal Case John Doe 2-14-10
Constitutional Drivers License_09042010
Rescind DMV Contract
Arresting Officer Kidnapping

Department of Transportation EO:13175

DO NOT STOP, DO NOT ARREST, DO NOT DETAIN: THIS NATIONAL IS PROTECTED UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW.

“NO STATES SHALL CONVERT A LIBERTY INTO A PRIVILEGE”
LICENSE IT, AND ATTACH A FEE TO IT.”
MURDOCK V. PENN., 319 US 105


“Traffic infractions are not a crime.” People v. Battle, 50 Cal.  App. 3,step 1, 123 Cal.Rptr. 636,639

.“Speeding, driving without a license, wrong plates or no plates, no registration, no tags, etc., Have been held to be “non-arrestable offenses” (Cal V. Farley, 98 Cal. Rep. 89, 20 CA 3d 1032.

Advertise Yah Business/Events here!

Place Your Ads Here!
Contact us: 916-750-4192
Just $7 A Month No Hidden Fees.

Click Here For Guidelines and info.

Report A Crime?

About ⱯエヨƵⱯ・ヨƵオⱯ (Sr. Chief Executive City Council) 46 Articles
Power in the hand of strength in worship of Ahyaha.