East Ridge resident Omerrieal Woods faces East Ridge city court judge Chris Helton on the charge of “driving without a license.”

Mr. Woods, a VW worker on the late shift, has never had a driver license, yet he travels about by car freely. He is innocent of any crime, as laid against him by the East Ridge police department, serving Mayor Brent Lambert.

By David Tulis / 92.7 NoogaRadio

He was given a license by the department of safety, then found on his arrest for a “tag light” violation that it had been revoked. So he faces a charge of “driving” on a revoked license.

He has unpaid debts to the state, fees for a stay at Silverdale workhouse in Hamilton County, a total of F$14,000, Mr. Woods says. If I were to defend Mr. Woods’ innocence, here’s what I’d do, just to be helpful.

State of Tennessee v. Omerrieal Woods

Motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

Special appearance only for  purpose of denying jurisdiction.

The accused asserts his right to be free from allegations under Tenn. Code Ann. Title 55 as he is not within its purview as a party involved in transportation.

The accused moves that the action be dismissed on grounds that the subject matter of title 55 is the commercial use of the people’s roads, which is defined as the profit-seeking extraordinary use of the people’s assets for profit and gain.

No.1. No evidence of commerce. Nothing the paperwork for this case indicates that he is in commerce, as the officer seized no bill of lading or contract showing for-hire activity.

No. 2. No authority over accused.

1. Authority ex nihilo.The charge of driving on revoked license is not based on any law or any lawful activity of the Department of Safety and Homeland Security. U.S. District Judge Aleta Trauger, in a 79-page memorandum in Davis and Hixson vs. Tennessee et al, reports an admission by safety commissioner David Purkey that indicates a fraudulent use of his power as against people such as the accused. According to Judge Trauger, “An individual may be treated as having a revoked license, even if he was not licensed to drive by the State of Tennessee as an initial matter; TDSHS simply assigns such a person a driver’s license number and classifies the corresponding “license” as revoked. (Docket No. 64 ¶ 31.) Purkey admits that, when his office receives notification from a clerk of court that an individual qualifies for revocation of his license, “the Department revokes a person’s driver’s license on the same day that it receives notification of non-payment from the court.” Exhibit 1, 2 pp.

2. Proof of no protocol to create licenses apart from personal application. This administrative act by Commissioner David Purkey is outside the law and is not with statutory authority, and is thereby arbitrary and capricious. An open records request recently discovered no procedural method, system, or protocol that allows the department of safety to create a driver’s license for anyone apart from that person’s written application and payment of the fee. Letter to open records requester David Tulis by DOSHS attorney Lizbeth Hale, Exhibit 2. 1 pp.

No. 3. Affidavit of status — private user. The accused avers that he is not involved in commerce and uses the people’s roads as a matter of right, pursuant to Transportation Administrative Notice Tennessee that has been delivered to Hamilton County. Affidavit of Omerrieal Woods, Exhibit 3, 1 pp. Affidavit of David Tulis, Exhibit 4.

No. 4. Transportation administrative notice. Hamilton County has been notified of the distinction in the law between travel and transportation, and that from the beginning of self-propulsion the law in Tennessee regulates the for-profit use of the roads only, as an extraordinary use subject to the police power in the public interest. Pursuant to transportation administrative notices’ review of Tennessee law and case law, accused avers he is innocent of any crime under Tenn. Code Ann. Title 55. Transportation administrative notice, Exhibit 5, 20 pp.

Etc.

Exhibits