JUDGE ERIN O'CONNELL RIGS THE CASE IN TREASON TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS UNACCOUNTABLE STEALING $28,500,000

STATE OF NEW MEXICO

BERNALILLO COUNTY

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

CV-2023-05227

Judge Erin B. O’Connell

David Derringer,

Plaintiff,

V.

New Mexico Livestock Board, Benjamin Benavidez Jr., Benavidez Ranch, Officer Manuel Monte, Officer Justin Gray, Manuel Monte (as an individual NM citizen precluded attorney representation by use of NM tax dollar fee payment), Justin Gray (as an individual NM citizen precluded attorney representation by use of NM tax dollar fee payment)

Defendants,

PLAINTIFF’S TIMELY [1] MOTION FOR REMOVAL AND RELIEF FROM

THE ILLEGAL IN TREASON & FRAUD JUDGE ERIN B. O’CONNELL 9-29-2023 ‘ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS NEW MEXICO LIVESTOCK BOARD, MANUEL MONTE AND JUSTIN GRAY’S SPECIAL APPEARANCE AND MOTION TO QUASH FOR IMPROPER SERVICE” UNDER NMRA RULE 1-060(1) MISTAKE (2) NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE (3) FRAUD (4) THE JUDGMENT [ORDER] IS VOID (6) OTHER REASONS OF FRAUD ON THE COURT BY BOTH DEFENDANTS AND JUDGE ERIN B. O’CONNELL, TREASON, OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE, RICO RACKETEERING, CRIMINAL ACTS OF DELIBERATE AND MALICIOUS FALSIFICATION AND TAMPERING WITH COURT RECORD BY JUDGE O’CONNELL SAME AS DEFENDANTS, DIRECT SUBVERSION AND SABOTAGE OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION INTEGRITY OF ARTICLE III, CRIMINAL ACTS WITHIN THE COURT, BIAS, PREJUDICE, AND CRIMINAL ACTS AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF UNDER U.S. CODE TITLE 18 SECTIONS 241 AND 242 AND OTHER MATTERS DESCRIBED AS A PATTERN OF N.M. PUBLIC CORRUPTION COMMUNISM DEMOCRATIC COUP TO OVERTHROW AMERICA BY BRIBES AND COLLUSION WITH THE INVADING MEXICAN NATIONAL SINALOA CARTEL TO RIG THIS CASE BY ILLEGALLY PRESIDING DEFYING ALL LAW, THUS WITHOUT JURISDICITON OR JUDICIAL CAPACITY IN SUBVERSION OF THE CONSTITUTION

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, David Derringer, (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) representing himself Pro-Se with his timely Motion as detailed above for rule of law mandated relief and dismissal of the illegal Response to the illegal and criminal ‘Order Granting Defendants New Mexico Livestock Board, Manuel Monte and Justin Gray’s Special Appearance and Motion to Quash for Improper Service” "Rule 60 equitable action for relief from judgment may be employed to prevent manifest injustice." Id. at 863. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944), and United States v. Beggerly, 524 U.S. 38 (1998) “Rule 60 action in equity should be available to prevent a grave miscarriage of justice in cases of injustices which, in certain instances, are deemed sufficiently gross to demand a departure."

NOTICE: Since this matter involved extreme sedition, treason, criminal acts by Judge O’Connell against the Plaintiff, and directly against with sabotage and subversion to Constitution Article III, and treason under the 13th Amendment section 3, and criminal treason under US Code Title 18 Section 2381 and multiple other state and federal crimes, this Pleading is sent directly to the DOJ and FBI at AskDOJ@usdoj.gov; U.S. Pentagon whs.pentagon.esd.mbx.secrev@mail.mil ; whs.pentagon.esd.mbx.dopsr@mail.milofficeofsecurity@osdj.ic.gov ; adam.r.cole.mil@usdoj.gov ; Congress Oversight Commission 2157 Rayburn House Office Building Washington, DC 20515; regarding treason, and the U.S. Supreme Court at efilingsupport@supremecourt.gov

1. NMRA Rule 1-060(1) Mistake Judge O’Connell herself with “motive” of fraud on the court, treason and collusion to protect the underlying invading Mexican National Sinaloa Cartel for bribes and Democrat destruction of America deliberately, maliciously and in collusion made the false heading exactly like the criminal Defendant’s attorney Daniel Mackey to distort, tamper, conceal and falsify public record for the underlying motive to allow Defendants to embezzle NM State tax money for state-paid attorney Mackey to falsely claim to represent “select private party citizens sued separately Manuel Monte and Justin Gray in order to use the “good ol’ boy public corruption to exonerate “citizens” that are hiding behind a public service badge to moonlight with the Sinaloa Carte to steal 285 + Derringer horses in the last 3 years of lifetime value of $28,500,000.00. As the proper heading as above in this pleading, Judge O’Connell as attorney Mackey changed it to : (Defendants) NEW MEXICO LIVESTOCK BOARD, BENJAMIN BENAVIDEZ JR., BENAVIDEZ RANCH, OFFICER MANUEL MONTE, OFFICER JUSTIN GRAY, MANUEL MONTE, in his Individual Capacity, JUSTIN GRAY, in his Individual Capacity so as in co-conspiracy and fraud on the court, to condone and allow Mackey to illegally claim to fraudulently represent select individual citizens Monte and Gray to protect them in proven conflict of interest to falsely represent select private party NM citizens so they would not have to pay a private attorney or act Pro-Se, thus Judge O’Connell, as attorney Mackey doing felony criminal acts under. NM Stat § 30-26-1 (2021). Tampering with public records consists of: A. knowingly altering any public record without lawful authority; B. any public officer or public employee knowingly filing or recording any written instrument, judicial order, judgment or decree in a form other than as the original thereof in fact appeared; C. any public officer or public employee knowingly falsifying or falsely making any record or file, authorized or required by law to be kept; D. any public officer or public employee knowingly issuing or causing to be issued, any false or untrue certified copy of a public record; or E. knowingly destroying, concealing, mutilating or removing without lawful authority any public record or public document belonging to or received or kept by any public authority for information, record or pursuant to law. Whoever commits tampering with public records is guilty of a fourth degree felony Jemez Properties Inc. v. Lucero, 94 N.M. 181, 608 P.2d 157 (Ct. App.1979) cert denied 94 N.M. 628, 614 P.2d 545 (1980) “Tampering with evidence constitutes exceptional circumstances. Tampering with physical evidence in the case and with public records in the county clerk’s office went beyond the common fraud contemplated by Subdivision (b)(3) of this rule [Rule 1-060], and constituted exceptional circumstances to allow the reopening of judgement more than a year after its entry, under Subdivision (b)(6).” Fraud upon the court is fraud committed by officers of the court. The officers of the court are attorneys, judges, and judicial employees, including the staff of the clerk of the court. Attorney fraud upon the court is types of actions designed to interfere with the proper functioning and decision-making of a court..that species of fraud which does or attempts to, subvert the integrity of the court itself, as it is a fraud perpetrated by officers of the court) (citation omitted); Herring, 424 F.3d at 386. A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar. A judge is not the court. People v. Zajic, 88 Ill.App.3d 477, 410 N.E.2d 626 (1980).

2. Kerwit Med. Prods., Inc. v. N. & H. Instruments, Inc., 616 F.2d 833, 837 (11th Cir. 1980). This act alone vitiates the entire Order as null and void under fraud wherein this court cannot sustain any writings within. The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."). Judge O’Connell, as also attorney Daniel Mackey engage in a federal crime, not only to protect state employees and private citizens doing criminal acts against the Plaintiff and in cahoots with the Sinaloa Cartel in treason, but use of a corrupt traitor Judge, obviously being bribed by Sinaloa Cartel drug and human trafficking monies for Judge O’Connell to “rig” the case against Plaintiff Derringer being targeted, singled out and persecuted being a “whistleblower” against the public corruption of New Mexico political Democratic communism agenda and not punish, nay “protect” the Sinaloa Cartel providing the cocaine to the Judges and officials. US v. Barrera-Moreno, 951 F.2d 1089; Kunkel v. US, 113 S. Ct. 417, 506 US 957, 121 L.Ed.2d 340; Ruis v. US, 113 S. Ct. 985, 506 US 1055, 122 L.Ed.2d 137 “Government’s failure to be aware of and stop use and distribution of cocaine”. This Judge has “knowledge” and a duty to stop all of this but “won’t. Martinez v. Winner, 771 F.2d 424 opinion modified on denial of rehearing 778 F.2d 553, cert granted, vacated; Tyus v. Martinez, 106 Supreme Court 1787, 475 US 1138, 90 L.Ed.2d 333 on remand 800 F.2d 230 “A judge is not only entitled, but also has a duty to take all lawful measures reasonably necessary to prevent the occurrence of a crime in his courtroom.” RICO Racketeering crimes are protected by Judge O’Connell by distorting the court record in a federal felony under 18 US Code 1519. “Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States.

3. NMRA Rule 1-060(2) Newly Discovered Evidence

As presumed, Judge O’Connell had been selectively picked to be assigned to this case, [SEE the total corruption of the New Mexico Supreme Court S-1-SC-39680] not randomly, but due to Judge O’Connell being a left wing radical Democrat entirely devoted to the nationwide Democrat coup Communist political agenda to overthrow America to Communism, with loyalties to the DNC far exceeding and suppressing the Judge’s Oath, Constitution, Statutes, case law, ethics, duties, to rule of law. Plaintiff Derringer rationally examined why the State and State attorney Mackey would deliberately not answer, file entry of appearance of any timely motion to the Plaintiff’s Complaint, thus deliberately and “without fear” ignoring the Complaint to legal DEFAULT, as they had been informed Judge O’Connell would “rig the case” to defeat Plaintiff Derringer. When corrupt, traitor Communist Judge O’Connell denied duties, NMRA Rule 1-055 and all case law [2] to not file Order of Default against Defendants not answering the Complaint, the writing was on the wall of Judge O’Connell’s corruption to protect state employees and agencies and to protect the two private actors moonlighting as horse rustlers hiding behind their “badge” day-jobs of public employee officers, (Monroe v. Pape, 365 U.S., at 184 “Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because the wrongdoer is clothed with the authority of state law.”) and in protection of the Sinaloa Cartel. Judge O’Connell deliberately left the door open for the Defendants to come hence with a means to give Judge O’Connell to “rig” the case against Plaintiff Derringer. Such criminal acts now presented by Judge O’Connell to falsify the court records in crimes, disregard due process and equal protection against the Plaintiff denying a hearing, (US v. Guest, US Ga. 1966, 86 S. Ct. 1170, 383 US 745, 16 L.Ed.2d 239 “This section (Title 18 Section 241) pertaining to conspiracy against rights of citizens encompasses due process and equal protection clauses of USCA Constitution Amendment 14 and is not unconstitutionally vague.”) allowing embezzlement of tax money for attorney Mackey to illegally claim to represent select private citizens Monte and Gray as individuals using unlawfully a state attorney and disregarding the continuing and admitted grand larceny in this court of Justin Gray stealing in larceny 13(17 since 4 mares are pregnant {all worth $1.7 Million dollars of lifetime use}) more Derringer horses and leaving an extortion note for payment on Derringer’s front residence door, (since then, Justin Gray and Sinaloa Cartel has stolen 22 more Derringer horses) is conclusive, tangible and new evidence sustaining the extreme treason, fraud, public judicial corruption and rigging a case against all law mandating reversal, dismissal and punishment of all traitors involved, specifically Judge O’Connell by the federal authorities, and mandated sua sponte intervening by the US Supreme Court to protect the integrity of Article III of the US Constitution.

1. NMRA Rule 1-060(3) Fraud on the court by Judge O/Connell and all Defendants

Judge O’Connell is a Judge and not the Court, (Herring, 424 F.3d at 386. A judge is an officer of the court, as are all members of the Bar.) and deliberately does FRAUD ON THE COURT, falsification of court records and other crimes against the Plaintiff in sedition and treason of Article III to protect the Sinaloa Cartel invasion of America responsible for horse rustling against Derringer and bribing NM Judges with $ Millions, while providing NM Judges with cocaine, fentanyl, minor children human trafficked for NM elite pedophiles and other contraband. Judge O’Connell is biased, prejudiced, corrupt and has been advised by Derringer to recuse before Derringer filed a Motion to Recuse for Cause, which has been ignored by the Judge. The fraud on the court of the Judge being an adversary and conspirator accomplice and accessory to all Defendants’ crimes while doing her own crimes against Derringer assisting the Sinaloa Cartel, renders Judge O’Connell a Traitor to America and a domestic terrorist by facilitating the Sinaloa Cartel. Chief Justice John Marshall acknowledged that a court may grant relief from judgment where a new matter "clearly proves it to be against conscience to execute a judgment, and of which the injured party could not have availed himself before judgment. Marine Ins. Co. of Alexandria v. Hodgson, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 332, 336 (1813). He further emphasized that an Article III court can grant relief where the "equity of the applicant [is] free from doubt," and where a judgment "would be against conscience for the person who has obtained it to avail himself." Id. at 337 (emphasis supplied).; NMRA Rule 60, as well as independent actions in equity may all be used to seek to vacate orders and judgments due to fraud upon the courts. Bankers Mortgage Co. v. United States, 423 F.2d 73, 79 (5th Cir. 1970).; “equitable action for relief from judgment may be employed to prevent manifest injustice." Id. at 863. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944), and United States v. Beggerly, 524 U.S. 38 (1998),; The People of the State of Illinois v. Fred E. Sterling, 357 Ill. 354; 192 N.E. 229 (1934) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters applies to judgments as well as to contracts and other transactions."); Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); In re Village of Willowbrook, 37 Ill.App.2d 393 (1962) ("It is axiomatic that fraud vitiates everything."); Dunham v. Dunham, 57 Ill.App. 475 (1894), affirmed 162 Ill. 589 (1896); Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co., 338 Ill.App. 79, 86 N.E.2d 875, 883-4 (1949); Thomas Stasel v. The American Home Security Corporation, 362 Ill. 350; 199 N.E. 798 (1935).

1. NMRA Rule 1-060(4) The Order is Void.

The Order made in fraud on the court to protect criminal domestic terrorist acts by the Judge O’Connell in collusion and conspiracy with the Sinaloa Cartel protection and protection of state employees working in concert with private American party domestic terrorists, and Sinaloa Cartel is void by reasons of treason, fraud on the court and criminal acts by the Judge and all Defendants performed in and against the court record. “equitable action for relief from judgment may be employed to prevent manifest injustice." Id. at 863. Hazel-Atlas Glass Co. v. Hartford-Empire Co., 322 U.S. 238 (1944).; Allen F. Moore v. Stanley F. Sievers, 336 Ill. 316; 168 N.E. 259 (1929) ("The maxim that fraud vitiates every transaction into which it enters ..."); State of New Mexico ex rel Candelaria v. City of Albuquerque 768 F.2d 1207 “Allegation that local government officials acted “in concert” sufficiently alleged conspiracy..” ; U.S. v. Pedreza 27 F.3d 1515 cert denied 115 Supreme Court 347, 513 U.S. 941, 130 L.Ed.2d 303 cert denied “Elements of conspiracy are agreement with another person to violate law, knowledge of essential objectives of conspiracy, knowing and voluntary involvement, and interdependence among alleged co-conspirators.”; Telman v. US 67 F.2d 716 cert denied 54 Supreme Court 860, 292 U.S. 650, 78 L.Ed 1500 “Conspiracy may be established by showing that minds of the parties met in an understanding way so as to bring about intelligent and deliberate agreement to do acts charged, although such agreement is not manifested by formal words.”

1. NMRA Rule 1-060(6) other matters of treason against the United States acting and working with and accepting bribes for mandated protection of the Sinaloa Cartel, criminal acts, federal and state and extreme larceny of 285 + Derringer horses in obstruction of justice, domestic terrorism, intimidation, death threats and hundreds of criminal acts state and federal, democratic solidarity with the Democratic national coup to overthrow the United States government and shred the US Constitution by insurrection and treason.

“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or imprisoned and fined, and incapable of holding any U.S. office.”; Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Guerra, 1978-NMSC-053, && 15, 20, 21, 92 N.M. 47, 582 P.2d 819.; The abuse of discretion here is monumental fraud, arbitrary and capricious and deliberate abuse of process, malicious prosecution and violations of all Canon. Click v. Litho Supply Co., 1981-NMSC-015, 95 N.M. 419, 622 P.2d 1039.

Plaintiff Derringer is only required to notice the NM Attorney General of a suit against a NM agency or employee, whereas such Derringer only mailed a copy to the NMAG not served by summons as the NMAG was not a direct party to the case. Also, Derringer filed multiple criminal complaints with the NMAG of this proceeding of criminal acts being performed by NM State employees in domestic terrorism against Derringer and involved with the Sinaloa Cartel. NMAG Raul Torrez, past Bernalillo County District Attorney formerly noted in the Albuquerque Journal that he took pride being bribed by world renowned Communist George Soros wherein Soros had given Raul Torrez $100,000.00 in corruption, as obvious bias and prejudice as he did many DA’s nationwide to facilitate the overthrow of America to Communism. It would be no surprise if Torrez trashed the mailed copy of the Derringer suit, but through this mailing and online Internet complaints against the NMLB, Manuel Monte and Justin Gray, the NMAG knows well this situation, whereas the NMAG will not talk to Derringer by phone, and due to caller ID hangs up on Derringer and refuses to act on Internet Complaints by Derringer against the instant Defendants. Judge O’Connell simply ruled without due process and against equal protection when the Defendants presented no NMAG affidavit or other evidence that the NMAG did not get mailed copy notice of this suit, wherein Judge O’Connell simply rules on spurious ‘ALLEGATIONS” without any evidence of facts before the Judge, without any filed affidavits from the NMAG. Clearly, since Judge O’Connell was selected and designed to “rig” the case against Derringer, the Judge denied a hearing on the matter to keep Derringer testimony from the court in court deceit, and to conceal damaging information out of the court record in ABSOLUTE PUBLIC AND JUCICIAL CORRUPTION. Clearly, select individual citizens Manuel Monte and Justin Gray that are not able to be considered in this Order, as they are not legally represented in any manner by a private attorney, not representing themselves Pro-Se, and cannot be represented by NM State-paid attorney Daniel Mackey by embezzlement of NM tax dollars, each of select individual citizens Manuel Monte and Justin Gray are in DEFAULT, and judgement against them for all counts and in all amounts is mandated under NMRA 1-055 to be Ordered and filed immediately, along with all requested sanctions of this litigation. Other named Defendants are also proven in Default by their illegal pleading in fraud on the court, thus without standing to litigate without any answer to the Complaint and Default Judgement is mandated Ordered immediately against Defendants New Mexico Livestock Board, Officer Manuel Monte, Officer Justin Gray for the Plaintiff for all counts and in all amounts stated in the Complaint, along with all requested sanctions of this litigation.

WHEREAS the Court must rescind, dismiss and nullify with relief the illegal Order Granting Motion to Quash for Improper Service, Judge O’Connell immediately recuse for cause, Order ALL Derringer stolen horses returned immediately unharmed, and the Judge under her criminal acts to subvert the Constitution, be disbarred and punished with Defendants for treason against the United States of America by the military treason tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, and Order Default Judgments against all Defendants New Mexico Livestock Board, Officer Manuel Monte, Officer Justin Gray, Manuel Monte (as an individual NM citizen precluded attorney representation by use of NM tax dollar fee payment), Justin Gray (as an individual NM citizen precluded attorney representation by use of NM tax dollar fee payment) without further delay.

Respectfully submitted by __________________________________________________

David Derringer, Pro-Se, Box 7431, Albuquerque, New Mexico 87194

Certificate of Service 10-13-2023

I hereby certify that I mailed a copy of this Pleading to the 2nd Dist. Ct. on this date. 400 Lomas NW Albuquerque New Mexico 87102

I further certify that I mailed a copy of this Response to John D’Amato PO Box 7888 Albuquerque New Mexico 87194 and only out of courtesy mailed a copy to Defaulted parties to Daniel Mackey8206 Louisiana Blvd NE Ste A Albuquerque, New Mexico 87113-1738.

[1] There is no statute of limitations for bringing a fraud upon the court claim. Hazel-Atlas, 322 U.S. at 244. [2] Rogers v. Lyle Adjustment Co., 70 NM 209, 372 P.2d 797 (1962); Gallegos v. Franklin, 89 NM 118, 547, Pl2d 1160 (Ct. App.) cert denied 89 NM 206, 549 P.2d 284 (1976); Kutz v. Independent Publishins Co., 101 NM 587, 686 Pl2d 277 (Ct. App. 1984). . First Nat’l Bank v. George 26 NM 46, 189 P. 240 (1920); Enfield v. Stewart 24 NM 472, 174 P. 428 (1918).; Schmider v. Sapir, 1971-NMSC-030, 82 N.M. 355, 482 P.2d 58. Simultaneous entry of default and judgment.