Where does Justice reform sit & I feel like problem with system is justice fairness & people being treated equal

  Richard Urrutia recently signed for 10 years in prison on what was a simple possession. Sat in county a year & a half fighting it & so who is there to make sure things filed are even filed under fair circumstances. Richard Urrutia Jr. had a simple possession without any factors of what Trafficking is about & it was under an ounce but they still decided to list it as Trafficking although it was possession. For many that is a misdemeaner, his was not lowered to fit the crime while fighting it niether as many are that fit, & they were able to sentence him to 10 years.

  Now, at his arrest the Sante Fe police department had confiscated his money totaling almost $500 bucks in pocket. The officer stated he just wanted to make sure it not come off some card & he could have it back. But I fought the entire time he incarcerated to have it released to him & the detective at that department by name of Michael Williams repeatedly stated how I was to do this. Problem was is that I continually did what he said he needed & then all of sudden it was something different he needed me me.
   Went from speaking to judge, then prosicuter, but as a pedestrian niether would even let me talk with them.  Let alone care if I requested for them to take the time out to make a call to a  detective to say he can release it. I finally got him to agree to lawyer on case.  The original public defender called and later the paid attorney did, but then the detective told me I have to wait till the case was closed and so I did.
   So the case has been closed he signed for 10 years and this is where we're at now. I called detective and he told me that I need a court order from judge to release Richard's funds to him.  that I need to talk to them. I explained to him already tried that and they don't let me talk to the judge. then he just refused to tell me how to get it done. He just began cursing at me and so I called someone else and found out how it was done. It's like they did not want to hand back over his money. Thank you detective Michael Williams for all your help. NOT!  NOPE!
 THANK YOU SERGENT SO-&-SO FOR YOUR HOSPITALITY & THAT SERGENT WAS THE TYPE OF THINGS YOU EXPECT WHEN DEALING WITH PEOPLE.

 Dectective Williams complains thAt I bitch about the system but I could not believe it the very first time I went to jail when the nurse asked me if I shot up in one arm or two, & then she actually made a comment about my obviously a scratch on my arm. They treated us like junky low life druggies & they were hateful, non-caring pigs as police officers at that jail for the most part. That's why there been so many deaths there & those officers were abusive, & they literally froze you out while in holding cell purposely and I know that was kirkendale or the sheriff's office.
    I have seen officers in OKC forge documents & classify crimes unjustly. I have had officers threaten me with charges filed on me if I did not help them falsify put charges on another. I seen officers arrest somebody with murder charges that they kNEW themselves had an alibi, for he was incarcerated at that time, but they hid that fact from the public. I later learnt that the attorney's & the D.A.'s office were using this case for thier elections & that was after taking them the printed off paperwork myself of that incarceration. With Richard there was no probable cause to search him when they did, & had no legal means to continue prosecuting the case seeing as how it is technically against code for a prosicuter to continue prosecuting a case if no probable cause is established. But yet they kept up where the other left off.
   You wonder why I wrote this inserts & it was to accomplish knowing exactly where corruption lies. Now you people act like you hate on me because you decided to play along. AND WHY DID YOU CONTINUE PLAYING THIS & I KNOW WHY.. .  IT WAS BECAUSE I WROTE YOU 2 LETTERS IN THAT FIRST WEEK & SENT THEM STRAIGHT TO DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. The rest the things were sent via Court Clerk to be on record, but what got you adimet on trying a case that illegally brought about were those letters written. I am from the exact same background that all of you are from & my parents were both legally equipped & law equipped. YOU ARE SUCKERS FOR THE GAME OF POWER PLAys.  MOST OF YALL HAVE SUCH A PROBLEM SHOWING YOU CAN BE MORE POWERFUL THAN THE OTHER THAT YOU CARE LESS ABOUT HUMANITY OR RESPECT FOR OTHERS.  THE LAW IS A UTINSEL TO EXERT SHOWING WHO HAS THE POWER & YOU USE IT.  To the point that the law is law anymore & this is Oklahoma City I witnessed this with & not so much other places.
    I DO NOT have an issue with law & most my immediate members of my family are also working for the government & higher up by far than some lawyer, prosecuted, or detective combined. I am bringing about change in the Oklahoma City system with those who I witnessed as corrupt as I see it. And if you want to know why then it's because I have never did anything to have a felony & never had an issue in my life. I was already 35 years old with a clean record but I am now with 2 felony cases myself. There was not one rythm or reason how I was arrested on crimes that make no sense & then to be threatened with another felony put on me if I would NOT witness for officers so they could put a case on another person who likewise had nothing found on them, is reason I already knew officers were planning on setting the defendant up with charges no matter what it took. And that's what they did that day because even the truck owners statement confirmed no suspension towards Richard as well.

  Richard Urrutia Jr.  C-2018-4243 Oklahoma County case

What the fish?

As far as the courts then tell me how the lawyer we hired wants to quit after showing to one court hearing & his comments after was that they hate him for some reason & then he wants to quit. Reminds me of when they illegally tried to arrest him for something by threatening me to say I seen him with something. When they released me thT next morning but kept him in jail, I had called up to the Sante Fe police department to talk to someone about that case & find out who the arresting officer was & the man pulled it up & all he said was it was a complicated case.
   Well, I bet it is complicated since it was illegal & unjust whatever it was & it was 4 cop cars that came in front of us from 2 different directions & for no reason at all. They even drew pistols & they told me they just wanted to talk to him & pulled him off in a different direction than me. I need to find out what happened because as soon as they done speaking to him is when they tried hard to scare me into saying I witnessed seeing him with something. Now, that would make a complicated case because it itself had no probable cause & something is not right here niether & thats why I put in the motions I did. Because from what I understand the D.A. is not supposed to prosecute a case with no probable cause. And with my motions then there is no doubt about it they know there was none.
   So now they set it for trial & that court hearing nobody even seen & we know nothing about it. We have called the lawyer many times & there no responce back.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR OKLAHOMA COUNTY

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

STATE OF OKLAHOMA,            )

                        )

                Plaintiff,    )

                        )

v.                        )    Case No. CF-2018-4243

                        )    Judge Kendra Coleman                                    )

RICHARD URRUTIA.            )

                        )

                Defendant.    )

Motion to Suppress Evidence obtained against 4th amendment rights and dismiss charge of Count 2.

I, Richard Urrutia jr., come before the courts with the motion to suppress all evidence obtained during an illegal search and against my 4th amendment rights and to dismiss count 2.  (The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.)

Summary and Overview

   On Sept. 2nd, 2018 an officer got a call from a man stating that he was the brother of someone who's truck had been stolen the day before. That he has spotted his brother's truck, and has been following it. That it has pulled into a small shopping center off SE 44th & High ave. in Oklahoma city. 

   By then the truck owner arrives at this location; as well as the officer on the call.  The brother of truck owner then informs the officer he seen the guy get out and walk into the store across the complex, and he was a mexican man who was wearing a white shirt. The officer departs and walks over to the store leaving the witness and the truck owner behind. 

Findings to support illegal detainment with lack of probable cause and suspension

   Witnesses say that as soon the officer entered the store and seen Richard Urrutia standing right inside the doors that the officer called him out by his real name. That he had asked Richard what truck he was driving and the witnesses stated that Richard replied to the officer and then began to walk away. And at that time the officer threatened to tackle the defendant and they said Richard froze; whereas then the officer cuffed the defendant and searched the defendant before they ever left the counter.

It requires that officers have an objectively reasonable basis for suspecting criminal activity before detaining someone. In addition, before conducting a pat-down, officers must reasonably suspect that a subject is armed and dangerous. Officers can, however, ask people to stop and answer questions without reasonable suspicion.

One does not have probable cause unless he has information of facts which, if submitted to a magistrate, would require issuance of an arrest warrant. Mere suspicion is not enough. Mallory v. United States, 354 U.S. 449, 77 S.Ct. 1356, 1 L.Ed.2d 1479 (1957).

 An arrest is not justified if the person arresting acts only at the request of a third person who himself has only a mere suspicion of guilt of the arrestee, and does not have probable cause.1 Whitely v. Warden, 401 U.S. 560, 91 S.Ct. 1031, 28 L.Ed.2d 306 (1971). 5 Am.Jur.2d, Arrest, § 45. The officers' "good faith is not enough to constitute probable cause. That faith must be grounded on facts . . . which in the judgment of the court would make his faith reasonable." Welch v. State, 30 Okl.Cr. 330, 236 P. 68, 70 (1925

Probable cause- It is also the standard by which grand juries issue criminal indictments. Enough proof that if you introduced it to a magistrate it would be enough for a search warrent to be issued. 

   The officer escorted Richard out to the squad car while he spoke to the truck owner and according to the truck owner he stated to me that he had told the officer that he had not wanted to file charges on Richard because he believed he had not known nothing about the truck and he also told me what Richard said to him as the officer was escorting him out. And he told me that he believed him. 

In the United States, the exclusionary rule is a legal rule, based on constitutional law, that prevents evidence collected or analyzed in violation of the defendant's constitutional rights from being used in a court of law. 

The fact that afterwards contraband was discovered is not enough. An arrest is not justified by what the subsequent search discloses . . ." 361 U.S. at 103, 80 S.Ct. at 171.

¶6 Since the officers had observed no incriminating actions, and standing there in line at the registar as being outwardly innocent, the only basis for arrest was the informant's undisclosed report which was insufficient to establish probable cause. The details of the report concerning defendant and "the manner in which he was implicated remain unexplained and undefined. The rumor about him is therefore practically meaningless." 361 U.S. at 103, 80 S.Ct. at 171. 

   

Even if probable cause had been provided by the informant, no exigent circumstances or compelling reasons existed. It is the rule that "no amount of probable cause can justify a warrantless search or seizure absent `exigent circumstances.'" Collidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 91 S.Ct. 2022, 29 L.Ed.2d 564 (1971).

Mere information from a third party, however, reliable, that a felony is being committed, without an effort to check its accuracy by personal observation,  where discovery is anticipated, would of itself be insufficient to authorize either issuance of a warrant or a search without a warrant."

   Taken into consideration that according to the cashier standing at the registar that day and the witness I spoke to who was standing directly behind Richard Urrutia in line, then the officer had automatically decided Richard had quilt before ever establoshing probable cause that efficent enough by the courts for his arrest that day. The officer searched him without probable cause and inside the store before taking Richard out and even discovering any facts from the actual truck owner and not soley his brother's word before he continued. During this search I was told the items were established according to the cashier who stated that then the officers had asked him if Richard had used cash or a credit card and he had replied that Richard never had a chance to pay for anything yet. 

   Taken into mind that probable cause was not found before or after the search making Count 2 invalid then I request the courts to suppress that evidence and dismiss this case. 

                       Thanks,  Richard Urrutia jr. 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR OKLAHOMA COUNTY

STATE OF OKLAHOMA

STATE OF OKLAHOMA,            )

                        )

                Plaintiff,    )

                        )

v.                        )    Case No. CF-2018-4243

                        )    Judge Kendra Coleman                                    )

RICHARD URRUTIA.            )

                        )

                Defendant.    )

                     MOTION TO REDUCE CHARGES

   On September 2nd the defendant Richard Urrutia was unknowingly approached and searched; and in his pocket was a single bag of narcotics with no other paraphernalia found, no scales, no extra baggies, no other types of narcotics. Nor does the defendant have any type of history of that kind and the defendant states that he was charged with Trafficking on that day of September 2nd solely because the weight of that bag barely touched the minimum grams needed in order for it to be filed as Trafficking if someone chose to do it that way. And the defendant chooses to file a motion in order to correct the charge to something it better implies. 

         SUPPORTING FACTS

   At his arrest the defendant was at his local convenience store and not trying to sell, nor distribute, nor was he traveling or trying to conceal, or hide anything and especially not Trafficking or traveling outside of his own area. There are no supportive facts than show any other besides a simple possession and all facts show this is likely what it was. The defendant had no other narcotics present, nor did he have scales or other bags available, and the contents were in one single bag and no other paraphernalia was near. The defendant was not selling anything, nor did it appear he was, and there were no items used for manufacturing near him or on him.  

 The defendant has no criminal history towards previous charges of Trafficking, or towards intent to distribute, and all he has as a subsequent offence is the prior possession charge going back to the year 2012 and making that almost 8 years ago. The defendant has no recent cases established since and that case and it was closed in 2013. 

   The defendant swears all he has is a habit and the reason he had 24 grams in his pocket at the time was solely because he was maintaining a full time job and had another part time job he did on the side prior to being stopped that exact day of September 2nd,2018; and therefore was unable to go out each day in order to maintain his habit and so he purchased enough to get through the week. 

   The contents of that bag of norcartics according to records show it at 24.75 grams which is consistent with the amount likely used on a weekly basis and the defendant had no other narcotics, no other baggies which made the narcotics totaled up together, nor any scales in his pocket at the time. The defendant solely had one bag and nothing else which appeared to be nothing but an addiction problem, and a possession of narcotics used only for personal use, which weight of bag still did not even count for an ounce which is still under the rational amount for possession . Therefore it is most likely the defendant did indeed plan on using those narcotics for personal use only. 

            SUMMARY

   

   Taking into consideration that the defendant was found with what seemed to be only a possession then we are petitioning the courts to lower the charge of Trafficking to a lesser charge of possession. 

  

                                                     Signed by defendant

                                                           Richard Urrutia jr. 

  

     

                                                   This 25th day of June 2019

The government must provide you with an opportunity to rebut their charges against you in a meaningful way and at a meaningful time (the "hearing requirement").

NOW HEAR THIS ONE OUT.. . ,

The case involves Richard Urrutia being approached while he was in the store, within a shopping complex. There had been a call by the "brother" of the legal owner of the truck who had said he had seen his brothers truck which stolen the day before & had followed it to this location. The truck owner had showed up at that location, As did the Officer, & then "the brother" tells them he had followed the truck & seen a mexican guy driving & that he was wearing a white shirt & that he had entered the store at the other end of the complex.. The officer walked 'aCRosS ThE cOmPLEx', & into that store, & as he seen Richard standing at the register the witnesses say that the officer immediately called him out by his first name. The officer searched him & then asked the store clerk if Richard had paid for a pump & if used cash or credit card. The store clerk tells me that he stated that he did not know because he had not a chance to pay for anything yet. .

Witness behind Richard in line said they had him cuffed, & even searched, before he ever left the counter which means there was not given a chance to find out what might been going on before an arrest was made. Before ever pulling him outside to discover what more going on, & before knowing they even had the right suspect, this person had already been searched without substantial probable cause..  The brother who had called police when he noticed the truck, and the truck owner who just arrived were both waiting outside the store when officer exited.

   I had contacted the truck owner who had no idea the defendant was incarcerated & taken to jail after that day in question.  He stated to me that he had told the police that he did not want to file charges on the defendant and this was because, as he told me, he did not believe the defendant had stolen his truck, nor did he think he knew anything about it.  He even quoted to me what the defendant was yelling towards him that day as they brought him out which he also stated to me that he believed him. He also told me that he is not a bad person & that he had told the officer that he had not wanted to file charges & this was why he didn't want to file, & that he was just happy to have his truck back. (Those same exact words  D.A. used in the State's response to bond reduction which makes me aware that they knew this too). 

    And in support of this I give you the current & correct address of Mr. Julian Hernandez which and its 1315 sw 20th & I encourage reaching him for trail and I sent address to the D.A.'s office recently & given my lawyer the proof on what Mr. Hernandez told me.  Mr. Hernandez has a Facebook page under Jolio Campos Hernandez and a phone number which is 405-882-3391.  

  But I recently wrote the D.A.'s office to give them this information and so they should already be informed since I informed them of the correct address of Julian Hernandez first and foremost,.

  Technically, without proper knowledge or research, ( & since it was not even the truck owner that called & he just got there too) then they should of investigated what more going on before arresting someone merely off of a description as "a mexican" from the brother of so-called truck owner. MOST IMPORTANTLY THE SEARCH OF PERSON BEFORE FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS IS UNLAWFUL & ALTHOUGH CHARGES OF UNAUTHORIZED USE OF VEHICLE HAVE BEEN DROPPED IT STILL LEAVES AN AUTHORIZED SEARCH OF THE PERSON. Not too mention that because he works & has to obtain a small but decent amount then that gets 20 years time instead of a misdemeaner 1 year sentence.

                             Thanks much,

                Stacy Privett .& Richard Urrutia

Arresting officer Abraham Luna -Sante Fe Division threats to arrest using color of law

  A few months before the arrest of Richard Urrutia, the Oklahoma City police swerved in front of us demanding hands put up.  They put me in a car after telling me that they just wanted to talk to him.. While I was sitting in the back of the car the officer said he would run my name real quick.    
   
  Those officers take some minutes, then soon surround me.  Basically saying there was somethin found in a bag after they moved us & they needed me to let them know if Richard had thrown it. 

   

   I couldn't say that I seen him throw it & it became threats that they would then have to charge both of us..  As one officer gets angry he then splurts out that they planned on taking him for possession regardless at one point when we spoke & really if I just said it was his then they would of let me go. But otherwise they would have to charge both of us for it.   

  Because of this story I also arrested on possession charges & I thought I would spend forever in jail,  or worse & go to prison.  I have a previous case that I signed for just to be let out of jail but nothing legal was done in first place. 

   If you look up my record then it shows the possessions probable cause hearing but it goes no further on this one. (3-20-2018). It shows on my OSCN for probable cause that next morning but nothing at all is shown on his record.

    ANYWAYS BACK TO THIS STORY.. .

   This time the crazy thing was that just as morning hit, about 8am, the jail personal came to release me. When we were exiting the pod she told me that they decided not to file charges on me. I was released but not him. He was held for 10 days like i should have been because its odd for them to pull you first thing in morning to release you because they decided not to file.   And how & why does a jail officer even have that info?

  Richard waited out his 10 days but once he was released he tells me that the jail officer who took him to arraignment actually told him, while they were standing there for arraignment, that they decided to let me go.. 
   
  Later on I had realized that basically they had tried to get me to set him up & would of used me saying it was his to have their proof. That's why they made me believe that I was going to have a case on me.  I believed them at that time & I was scared to death & crying as I went to jail. 

        NOW THINK ABOUT IT..... .

   Richard was not driving anything when officer pulled in the parkinglot at that corner shopping center. A friend of mine named Carrie was posted outside at gas pumps. She stated the officer pulled in & got out & walked straight in the store. Our other friend, Ashley, was posted behind Pico in line. The officer came in the store with the intentions to arrest Pico. Ashley stated that the officer 1st asked Pico if he driving the red truck & Pico stated No'.   As Pico began to walk away the officer said "Dont make me take you down", & Pico stopped. 

  The store clerk told me that the officer asked him if Pico had paid for that pump & what he used to pay. The store clerk stated to me that he answered the officer by saying that the defendant had not even got a chance to pay yet so he had not used nothing to pay for anything, so he did not know.

    The officer arrested Richard for stolen vehicle that parked in lot even though nobody seen him driving any vehicle anywhere. Of course at court they deopped that charge because of the facts & that meant they had no probable cause for his arrest. But after arresting him & searching him they found a bag of stuff in his pocket. They continue to charge him on it although technically with 'Illegal Search & Siezure' then they have no right to keep any charge

.

   I HAVE NOT BELIEVED IN OKLAHOMA COUNTY OFFICERS THIS ENTIRE TIME.  Or the courts too much!  

  -- But if you want to ask why they would target Richard as they do then I will tell you.. . .

   The reason they plot against him is because of something that happened when he was 18 & I know this because i have watched the police harass him once& right after Richard was first released.  They mentioned a case where an officer was shot & the name was 'Bearbow'.& I guess when Richard was 18 years old he was riding with another guy who had stole a car. The police chased them & the other guy opened fire on the officer. It killed him & I think the guys name was Bearbow. Richard got off on the charges because he was not the person shooting at anybody & the other guy did & went to prison. But when the cops first harrassed Richard one day they spoke of this.

    Also I know a man who was continually speaking to an officer from the Oklahoma city Sante Fe division on trying to get Richard arrested & the officer that came out to his place, I know, the officer also spoke both English & Spanish.  So, I figured that must be Officer Luna because the day of Richard's arrest, that officer aproached Richard & arrested him within a crowd of others because supposedly there was a parked stolen truck out at the gas pumps. The officer had no probable cause to arrest Richard because the officer had not seen Richard driving anything & by the questions asked to both 'Pico' & the store clerk at the registar, nothing said Richard had driven anything. Of course that charge of Unauthorized Use of Vehicle was dropped once the officer testified but the dope found during what makes an illegal arrest in the 1st place held. Richard should of never been searched & now the D.A comes at him with 15 years on that. The officer stated at arrest that he going to charge him with whatever he can & the biggest he can.

  ( The man who I speak about is Raul Vibillos-Jaurez but he changes his name alot, & he lived just a few houses down at 721 SE 48th OKC but not anymore.)

SINCE I BEEN IN OKLAHOMA CITY I HAVE SEEN TOO MUCH BAD POLITICS TO WATCH PEOPLE IN POLITICS BE SO JUDGEMENTAL.. . 

                      Stacy Privett

******************************

     WELL ACTUALLY, just because someone lives in a certain area they are treated like they are a criminals in Oklahoma City. They are somehow already labeled & therefore automatically treated so by our justice system here, & therefore my theory is that's how they become part of the justice system.

  "When you see somebody as a criminal & therefore automatically assume & prosecute them as one..,  then I guess they have no choice because the system makes them that through targeting & then prosecuting the innocent without real cause. 

( I am a felon because of this so don't tell me that it does not happen. I been there twice but only in OKC. And here is a 3rd time I thought for sure would send me to prison, but I am lucky it didn't. I thought again I was going to have a charge & I never seen myself going to prison in my life, or being a felon either, because I don't actually do anything bad like that).