IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Case No. ________________
JOSEPH S. GARWOOD,
Plaintiff,
vs.
CHIEF JUSTICE PEGGY QUINCE, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE CHARLES T. WELLS, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE HARRY LEE ANSTEAD, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE BARBARA J. PARIENTE, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE RICKY POLSTON, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE R. FRED LEWIS, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE CHARLES T. CANADY, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT,
JUSTICE RICKY POLSTON, FLORIDA SUPREME COURT.
Defendants.
CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 28 U.S.C. 1983
COMES NOW Plaintiff, Joseph Garwood, and files this Civil Rights Complaint under 28
U.S.C., Section 1983, for damages, and in support thereof states as follows:
1. Plaintiff, Joseph S. Garwood is a Florida resident and United States citizen
residing at 3232 Albert Drive, Tallahassee, Florida 32309.
2. Defendants, Justice Peggy Quince, Justice Charles T. Wells, Justice Harry L.
Anstead, Justice Barbara J. Pariente, Justice R. Fred Lewis, Justice Charles T. Canady,
Justice and Justice Ricky Polston, are employed by The Florida Supreme Court, 500
South Duval Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399.
3. Plaintiff filed a facially legitimate complaint against the license of Lorena
Vollrath-Bueno, Assistant State Attorney, and alleged that Ms. Bueno suborned perjury
and conspired to commit perjury in State of Florida v. Joseph Garwood. Specifically,
Ms. Bueno requested that the police officers testify that they saw Garwood in “rustling
bushes” because the act of hiding in bushes suggests guilt. In fact, Garwood was in a
large, blue above ground swimming pool. Ms. Bueno further requested that the police
officers testify that Garwood ran to the fence at the corner of the yard, cornered himself,
and then ripped boards out of the fence to create a hole in order to escape. In fact,
Garwood was attacked on his property by officers who failed to identify themselves as
officers of the law and instead stated, “There’s the hedge clippers! Get him!” Further,
Garwood knew the fence had a rotten fence post and easily pulled an edge away from the
corner to slip through, and no boards were removed from the fence. Lorena Bueno
further argued before the jury that Garwood, “Crawled through a hole in the fence like a
little dog,” when she knew perfectly well that this was a fabrication. However, she
wanted to make the trial as defamatory and humiliating to Garwood as she possibly
could.
4. Lorena Bueno, ASA, further requested that another witness, Paul Mekeel, an
innocent bystander, testify that he saw Garwood inside his house at 2038 Eastgate Way,
“in black underwear,” when she knew perfectly well that Garwood was in khaki shorts,
but with no shirt. Lorena Bueno, ASA, further requested that Paul Mekeel testify that
Garwood “ran into the street” even though she knew perfectly well that Garwood did not
run into the street, and in fact was tasered on the grass. That Garwood was tasered on the
grass of 2038 Eastgate Way was confirmed by the testimony of Karissa Smith and
confirmed by photographic evidence introduced by the prosecution at trial.
5. Plaintiff filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus in The Florida Supreme Court
arguing that The Florida Bar should be ordered to investigate and prosecute these facially
legitimate complaints; however, the Florida Supreme Court reasoned that the decision
whether to prosecute was similar to a State Attorney’s prosecutorial discretion to protect
the public, citing Tyson v. The Florida Bar, 826 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2002). Plaintiff filed a
second Petition for Writ of Mandamus in the Florida Supreme Court arguing that this
case was distinguishable from Tyson, because The Florida Bar refused to investigate the
complaint filed against ASA Lorena Bueno by interviewing Paul Mekeel, the innocent
by-stander that the police recruited to commit perjury in order to corroborate their
fictional version of events created to justify use of the taser. Mekeel was further
recruited prior to trial by ASA Bueno to commit perjury in order to further depict
Garwood as a “whacko” who was chasing Karissa Smith in the living room in black
underwear, was running into the street with the police in pursuit and was refusing orders
from the police to “get down,” all of which are incriminating fictions created by the
prosecutor. Paul Mekeel willingly perjured himself for the prosecution, probably because
he was assured by the State Attorney’s Office that he would not be prosecuted. Plaintiff
further argued in the Petition for Writ of Mandamus that Tyson acknowledged that an
exception to the Tyson rule might be created where there was an equal protection, and
that there was such an equal protection violation in this case. Specifically, The Florida
Bar has systematically refused to investigate any facially legitimate complaints filed by
Joseph Garwood against the licenses of government lawyers, including Owen Kohler,
Lorena Bueno, Willie Meggs, and William Miller. All of these complaints involve
government attorney misconduct that could easily be uncovered by a proper and thorough
investigation which The Florida Bar, for obvious reasons, refuses to conduct. By
refusing to investigate and prosecute the Plaintiffs facially legitimate complaints against
the licenses of the government lawyers named above, the Florida Supreme Court and The
Florida Bar have failed the public in their mission to protect the public from government
lawyer misconduct. By denying the issuance of Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of
Mandamus, The Justices of the Florida Supreme Court have violated Plaintiff’s right
under the Florida Constitution and United States Constitution to Equal Protection of the
Laws. In so doing, defendants, acting under color of state law, violated 28 U.S.C.,
section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act, and should be ordered to pay damages to Plaintiff.
6. By letter of July 25, 2008, William W. Wilhelm, Counsel to The Florida Bar,
dismissed Garwood’s complaint against the license of Lorena Vollrath-Bueno, ASA,
stating that, “The matters raised in the complaint have been raised before the trial court
and denied by Judge Dekker.” This is false. Garwood filed a Motion for New Trial in
which similar issues were raised, but obviously Judge Dekker, as an Article Nine Circuit
Court Judge under the Florida Constitution, does not have authority to investigate or
prosecute allegations of attorney misconduct, other than contempt of court. Judge
Dekker denied the Motion for New Trial, but the fundamental allegation of prosecutorial
misconduct remains uninvestigated by The Florida Bar, because the Bar categorically
refuses to investigate allegations of Florida governmental attorney misconduct.
7. William Wilhelm further wrote in his letter of July 25, 2008, that, “There is
insufficient evidence from the materials provided that the attorney violated the rules of
conduct adopted by the Florida Supreme Court.” This also is false. The Rules
Regulating the Florida Bar state that an attorney shall not place a witness on the stand
who the attorney knows will give false testimony. If Garwood’s allegations are true, and
they are true, Bueno not only placed a witness on the stand who she knew was going to
give false testimony, she suborned perjury and conspired to commit perjury with the
officers and witness Paul Mekeel. These are not only ethical violations warranting
attorney discipline, they are crimes in the State of Florida. Further, The Florida Bar
cannot conclude that there is insufficient evidence of an ethical violation when it refuses
to conduct a proper investigation of the alleged offense, such as interviewing Paul
Mekeel and the police officers involved.
8. Under color of state law, William Wilhelm violated Joseph Garwood’s
constitutional rights to due process of law and equal protection of the law, in violation of
28 U.S.C., section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act. The Florida Bar, through the actions of
William Wilhelm, has failed to provide equal protection of the law by steadfastly refusing
to investigate allegations of government lawyer misconduct. While it is understandable
that The Florida Bar, as a governmental agency, would want to protect its own fellow
government workers from discipline, it must investigate and prosecute such wrong doing
in order to provide all Floridians with equal protection of the law and with protection
from the horrible consequences of prosecutorial misconduct, which are well-illustrated in
the DNA exonerations made by the Innocence Project of Florida, Inc. The Florida Bar
has also violated Garwood’s right to equal protection of law in that it is discriminating
against him by zealously prosecuting a bar disciplinary case against him and refusing to
investigate his complaints of against government lawyers who took actions which are
unethical, illegal and immoral in order to wrongfully convict Garwood.
9. By failing to grant the Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Mandamus, and Order
The Florida Bar to conduct and proper and thorough investigation into the complaints of
attorney misconduct made by plaintiff, the Justices of the Supreme Court violated
Plaintiff’s constitutional right to Equal Protection of the Laws under the Florida
Constitution and the United States Constitution. In doing so, the Florida Supreme Court
Justices violated Plaintiffs civil rights under 28 U.S.C., section 1983, and should pay
damages to Plaintiff. William W. Wilhelm, The Florida Bar, the Florida Supreme Court,
the Florida Department of Law Enforcement and The Tallahassee Police Department,
Internal Affairs, have all shown a pattern of refusing to investigate or prosecute facially
sufficient complaints of police and/ or prosecutorial misconduct, which warrants the
placing of the State of Florida under a Federal mandate to reform the criminal justice
system.
10. Joseph S. Garwood filed a complaint against the license of Willie Meggs, in
which he alleged that State Attorney Willie Meggs violated the rules of the Florida Bar
by engaging in malicious prosecution of a case against Joseph Garwood in which there
was no probable cause, in violation of the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. Garwood
argued in his complaint that the alleged victim, Karissa Smith, had fully and completely
exonerated Joseph S. Garwood in 1) a telephone call to the office of the State Attorney, in
which she stated to Owen Kohler, by his own admission, that, “Nothing happened. How
can you prosecute when I say nothing happened?”; 2) in a letter to Garwood’s former
counsel, Alexander Dombrowsky, in which she admitted that she exaggerated the entire
argument, and that she had mental issues for which she was seeking counseling, and that
Joseph Garwood never once laid a finger on her or threatened her with hedge clippers;
and 3) in a sworn, pre-trial deposition in which she stated that everything in the police
report was false. In other words, Karissa Smith admitted under oath that she filed a false
criminal report against Garwood, which is a crime in the State of Florida, and the State
Attorney’s Office prosecuted the victim of this crime of false reporting, Joseph Garwood.
This also is an equal protection violation because the State Attorney’s Office discrimated
against Garwood on the basis of his sex (i.e., the man is always the bad guy and they
could use a woman’s false complaint as fodder for a malicious prosecution of a criminal
defense lawyer; that is, they can destroy “the enemy” with lies.) The State Attoney’s
Office also maliciously prosecuted John Eagan, another criminal defense attorney, but
those charges were dismissed. Based on Smith’s complete and total recantation of her
original criminal complaint, there was no probable cause to prosecute Garwood, but
Garwood was nonetheless maliciously prosecuted in violation of the rules regulating The
Florida Bar and Garwood’s constitutional rights to due process and equal protection of
the law.
11. The Florida Innocence Project of Florida has conducted DNA testing to
exonerate 13 Florida prisoners to date, including a man on death row. In those cases, one
of the contributing causes of wrongful conviction is often police or prosecutorial
misconduct. On December 5, 2007, the State of Florida provided a “show case” of
police and prosecutorial misconduct in order to wrongfully convict Garwood. The
alleged victim was forced to testify against her will, stating at trial that she did want to be
there, but was under a subpoena. Further, the alleged victim was forced to make a third
false incriminating story, because her true statements in her pre-trial deposition, if stated
at trial, would be the basis for her arrest for filing a false criminal report. The police,
prosecutor and an innocent bystander all engaged in a conspiracy to commit perjury and
committed multiple counts of perjury in order to wrongfully convict Garwood.
12. This case may be consolidated with Joseph S. Garwood v. Police Officer
Frederick Sapiera, Police Officer Joseph Azevedo, and Police Officer Steven Harriet,
which complaint is pending before this Court.
WHEREFORE the Plaintiff, Joseph Garwood, requests that this Honorable Court
Order the State of Florida to pay Plaintiff $1,010,000.00 in damages and place the State
of Florida under a Federal Mandate to reform the justice system and to investigate and
prosecute facially legitimate complaints of police and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________
Joseph S. Garwood, Esq.
3232 Albert Drive
Tallahassee, Florida 32309
(850) 894-9224
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Civil Rights Complaint was sent by US
Mail to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida, this _____
day of October, 2008.
___________________________
Joseph S. Garwood, Esq.