Free Miscellaneous Document - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

December 5, 2006
Neil Rusty Bond
4132 E. Alan Lane
Phoenix, AZ 85028
Honorable Judge David G. Campbell
United States District Judge
401 W. Washington Street
6th Floor
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Re: Case No. CR 03-0974-PI-1X—DGC
Dear Judge Campbell:
I spoke to Beth Stephenson in the Transcript Department of the Federal Courthouse again
today regarding transcripts needed for my Appeal. One of the transcripts (of several),
dated, February 24, 2005, I need to order is from the Pre-Trial of which Judge Roslyn
Silver denied the EXPARIE MOTION FOR FUNDS FOR A CERTIFIED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTANT (FILED UNDER SEAL), was never ordered by the U.S. Appointed
Defense Attorney, the U.S. Appointed Appeal Attomey or the U.S. Prosecution.
As a result, the cost for the transcript requires a deposit of $242.00. U.S. Appointed
y Appeal Attorney Anders Rosenquist did not attach this transcript, among others that are
l “under seai” and "public record", which are pertinent and applicable to the Opening Brief
(as the February 24, 2005 transcript), and others, as well as copies of documents, etc.
I which are pertinent and applicable but were never ordered.
Again, as I have expressed in previous letters to you, U.S. Appointed Appeal Attorney
Anders Rosenquist did not and has not involved me in the Appeal of my case as he
committed in person, by telephone and through letters. In addition, U.S. Appointed
Appeal Attorney Anders Rosenquist will not answer any of my telephone calls made to
him, or letters I have sent to him, since before the Opening Brief was due. __ _
Also, U.S. Appointed Appeal Attorney Anders Rosenquist still does not respond to my
requests I have made in person, with receipt signatures Hom the receptionists who work
at his Phoenix office. I have been told more than once that he is rarely at his Phoenix
office. He does not have a personal secretary available to talk to. The only person I can
talk to is the receptionist on duty who is employed by numerous independent Attomeys
who have office space there.
In addition, U.S. Appointed Appeal Attorney Anders Rosenquist has not included in the
Opening Brief; many pertinent facts and law, or attached many pertinent transcripts and
document copies, including the above mentioned transcript, pertinent and applicable to
my Appeal.
Case 2:03-cr-00974-DGC Document 238 Filed 12/22/2006 Page 1 of 2

I realize an Appeal Attorney has a different level of knowledge than me, and based on
that knowledge, could certainly have a different opinion of what is allowed, compared to
what is not allowed.
However I’m certain that the components which are legally allowed, applicable and
pertinent should be included. In other words, the components that are not allowed should
not be included. But, if twenty, fifty or ninety percent of what is allowed, applicable and
pertinent is missing in the Opening Brief; the Appeal is not complete and not being
presented to the Court of Appeals - 9th District in its entirety and not fully representing
all aspects of fact and law and certainly not in the best interest of the Appeal.
And furthermore, if twenty, fiity or ninety percent of what is allowed and applicable is
missing in the Opening Brief the Appeal is not complete and not presented to the Court
of Appeals - 9th District in its entirety proving all aspects of fact and law in the best
interest of the Appeal, then the Appeal has certainly not been tiled in its entirety proving
all aspects of fact and law in the best interest of the Appeal.
Due to the revocation of my Life and Health Insurance license, I can not afford the
expense ofthe February 24, 2005 transcript, as well as others needed to file an Opening
Brief Supplement in its entirety proving all aspects of fact and law in the best interest of
the Appeal.
Since I can not be represented by a U.S. Appointed Appeal Attorney who will file an
Opening Brief or an Opening Brief Supplement in their entirety proving all aspects of
fact and law, it is not in the best interest of the Appeal.
I ask you to grant me the funds necessary to obtain the February 24, 2005 transcript and
other document copies, transcripts, etc., needed to file an Opening Brief Supplement in
its entirety proving all aspects of fact and law in the best interest of the Appeal.
Thank you for your expedited attention and response.
. A Sincerely,
Neil R. Bond
Case 2:03-cr-00974-DGC Document 238 Filed 12/22/2006 Page 2 of 2

Case 2:03-cr-00974-DGC

Document 238

Filed 12/22/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:03-cr-00974-DGC

Document 238

Filed 12/22/2006

Page 2 of 2