STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
COUNTY OF WAKE 12 CVS ______
GARY O. BARTLETT, Executive Director, NC Board of Elections
VERONICA DEGRAFFENREID, Elections Liaison, NC Board of Elections
CHERIE POUCHER, Director, Wake County Board of Elections
AIDA DOSS HAVEL, Chairman, Wake County Election Board
EUGENE A. CONTI JR., NC Secretary of Transportation
MIKE ROBERTSON, Commissioner of Motor Vehicles
The plaintiff, complaining of the defendant, alleges and says:
2. That the defendant is a citizen and resident of Mitchell County, North Carolina; and citizenship and residency at the time of the matters herein below alleged was the same as herein above stated.
3. That on the 29th day of May, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel presided over a regularly scheduled Board of Election meeting, where Plaintiff was in attendance.
4. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel, publicly demeaned and chastised the plaintiff for filing the registration challenges in accordance with NCGS § 163-85 and instead suggested that “a quiet phone call” would have been just as effective.
5. That on the 30th day of May, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel posted comments on the Plaintiff’s “Blog” page, repeating the gist of her lecture at the hearing by writing, “…if you identify a problem, or what you perceive to be as problem, come to us and tell us about it as an adult. There is no need for covert, “gotcha” type of tactics.”
6. That on the 26th day of June, 2012, at 2:00 p.m., the plaintiff represented himself at a hearing over the status of approximately 553 voter registration challenges.
7. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel presided as Chief Judge for the three-judge panel.
8. As evidenced by her public comments, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel acted in violation of 28 U.S.C. § 455 (a) “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Her actions also were in violation of North Carolina Code of Judicial Conduct Canon 3A(6) “A judge should abstain from public comment about the merits of a pending proceeding in any state or federal court dealing with a case or controversy arising in North Carolina or addressing North Carolina law….”
9. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Veronica Degraffenreid, testified that her Agency relied on citizenship determinations made by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV).
10. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Veronica Degraffenreid proved to be an incompetent witness, as required in NCGS § 8‑50 when she was unable to answer Plaintiff questions regarding the process or underlying assumptions of the DMV citizenship determinations.
11. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Veronica Degraffenreid proved to be an incompetent witness, as required in NCGS § 8‑50 when she was unable to explain how the DMV handled the citizenship determination of drivers licensed before North Carolina initiated the “Legal Presence” identifier for non-citizen drivers.
12. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel, while presiding as Chief Judge for the three-judge panel, erroneously accepted the incompetent testimony of Defendant, Veronical Degraffenreid as sole citizenship evidence to refute the testimony of the Wake County Clerk of Courts whose determination of non-US citizen status for the 510 registered voters triggered the challenges.
13. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel, erroneously established a burden of proof far above the “probable cause” level, as specified in § 163-85(d).
14. That at the time and place set out above, Defendant, Aida Doss Havel, erroneously dismissed the plaintiff’s challenge of 510 registered voters who had convinced an officer of Wake County Court that they were not US citizens within the past four years.
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff respectfully prays unto the court as follows:
1. That plaintiff be granted an appeal hearing that will allow a cross examination of the evidence not provided in the initial hearing pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 163-90.2. (d).
2. That prior to requested hearing, plaintiff be allowed access to the actual date of birth belonging to each of the 510 erroneously dismissed non-citizen voters pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 163-82.10B.(3).
3. That in a reasonable time prior to requested hearing, plaintiff be allowed access to any and all written communication between any listed defendants, Wake County Board of Elections, NC Board of Election and the NC DMV pertaining to the May 29th and June 26th hearings regarding plaintiff’s challenge of non-citizen Wake County voters who were registered to vote.
4. That in a reasonable time prior to requested hearing, plaintiff be allowed access to any evidence the NCDMV used for the determination of the challenged voters’ citizenship status.
5. That in a reasonable time prior to requested hearing, plaintiff be allowed to perform a name-by-name evaluation of the 510 erroneously dismissed non-citizen voters to confirm the legality of their registering and/or voting prior to the date they may have been granted US citizenship.
Respectfully submitted this the 6th day of July, 2012.
Jay N. DeLancy
506 Compton Rd.
Raleigh, NC 27609
Telephone: (919) 332-4129