This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
DivineSalazar,
Petitioner.
v.
TheNamesCool08, Trooper in the Ridgeway
State Police, in their official capacity,
Respondent
Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus
PETITION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
DivineSalazar, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby petitions this Court for a writ
of habeas corpus per 1 R. Stat. § 2210-2212 and alleges as follows:
PARTIES
1. Petitioner, DivineSalazar is a Resident within the State of Ridgeway.
2. Respondent, TheNamesCool08, is a citizen of the State of Ridgeway. Respondent is
being sued in their official capacity as a Trooper of the Ridgeway State Police.
ALLEGATIONS
3. On the 21st of May, 2024, the Petitioner DivineSalazar was cited by the Respondent,
TheNamesCool08.
4. The charge alleged upon the Petitioner was Ridgeway State Vehicle Code §7.08 Driving
Wrong Way”, contrary to Title Seven, Section Eight of the Ridgeway State Vehicle Code.
5. The charge makes it illegal to commit an “act of operating a motor vehicle and driving
the opposite way which traffic is directed to follow.”
6. The Petitioner was cited for allegedly “...cut across 3 lanes of traffic to attempt to block a
RCU [Ridgeway Credit Union] truck and left his vehicle on the sidewalk; SGC’. See
Exhibit A.
7. Despite the absence of probable cause to suggest that the Petitioner was ever in violation
of the charge alleged, the Respondent cited them and thus imposed an invalid charge
upon them.
- 1 -
This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
8. At or around 3:29 pm (GMT+12), Petitioner was driving their vehicle within the city
limits of Sterling. They made a legal U-turn near Sterling Gun Club before a Ridgeway
Credit Union truck passed behind them.
9. The Petitioner allowed the truck to drive past, making way for them.
10. The Petition then parked their vehicle just near the gap between the Sterling Gym and the
Sterling Gun Club, when they were approached by Trooper and Respondent
TheNamesCool08.
11. Respondent drove their vehicle in front of the Petitioner out of nowhere and attempted to
block the Petitioner, who did not attempt to flee or resist.
12. Respondent proceeded to eject Petitioner from their vehicle and detained them without
any verbal or emergency indication.
13. The Petitioner was placed in the patrol car of the Respondent and informed that they were
driving on the wrong side of the road, claiming that they had “seen” them (the Petitioner),
and had received 2 reports from Ridgeway Credit Union employees of their harassment
of them. See Exhibit B.
14. Another player walked up to the scene and claimed that the Petitioner “was harassing
me… …when I was driving”.
15. The Respondent proceeded to cite the Petitioner for R. Vehicle Code §7.08 “Driving
Wrong Way”.
16. In doing so the Respondent imposed unlawful detainment and monetary fine upon the
Petitioner without probable cause to do so.
17. Despite being a citation instead of an arrest, the State of Ridgway lacks a proper channel
to address grievances related to the false imposition of fines. The 14th Amendment to the
United States Constitution says that "...nor shall any State deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
18. As seen in Exhibit B, the Petitioner was forced to pay the unlawful fine, thus constituting
a violation of their rights as they were unnecessarily deprived of their property under
penalty of imprisonment for R. Crim Code §2.06 “Failure to Pay Fines”, which imposes a
sentence of fifteen (15) minutes upon the elapse of one (1) hour after the issuance of a
citation without it being paid, when issued through a law enforcement officer.
- 2 -
This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
JURISDICTION
19. This court is entitled to “exercise original jurisdiction for all civil and criminal cases or
controversies.” See Rid. Const. Art. V Sec. IV. This Court, by the same section, is also
entitled to grant writs of habeas corpus.
ARGUMENT
20. “In assessing petitions for writs of habeas corpus concerning arrests, the first question to
be asked is whether the police were legally entitled to make that arrest — that is, the
police either had a judicial warrant ordering an arrest, or the police had probable cause
that a crime was committed. If the arrest was not lawful to begin with, the inquiry ends
there; the record must be removed. If not, the next and final question is whether the
petitioner was actually innocent of the charge or charges for which they were arrested.
Indeed, an arrest can be lawful when the subject of the arrest is actually innocent at the
same time. A petitioner who demonstrates actual innocence by establishing facts that
make the prospect of a hypothetical conviction on the charges virtually impossible. The
standard is such that a reasonable and well-informed jury could not convict the petitioner
in a hypothetical trial if they were aware of those facts, and those facts were admissible
evidence.” See In re Zachcasisbeast, No. RSC-CV-367, slip op., at 1 (Super. May 21,
2022) (frostbleed, J.)
21. Indeed, the Respondent did not have probable cause that a crime was committed. Not
only did the officer lie about holding firsthand visual evidence of the Petitioner’s alleged
offense, but, as seen in Exhibit A, they cited “reports” (without evidence) from two
Ridgeway Credit Union employees when making the citation. The Respondent lacked
probable cause to cite and thus deprive the Petitioner of their property through a fine,
under penalty of arrest (R. Crim Code §2.06 “Failure to Pay Fines).
22. Probable cause to arrest or cite an individual exists when the facts and circumstances
within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person in believing that
the suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense. This
principle is well established in federal case law. See Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S.
160, 175-176 (1949). The Supreme Court stated that probable cause deals with
- 3 -
This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
probabilities and depends on the totality of circumstances. In Brinegar v. United States,
the Supreme Court emphasized that probable cause is a practical, non-technical concept
that requires assessing the totality of circumstances. This means that officers must
consider all relevant facts and not rely on isolated pieces of evidence. The Court
acknowledged that while probable cause does not demand certainty, it requires a
reasonable basis for believing that a crime has been or is being committed. Therefore, the
determination of probable cause must be grounded in factual context and common sense
rather than mere suspicion or conjecture. Here, the Respondent lacked specific,
articulable facts to believe that the Petitioner was driving the wrong way. The Petitioner
had made a legal U-turn and parked their vehicle, which does not constitute driving the
wrong way under Ridgeway State Vehicle Code §7.08. Additionally, the Respondent’s
reliance on reports from Ridgeway Credit Union employees about the Petitioner’s alleged
“harassment” is wholly insufficient to meet this standard.
23. The Petitioner's due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment were violated when
they were fined and automatically threatened with imprisonment without adequate legal
recourse until they paid the unjust fine.
24. The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that no state shall "deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law." “... the identification of the specific
dictates of due process generally requires consideration of three distinct factors: First, the
private interest that will be affected by the official action; second, the risk of an erroneous
deprivation of such interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any,
of additional or substitute procedural safeguards; and finally, the Government's interest,
including the function involved and the fiscal and administrative burdens that the
additional or substitute procedural requirement would entail.” See Mathews v. Eldridge,
424 U.S. 319, 335 (1976). In this case, the Ridgeway legal system does not provide an
adequate channel to contest fines issued by law enforcement officers. Indeed, the
injurious results that stem from a lack of proper ability to contest a citation consist of a
disproportionate violation of the first factor The Petitioner was forced to pay the fine
under threat of imprisonment without a proper hearing or opportunity to challenge the
citation in a meaningful way, constituting a clear violation of procedural due process. A
procedure to officially remedy such instances would not be excessively injurious to the
- 4 -
This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
administrative organs of the state as almost all citations issued are indeed valid. However,
for the times when they are invalid, much like arrests, given that both have the same
standards of evidence applied to them, they must both be treated as one and the same
when discussing potential false allegations and resultant penalties imposed.
25. The Supreme Court held that due process requires an evidentiary hearing before the
termination of welfare benefits. By analogy, the Ridgeway legal system's failure to
provide a hearing mechanism for contesting fines is similarly deficient. The Petitioner
was deprived of property by way of the fine and liberty through R. Crim Code §2.06
“Failure to Pay Fines” without remedy, which is once again a clear violation of the
Petitioner’s rights as a citizen. See In Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970).
26. The imposition of fines and the threat of imprisonment without a meaningful opportunity
to contest the charge also violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth
Amendment.
27. The State of Ridgeway’s legal system, by not providing adequate recourse to challenge
citations, creates an irrational and disparate treatment of individuals fined by law
enforcement officers as opposed to other forms of legal grievances where a hearing or
trial is available. The Equal Protection Clause protects individuals from “irrational and
arbitrary” treatment. See Village of Willowbrook v. Olech, 528 U.S. 562, 564 (2000)
28. In treating individuals subject to traffic fines differently from those subject to other legal
penalties without a rational basis but with the same penalty of a monetary fine, the legal
system violates the Equal Protection Clause. Petitioner DivineSalazar was denied equal
protection under the law, as they were subjected to a fine under threat of imprisonment
without remedy, which is afforded to instances of arrest, even for those of lesser severity.
29. The lack of probable cause and the issuance of a false fine without remedy under penalty
of imprisonment constituted a violation of the 14th Amendment. Thus, this Petition for a
Writ of Habeus Corpus should be granted and appropriate remedy under 1 R. Stat. § 2212
should be granted.
- 5 -
This is a document filed in a mock court in the State of Ridgeway on Roblox.com, and does not constitute
real-life legal advice in any way, shape, or form.
REMEDY
WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Court–
30. Award per 1 R. Stat. § 2212 expungement of the Petitioner’s criminal record dated May
21st, 2024 at 3:29 PM (GMT+12) for R. Vehicle Code §7.08 “Driving Wrong Way” by
Trooper and Respondent TheNamesCool08;
31. Award compensatory damages of $650 Ridgeway Dollars lost to their false citation;
32. Award declaratory relief that probable cause did not exist for the citation;
33. Award such other, further, or different relief as may be just and proper
EXHIBITS A-C ENCLOSED
A. EXHIBIT A -
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1220251587759439913/1242687429668769803/i
mage.png?ex=664ebe5b&is=664d6cdb&hm=db7b40b1463ecce520960493812850d4072
453c664d5926533cfe2e821f1d8f5&
B. EXHIBIT B -
https://gyazo.com/59c3f52bc1c07f270f96e0ecca5228a3
C. EXHIBIT C -
https://medal.tv/games/roblox/clips/2eAc3qyUSZOVlX/d1337f22Bpux?invite=cr-MSxk
ZjcsMTY2MjEzNzYs
DATED: MAY 21ST, 2024 PUBLIC DEFENDER’S OFFICE
/s/—————————————————————————————————————————————
ItzARandomBoi
Ridgeway Bar No. 17118
Counsel of Record
Discord: itzar2020
- 6 -
