Hookah: WY Hip Hop Hippie Page 1

By Jonathan On Jul 5, 2017

Jeffrey Doles said the prosecutors were not returning the merchandise from his store because they were angry about losing the case.

Read Newest Updates:? WY Hip Hop Hippie Page 2

Update from Jeffrey W. Doles
September 24, 2006

I Need Help and assistance in getting the public eye on the Mafioso style of Justice going on here in Gillette Wyoming. I want the national media to investigate the prosecutorial misconduct in this case. I’m not looking for sympathy, I represent a minority of Humans that believe This Government is sacrificing our freedom for the sake of itself!

We need charitable contributions, so that we can afford legal fee’s while we under go this stage in the proceedings. If you feel like we’re doing a good job representing you in this matter, then please get behind us and show your support. Use your voice to free your yourself from the controll our government is trying to get on us. Free your mind, the rest will fallow!

Jeffrey W. Doles President/Hip Hop Hippies Inc.

610 Butler Spaeth #A Gillette, Wyoming. 82716

307-682-3637 hiphophippiesinc@vcn.com

—– Original Message —–

To: hiphophippiesinc@vcn.com

Sent: Friday, September 22, 2006 4:23 PM

Subject: The article from the Gillette News Record

Judge: Pipes, bongs can be destroyed

A District Court judge ruled Thursday that pipes and bongs from a local head shop are predominantly used with illegal substance and that the items must be destroyed.

The ruling came after a hearing to determine whether prosecutors had to return more than 300 items of evidence from a Circuit Court case in which Hip Hop Hippie owner Jeffrey Doles was acquitted.

Police seized 183 items, including pipes and bongs, from Jeffrey Doles’ Hip Hop Hippie store in August 2005. Police seized 143 more items when Doles reopened his store a few days later. They arrested him on suspicion of distributing drug paraphernalia and on two counts of possession with intent to deliver drug paraphernalia.

A jury acquitted Doles of the criminal charges in a January Circuit Court case, but prosecutors refused to return items that police had confiscated.

Defense Attorney Nick Carter, Doles’ lawyer, asked for the products back in February, and the case was scheduled for a forfeiture hearing, which is a civil proceeding in District Court.

Doles contended in both cases that the pipes and bongs he sold were intended for use with legal, herbal smoking products. Under Carter’s questioning, he described products, such as Merlin’s Blend, that he said do better with the glass and water pipes that prosecutors said were intended for marijuana.

“These herbs are just starting to come around, a little fad as an alternative to marijuana,” Doles explained.

Carter said that just because other people choose to use products like Doles’ for marijuana does not mean that’s how he intends the item to be used.

“What they are saying is, ‘We can’t go shut down Medicap Pharmacy or Walgreen’s because they sell syringes, but we can shut down this place because, well, (these products) kind of have a hippy look to them,” he said.

However, five prosecutors, a probation officer and a Des Moines, Iowa, Drug Enforcement Agency agent all testified that they regularly found products like Doles’ during drug busts.

Division of Criminal Investigation Agent Matt Waldock also described finding Hip Hop Hippies business cards during a raid where Doles’ mother lives that turned up five pounds of marijuana.

Virginia Peterson, Doles’ mother, is scheduled for a preliminary hearing Oct. 13 in Circuit Court on charges of manufacturing or delivering marijuana.

District Court Judge Michael “Nick” Deegan announced his decision just after the closing arguments. However, he acknowledged room for different interpretations of the law and anticipated an appeal to the state Supreme Court.

“If it’s appealed, if the Supreme Court looks at this otherwise, then that’s what they need to do,” Deegan said.

Deegan looked to federal law and a U.S. Supreme Court decision for help interpreting the Wyoming law. These, he said, look at what an item is “primarily intended for” to determine if something is drug paraphernalia.

“When a person sees light bulbs stacked up at Wal-Mart, that is not the first thing that comes to your mind, that a meth user is going to be buying that,” Deegan said. “Unfortunately, the same in my view cannot be said for the 330 items in this forfeiture proceeding. … The evidence is compelling that the likely use of these products is for illicit purposes.”

Prosecutors will not be allowed to destroy the items until Doles has exhausted his appeals.

– By JAMES WARDEN, News-Record Writer

The State of Wyoming has it’s own tail in it’s mouth, and it’s trying to swallow.

This Judge slapped the face of the jurors in my criminal trial. The Jury found me not guilty of possession of drug paraphernalia, and the pipes that Deegan says are drug paraphernalia, are the same pipes, that, I was in possession of, when the Jury determined that they were not Drug Paraphernalia.

I passed the highest standard of proof, which is beyond the reasonable doubt of a jury of my piers, and then was forced into defending myself in a trial with the much lower standard of a preponderance of the evidence. It’s Double Jeopardy

Dated a couple of weeks before the Civil Trial

Dear, Members of the Media and You!

I’m sending you this email, in an attempt to enlighten you about what is going on with Jeffrey W. Doles in Gillette, Wyoming. I’m not trying to tell you a sad story nor is it your sympathy that I’m trying to acquire. This is simply the truth, about how a local, “Mafioso style government,” is using its position of authority to harass and discriminate against someone it does not like!

Jeffrey owns a lifestyle store, called Hip Hop Hippies Inc. In Gillette, Wyoming. He opened this store as a sole proprietor, selling smoking accessories in June of 05.

Authorities confiscated his inventory, in its entirety, after an Assistant County Attorney, with a grudge against Jeffrey, interpreted it as being illegal. Ironically, Jeffrey was informed that, even though he was in violation of drug paraphernalia statutes, he wasn’t going to be charged with the crime as long as he didn’t re-open his store.

Jeffrey objected, and said that if they didn’t want to return his property that they needed to file criminal charges against him, and let a jury decide rather or not he was in violation of the Wyoming State Statute.

When authorities refused to return his property, Jeffrey, acting on the advice of his attorney‘s, re-stocked his shelves, re-opened his store, and invited the Assistant County Attorney to come down and arrest him, if he didn’t like it!

Ultimately, Jeffrey was taken to jail, and charged with one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, with intent to deliver.

The jury did not agree with the Assistant County Attorney, and acquitted Jeffrey on all charges. Hip Hop Hippies Incorporated into the State of Wyoming, as a retail store that primarily sells smoking accessories, and has been open since.

The concern here doesn’t revolve around rather or not Jeffrey was in violation of the law. A jury of his piers already determined that he wasn’t. This letter is being written in an attempt to shed some light on the prosecutorial misconduct. I want to expose a little bit of the truth about selective prosecution.

The story begins with the search warrant being illegally obtained in the first place. I say that, because the warrant itself derives from a conflict of interest between Jeffrey W. Doles, and William Edelman.

William Edelman, is the local Assistant County Attorney, but before he reached that position of authority, he was a public defender, and he represented Jeffrey in 1998. Hence, a conflict of interest does exist. It becomes amplified, when you take into consideration, the fact that Jeffrey filed a motion to have him removed from that case for ineffective assistance of council.

The search warrant was obtained under the direct supervision of Bill Edelman, and in accordance with the law concerning Conflict of Interest; that’s a violation of Jeffrey;s Constitutional right’s.

Bill Edelman is not allowed to participate in the prosecution of his former client, and according to the Police report, a member of the Gillette Police Department walked into Bill Edelmans office, and described the pipes being sold at Hip Hop Hippies, by Jeffrey W. Doles. Based on that “verbal Description,“ (Bill) “Edelman informed us that it was his interpretation of the laws that the items being sold at Hip Hop Hippies were in fact drug paraphernalia.”

The Police Report goes on to say that “with the assistance of Bill Edelman, a search warrant for the Hip Hop Hippies was drafted.”

According to the law, A situation in witch a person has a duty to more than one person or organization, (in this situation, Bill Edelman has a duty to Jeffrey) but cannot do justice to the actual or potentially adverse interests of both parties. (Bill Edelman is provided with a wonderful opportunity to attack Jeffrey, as if he was his adversary, and he’s not allowed, BY LAW, to do that!) This includes when an individual’s personal interests or concerns are inconsistent with the best for a customer, (Jeffrey was a customer of Bill Edelman’s, when Jeffrey was his customer at the public defenders office) or when a public official’s personal interests are contrary to his/her loyalty to public business. (Bill Edelman has a loyalty to Jeffrey, which he swore to, and it’s a violation of Jeffrey’s civil rights Jeffrey had him fired from a criminal case for ineffective assistance of council in 1998. And then Jeffrey had James Castberd an attorney out of Sheridan, Wyoming take his case all of the way through the Wyoming court system on Writ of Habeas Corpus petitions, claiming that he wasn’t guilty, and that Bill Edelman’s poor representation was directly responsible for his wrongful conviction! ) An attorney, an accountant, a business adviser or realtor cannot represent two parties in a dispute and must avoid even the appearance of conflict. (Looks just like a conflict, doesn’t it? The point being, that we shouldn‘t even be here because the law requires him to avoid even the appearance of a conflict. It isn‘t open for discussion, Jeffrey‘s civil rights have been violated, and he believes the government is trying to cover it up. He knows the truth; he has it documented both on film and in writing. ) He/she may not join with a client in business without making full disclosure of his/her potential conflicts, he/she must avoid commingling funds with the client, and never, never take a position adverse to the customer. (Not just never, but “never, never take a position adverse to the customer.”)

It’s clear that a violation of my constitutional rights have occurred. It is our mission here at Hip Hop Hippies Incorporated, to point a generation of young minds in the direction of the truth, and encourage them to believe that our creator didn’t make mistakes. (Read Genesis 1; 29 and 1st Timothy 4) and this is the truth that we’re talking about!

We are looking for help in preserving our rights, as members of the body of Christ, to live our lives free from discrimination for being peace seeking individuals. There are a large number of people in the land of the free, that think the government is trying to govern way too much of our civil liberties. And if you get this and are one of the large number, then don’t miss your opportunity to let yourself be heard right now!

Doles vs. The State of Wyoming, is before the Wyoming Supreme Court on a Writ of review, by and through his Attorney Nicholas Carter, At Carter Law Offices in Gillette Wyoming.

The rest of this story belongs to him!

Any questions?

Hiphophippiesinc@vcn.com

www.hiphophippiesinc.com

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF WYOMING

IN REGARD TO THE PROPERTY IN THE CUSTODY OF THE GILLETTE

POLICE DEPARTMENT; NAMELY, 330 PIECES OF DRUG No. ______________

PARAPHERNALIA (JEFFERY WAYNE DOLES, D/B/A HIP HOP HIPPIES)

PETITION FOR WRIT OF REVIEW

COMES NOW the Petitioner, Jeffery Wayne Doles, by and through his attorney, Nicholas H. Carter, and petitions the Court to review the Order Denying Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss entered July 31, 2006 (Attached hereto as Exhibit A). Upon an oral motion to dismiss the State of Wyoming’s forfeiture action by defense counsel in open court on June 8, 2006, the Honorable Michael N. Deegan requested briefs of both parties. After review of the briefs, Judge Deegan entered his order denying defendant’s motion.

As grounds for his petition, Petitioner states as follows pursuant to Rule 13 of the Wyoming Rules of Appellate Procedure, as amended.

(A) Nature of review desired and relief sought.

Petitioner ultimately seeks review of the lower court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the forfeiture proceeding which was initiated by the State of Wyoming on April 27, 2006 through a Petition for Order to Show Cause (Attached hereto as Exhibit B).

(B) Facts necessary to an understanding of the controlling questions of law determined by the lower court.

On August 10, 2005, a Search and Seizure Warrant was executed on Mr. Dole’s business known as Hip Hop Hippies to seize: “certain evidence of a crime, namely; scales, U.S. currency, pipes, water bongs, writings, rolling papers, other drug related paraphernalia, and other items used in the furtherance of controlled substance usage, in violation of

Wyoming Statute ?35-7-1056.” (Emphasis added). On August 12, 2005, Mr. Doles was arrested and other items of alleged drug paraphernalia were seized from his business. On January 11, 2006, Mr. Doles was tried in the Campbell County Circuit Court on the following charges: Delivery of Drug Paraphernalia, in violation of W.S.?35-7-1056 and two counts of Possession With Intent to Deliver Drug Paraphernalia, in violation of W.S.? 35-7-1056. These charges stemmed from the evidence seized on both August 10 and August 12. Mr. Dole’s theory of defense was exclusively limited to the proposition that the 330 items seized by law enforcement were not drug paraphernalia. A recording of the trial was provided to the court at the hearing held on June 8, 2006 and marked as “Defendant’s Exhibit A.” After the close of all evidence, an instruction packet was provided to the jury.

Jury Instruction No. 10 contained the elements of the crime of Delivery of Drug Paraphernalia. Element four required the jury to find that Mr. Doles delivered drug paraphernalia to another person. Jury Instruction No. 11 contained the elements of the crime of Possession With Intent to Deliver Drug Paraphernalia. Element four required the jury to find that Mr. Doles possessed drug paraphernalia with intent to deliver the paraphernalia to another person. Jury Instruction No. 12 iterated the elements of Possession With Intent to Deliver Drug Paraphernalia. Finally, Jury Instruction No. 14 contained the statutory definition of “drug paraphernalia” found at W.S.? 35-7-1002(a)(xxvii). The instruction packet was also submitted by counsel at the hearing on June 8, 2006, and marked as “Defendant’s Exhibit B.” The jury acquitted Mr. Doles on all three counts. Subsequently, the State of Wyoming initiated a forfeiture proceeding of the 330 items seized from Mr. Doles under the authority of W.S.? 35-7-1049.

(1) Whether the issue decided by the prior proceeding is identical to the present issue;

(2) Whether the prior proceeding resulted in a judgment on the merits;

(3) Whether the party against whom collateral estoppel is being asserted was a party or in privity with a party to the prior proceeding; and

(4) Whether the party against whom collateral estoppel is being asserted had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue in the prior proceeding. U.S. WEST Communications, Inc. V. The Wyoming Public Service Commission, 907 P.2d 343 (Wyo. 1995).

(D) Principles of law upon which petitioner relies, with citation of authority.

Proceedings for the forfeiture of property which was allegedly the subject matter of or used in a criminal transaction giving rise to a right of forfeiture have in a number of cases been held barred as against a claimant who showed that, in a previous criminal prosecution, he was acquitted of the same criminal acts relied upon to justify the forfeiture.

The most notable of these cases is Coffey v. United States, 116 U.S. 436(1886). In Coffey, the defendant was charged with removing and concealing distilled spirits with the intent to defraud the government. The defendant was acquitted, yet the government attempted to forfeit the spirits and distilling equipment. The court found that the same issues and parties were involved and held that the acquittal in the criminal case barred the forfeiture proceeding.

Conceding that the proceeding for forfeiture must be a civil action in rem, while a criminal proceeding must be brought to enforce the fine and imprisonment, the court said that nevertheless where the issue raised or the existence of the act or fact denounced had been tried in a criminal proceeding instituted by the United States, the judgment of acquittal was conclusive. Noting the contention by the government that the acquittal in the criminal case might have occurred because the government failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that on the same evidence a verdict for the United States in the civil action might be justified by the preponderance of proof, the court said nevertheless the criminal proceeding facts were the same as the facts of the subsequent civil proceeding did not exist and that this issue could not be again litigated between the parties in the subsequent forfeiture action.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has recognized the vitality of Coffey. Specifically, in U.S. v. One 1956 Ford Fairlane Tudor Sedan, Motor No. M6ET100140, 272 F.2d 704 (10th Cir. 1959), the defendant was prosecuted for the transportation of sugar intended for use in the unlawful manufacture of distilled spirits which resulted in a verdict of not guilty. Notwithstanding the verdict, forfeiture proceedings were undertaken against the vehicle and the sugar. The court, applying the Coffey case, held that the acquittal in the criminal case barred forfeiture action.

Another 10th Circuit case of interest is Lowther v. U.S., 480 F.2d 1031, (10th Cir. 1973) The court held acquittal on charges of possession of firearms was a bar to forfeiture where firearms were not illegal per se. The court again recognized the vitality of Coffey stating that acquittal in the criminal case allows the defendant to assert this judgment as a defense in forfeiture proceedings. The 10th Circuit has even gone so far as to recognize that a deferred prosecution is at least arguably equated with acquittal in legal effect for purpose of preventing forfeiture. Bramble v. Kleindienst, 357 F.Supp. 1025 (D. Colo. 1973).

In United States v. One De Soto Sedan, 85 F.Supp. 245 (1949, DC NC) aff’d (CA4th) 180 F.2d 583, the defendant was tried for possession of distilled spirits in which he was acquitted. Subsequently, a libel was filed under the statute against removal, deposit and concealment. The court acknowledged that possession was an essential element of the crime charged, and that the claimant could not have been guilty of removing, depositing, and concealing the liquor without having been in possession thereof, and that the jury had decided in the criminal case that he had no possession. Therefore, collateral estoppel applied.

In U.S. v. 86.9 Cases, More or Less of Assorted Distilled Spirits, Wine and Beer, 337 F.Supp. 1355 (U.S. Dist. Fla.1971), the defendant was charged with willfully failing to pay tax on several cases of liquor. The defendant was acquitted and three days after the Judgment of Acquittal was signed, the government sought forfeiture of the liquor under a different provision of the law which made it unlawful to possess any property intended for use in violating the provisions of the internal revenue laws. The court acknowledged that Coffey has never been overruled, has continued vitality as a precedent and that the Judgment of Acquittal operated as a bar to the forfeiture action.

In State v. $200,490.00 in U.S. Currency, 39 P.3d 160 (Okla. Civ. App. 2001), a couple was arrested after their vehicle was stopped and a search of the vehicle uncovered money. Trace quantities of cocaine on the money were found by chemical analysis. Criminal charges were filed alleging they transported proceeds known to be derived from violation of the Uniform Controlled Dangerous Substances Act. Additionally, a forfeiture proceeding was initiated under a separate provision of law alleging the currency was furnished or intended to be furnished in exchange for cocaine or was proceeds from such exchange. After a motion hearing, the criminal matter was dismissed. The court held that the State was collaterally estopped from continuing with the forfeiture proceeding noting there was identity of subject matter. It acknowledged that while one proceeding was criminal, and the other civil, there was a common issue in that the State was required to prove in both that the seized currency was possessed in violation of the Act.

In Wyoming, we have State v. Eleven Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Six Dollars and No Cents in United States Currency, 777 P.2d 65 (Wyo. 1989). The defendant in that case challenged the validity of a search on a Motion to Suppress in which he prevailed. The State (through the same prosecutor appointed as Special Assistant Attorney General) attempted a civil forfeiture of the money. The court ruled that it was collaterally estopped due to the privity of the agencies and the fact that the State had ample opportunity to argue their case at the motion hearing.

It has been said that “the law abhors a forfeiture.” Superior Oil Co. V. Devon Corp., 604 F.2d 1063, 1069 (8th Cir. 1979). “The law does not favor forfeitures and statutes imposing them must be strictly construed.” Wilshire Ins. Co. V. State, 582 P.2d 372, 375 (Nev. 1978). See also One Cocktail Glass v. State, 565 P.2d 1265 (Alaska 1977); Satte v, Ibe 1972 Chevrolet Pickup Truck, Etc., 252 N.W.2d 466 (Iowa 1977); State ex. Rel. Reid v. Kemp574 S.W.2d 695 (Mo.App. 1978). “The Controlled Substances Act provides for civil forfeiture actions in certain circumstances for violations of the provisions of the Act.” Merkison v. State, 996P.2d 1138 (Wyo. 2000) and W.S.?35-7-1049.

Wyoming law contains two statutes related to drug paraphernalia. The first is W.S.? 35-7-1056. It states: “It is unlawful for any person to deliver, or possess with intent to deliver, drug paraphernalia.” The second statute is found at W.S.? 35-7-1057 which states: “Any adult who violates W.S.? 35-7-1056 by delivering drug paraphernalia to a minor is guilty of a crime and, upon conviction, may be imprisoned for not more than five (5) years, fined not more than two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00), or both.

Pertinent federal law is located at 21 U.S.C. 863(a): “In general it is unlawful for any person (1) To sell or offer for sale drug paraphernalia; (2) To use the mails or any other facility or interstate commerce to transport drug paraphernalia; or (3) to import or export drug paraphernalia.”

Designation of an item as contraband per se means possession of that item alone constitutes a criminal offense; it denotes an express public policy against the existence of an object…Derivative contraband describes an article, not inherently unlawful, which is subject to forfeiture only if it is used in an illegal activity. People v. Mudd, 370 N.E.2d 37, 38 (1977); State of South Dakota v. Three Iso-2 Devices, Serial Nos. 13801, 13825, and 13904, 296 N.W.2d 510 (1980).

(E) Statement as to why the ends of justice require review.

The ends of justice require review of Petitioner’s case for two reasons. One is that the District Court’s findings were in contradiction of both Federal and State precedent. Secondly, Wyoming lacks any precedent pertaining to the issues alleged by Petitioner in this writ.

(F) Certification that the petition is not interposed for purposes of delay.

By his signature below, Nicholas H. Carter, hereby certifies that this Petition is not interposed for purposes of delay.

WHEREFORE Petitioner prays that the Court grant a writ of review in this matter.

DATED August 11, 2006.

__________________________________________

Nicholas H. Carter

CARTER LAW OFFICE, P.C.

Attorney for Petitioner

310 South Gillette Avenue, Suite B

P. O. Box 909

Gillette, WY 82717-0909

(307) 682-9349

FAX: (307) 687-7690

E-mail: attorneys@cartererb.com

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Claimant’s Motion to Continue was served on August 11, 2006 to the following and that the copies were served as follows:

Jeani L. Stone

Campbell County Attorney

500 South Gillette Avenue, Suite B-200

Gillette, WY 82716
U. S. Mail
District Court Box
Hand Delivered
Facsimile (307) 687-6441

Patrick J. Crank

Wyoming Attorney General

123 Capitol Building

Cheyenne, WY 82002

Clerk of District Court

Sixth Judicial District

500 South Gillette Avenue, Suite 2600

Gillette, WY 82716
_______________________________________

Nicholas H. Carter

To Whom it May Concern,

About a year and a half ago, I saw a police sergeant on the Wyoming news addressing the general public on the KTWO News about a second street store in Casper Wyoming. The concern was that the second street store was selling glass smoking accessories, and some members of the public considered them to be drug paraphernalia, and wanted to know why the police were letting the store owner sell them.

The Police Sergeant said on the KTWO News, that unless there was drug resin in the pipes, that the pipes couldn’t be considered drug paraphernalia. The Police Sergeant went on to say, that there wasn’t any thing wrong with what the second street store was doing, and that it absolutely was not a violation of Wyoming law.

Shortly after hearing that story on the Wyoming news, I contacted Police Lieutenant Peacock, in Gillette, Wyoming and asked him, point blank, if he would have a problem with me selling glass smoking accessories in Gillette. He told me that he wouldn’t discourage anyone from starting a new business in Gillette, and that if I did begin selling glass smoking accessories, that I shouldn’t promote the use of illegal substances, or sell them to minors.

Hence, I opened a store called Hip Hop Hippies, and began selling glass smoking accessories. About a month and a half into the business of Hip Hop Hippies, the Gillette Police Department, Sheriffs Department, and Department of Criminal Investigation showed up at the store, with a warrant that enabled them to seize all of my smoking accessories, calling them drug paraphernalia.

During the process of the raid, I learned that a police officer had been into the Assistant County Attorney’s office, and informed the him, that I, Jeffrey W. Doles, was selling glass smoking accessories, out of a store called “Hip Hop Hippies“. According to the police report, it was the Assistant County Attorney, Bill Edelman who, based on the verbal description he received from the officer, interpreted my glass smoking accessories to be Drug Paraphernalia, even though there was no drug resin in them, and began instructing the officer on how to obtain a warrant against me, and Hip Hop Hippies.

It should be noted at this point in the story, that Bill Edelman is my former public defender, and that I had him fired in 1998 for ineffective assistance of council. It should also be noted that I spent two years of my life on the run in Mexico, writing my life story, and a significant part of it involves my theory about him ( Bill Edelman ) selling me down the river, witch resulted in me having him fired for ineffective assistance of council in the first place.

Without getting into the specifics, lets just say very briefly, that I spent more than four years in the penitentiary, exhausting the appeals process, claiming that this specific attorney was a sell out and four months after my release, he, himself interprets the law in a way that enables authorities to effectively close the doors on my business, and ultimately have a warrant issued for my arrest! I call that selective, and vindictive prosecution. He had a reason to get even with me, and used his position of authority to do it!

That in and of itself is a violation of my constitutional rights, in that him and I have an ugly conflict of interest, which legally bars him from prosecuting me.

At any rate, based on my former attorney’s interpretation of the law, the pipes in my store, were considered drug paraphernalia, and confiscated. I contacted Bill Edelman by phone, to enquire as to who in the hell he thought he was coming after me on a personal level. I also told him that I had written a book about him, and that he was just about to inspire me to publish it. I told him that this would be considered harassment, in light of the fact that I am a former client of his, and that there are ten other stores like mine in the State of Wyoming, I said it seemed a bit ironic, how none of them were in violation of this Wyoming State Statute, except for me!

He told me that I hadn’t been singled out, and that he wasn’t aware of ten other stores in Wyoming, that sold smoking accessories. He said that I wasn’t in any trouble, but that I wouldn’t be getting my pipes back, nor would I be able to re-open my store.

I said that if I wasn’t in any trouble, he needed to return my property; otherwise it would be considered theft. You don’t just walk into someone’s business and confiscate its inventory in its entirety, based on a violation of the law, and then say that they aren’t in any trouble. If it’s a violation of the law, then charges need to be filed.

At that point, he informed me that no charges would be filed, that this would serve as some sort of warning, and that I should not, under any circumstances, re-open my store, and that if I did, I would be in serious trouble, and he would have me arrested.

I contacted my attorneys, and asked them what they thought about the position I was in. I spent over six thousand dollars opening Hip Hop Hippies, and there I sat, without a thing to show for it, other than a lease on a building that I suddenly couldn’t afford to maintain!

Both of my attorney’s James Castberg, and Mary Dunn, advised me that if the County Attorney’s office was not going to charge me criminally, that there was no reason that I shouldn’t re-stock my shelves, and re-open my store.

The fallowing day, I received a shipment of glass smoking accessories from “All of Your Tobacco Needs”, and called Bill Edelmans office to inform him that if he had plans to arrest me for re-opening my store, that he should set them in motion, because I was in fact re-opening Hip Hop Hippies even as we spoke.

I have Pictures of the police officer there to arrest me for selling drug paraphernalia, standing in front of a sign that says “We do not sell drug paraphernalia”. I spent that weekend in the Campbell County Detention center, where they confiscated my wheelchair on the way into the place. In all seriousness, I’m a paraplegic, confined to a wheelchair, and upon being booked into the Campbell County Detention Center, Deputies thought it might be a good idea to confiscate my wheelchair, and place me in a holding cell on the bed, without even a way to get back and forth to the bathroom!

When my mother called the Detention Center to enquire as to why they had confiscated my wheelchair, she was informed that they didn’t owe her an explanation, because I was not a minor!

I was arraigned after three days in there and finally released on bond, where I spent the next five months waiting for a trial by jury. My former Attorney prepared the entire case against me, including the determination of charges, and then took it to the front steps of the court house, where he informed the court that he was my former Attorney, and that it would violate my constitutional rights for him to prosecute me. His buddy from the same office took the case from there. I’ve maintained from the very beginning, that if it was a violation of my constitutional rights for him to prosecute me, it was a violation of my constitutional rights for him to prepare me for the prosecution as well. If it weren’t for his interpretation of the law (according to the police report) my pipes wouldn’t even have been considered drug paraphernalia.

To make a long story longer, the jury agreed with me, and found me not guilty of one count of “Possession of Drug Paraphernalia,” and two counts of “Possession of Drug Paraphernalia With Intent To Deliver”.

After the trial I re-opened Hip Hop Hippies, and Incorporated it into the State of Wyoming as a retail store that sells glass smoking accessories. My Attorney Nick Carter from Carter Law Office filed a motion to force the State of Wyoming to return my property.

The County Attorney that prosecuted me in the criminal case asked for that motion hearing to be continued, so that he could file a civil forfeiture. He received a special appointment as Assistant Attorney General for the State of Wyoming so that he could retry me civilly, and try to win the right to destroy over nine thousand dollars worth of my property, because it’s Drug Paraphernalia, even after he was unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that it is in fact Drug Paraphernalia!

I’m sure that this constitutes double jeopardy, because I’ve already been tried in front of a jury of my piers, who determined that the items he is seeking to destroy are not drug paraphernalia. My attorney filed a motion to dismiss the civil forfeiture, basically saying that this prosecutor doesn’t have the right to take another bite of the apple. That a jury has already determined that the property in question is in fact not Drug Paraphernalia, and that there is no way that they can come back after that verdict and say that it is! The judge disagreed, and literally ( according to court transcripts )advised the prosecutor to argue ( at a bench trial in front of him ) that there may be a duel purpose for these pipes. That process is being interrupted as we speak, My attorney has filed a Writ of Review with the Supreme Court, asking them to over rule the lower courts decision to let me be charged twice for the same crime. That Writ is being filed today 8-10-06.

In the mean time, after Incorporating Hip Hop Hippies into the State of Wyoming as a retail store that sells glass smoking accessories, I decided to expand and grow the business by opening a second store in Casper Wyoming, the very town that the police sergeant was on the KTWO News saying that unless the pipes had drug resin in them, they couldn’t be considered drug paraphernalia. After about three weeks in business there in Casper, the Department of Criminal Investigation served a warrant on the store, and seized its entire inventory, calling it Drug Paraphernalia. I wasn’t in the store at the time of the raid, but the store manager did call me on the phone while it was going on, and I did get to talk, live, to one of the Department of Criminal Investigations female officers. I asked her if she was aware that I’ve already been tried for possession of Drug Paraphernalia in the State of Wyoming, and that a jury of my piers determined that the items I sell at Hip Hop Hippies Inc. are in fact, not Drug Paraphernalia.

She said that I was found not guilty in Campbell County, and that it didn’t count in Natrona County! I informed her that it didn’t matter what County I was found not guilty in, because I was charged in violation of a Wyoming State Statute, by the State of Wyoming, in a Wyoming Court room, and in front of a Wyoming jury, and the verdict was not guilty in the State of Wyoming.

It’s double jeopardy to try me again in the State of Wyoming! Period!!!

I’m Writing this summation of my case for a couple of different reasons. First of all, because it exceeds the realm of my current attorney’s expertise. Though he has done a wonderful job of representing me up until this point, he doesn’t do civil litigation, and at this point I need someone to represent me on the civil issues. As we speak, there have been no criminal charges filed on me for the Casper store, apparently, they are determining rather or not they even have the right to do that, and that’s where the civil liberties issue comes up for me. I obviously feel as though my civil rights have been abundantly violated, not only where double jeopardy is concerned, but, also where they have come into my place of business, and closed my store down again, causing me to pay more attorney fee’s, and loose money, while we wait for another jury to re-decide what the first jury already decided, not to mention the fact that the after the first trial, I played money to the State of Wyoming to be incorporated into it, as a retail store that sells smoking accessories, and the State of Wyoming excepted my money, and excepted me into it’s Incorporation as a store that sells smoking accessories.

I think it’s a civil rights violation for the same State to turn around on me now and try to prosecute me again for selling the very smoking accessories it incorporated me to sell, and I believe that unless I continue to press for the attention of the national media, that the State of Wyoming will continue trying to have it’s way with me. I’ve said from the on set of the first criminal charges, that if I can keep this case in the public eye, the State of Wyoming will be forced to decide my case on points of law, instead of the way they usually do it.

I’m sending this out on the internet in order to obtain the interest of an attorney interested in perusing it, and hope that it gets the attention from the media that it deserves! The system worked, it just didn’t work in their favor, and the result of that has been vindictive and hateful on their part, causing me a great deal of money in attorney’s fee’s as well as an indescribable amount of mental anguish, and physical abuse. ( I have the absolute uninterruptible right to use my wheelchair )

There are already thousands of links to my case on the internet, from the Daily Rotten to NBC, I’ve been plastered all over the Wyoming News Papers, and even made the Wyoming News at least three times. I don’t have any intention of quitting until my mission is complete. I need professional assistance, and attention from the national media, If you see this on line, help me stand up for your rights by forwarding it to Montel, CNBC, ABC, CBS, Oprah, Letterman, Your attorney, your friends, or who ever else you feel needs to see it. Your civil rights are in jeopardy along with my civil rights, because if one of us is getting screwed, we’re all getting screwed.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey W. Doles

Please see attached copy of writ of review sent to the Wyoming supreme court August 2006

As grounds for his petition, Petitioner states as follows pursuant to Rule 13 of the Wyoming Rules of Appellate Procedure, as amended.

(A) Nature of review desired and relief sought.

(B) Facts necessary to an understanding of the controlling questions of law determined by the lower court.

(1) Whether the issue decided by the prior proceeding is identical to the present issue;

(2) Whether the prior proceeding resulted in a judgment on the merits;

(3) Whether the party against whom collateral estoppel is being asserted was a party or in privity with a party to the prior proceeding; and

(D) Principles of law upon which petitioner relies, with citation of authority.

(E) Statement as to why the ends of justice require review.

(F) Certification that the petition is not interposed for purposes of delay.

By his signature below, Nicholas H. Carter, hereby certifies that this Petition is not interposed for purposes of delay.

WHEREFORE Petitioner prays that the Court grant a writ of review in this matter.

DATED August 11, 2006.

__________________________________________

Nicholas H. Carter

CARTER LAW OFFICE, P.C.

Attorney for Petitioner

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing Claimant’s Motion to Continue was served on August 11, 2006 to the following and that the copies were served as follows:

www.hiphophippiesinc.com

HIP HOP HIPPIES INC. IS A LIFESTYLE STORE.

WE DO NOT SELL DRUG PARAPHERNILLIA!!!

IT IS OUR MISSION HERE AT HIP HOP HIPPIES INC.

TO POINT A GENERATION OF YOUNG MINDS IN THE DIRECTION OF THE TRUTH, AND ENCOURAGE THEM TO BELIEVE THAT OUR CREATOR DIDN’T MAKE MISTAKES.

Tobacco is a drug, and the surgeon general has determined it to be harmful to your health. Statistics reveal that it is killing more Americans than any other drug, or any other combination of drugs in the United States of America and even though we can not prohibit you from using our smoking accessories in conjunction with tobacco we can take the opportunity to strongly urge you not to!

ALL OF OUR SMOKING ACCESSORIES ARE INTENDED FOR, DESIGNED FOR AND ADVERTIZED FOR USE WITH SATIVAH AND OTHER LEGAL HERBAL BLENDS

It is illegal to use our smoking accessories in conjunction with marijuana or other controlled substances; we do not condone any such activities. If you are attempting to purchase our smoking accessories for illegal purposes, leave now!!! No exceptions!!!!

MUST BE 18 TO ENTER

READ GEN.1; 29 AND 1 TIMOTHY CHAPTER 4

If you are under the age of 18, and enter this site, or attempt to purchase merchandise from this site, you are doing so against the wishes of the operator of this site, and may be subjecting yourself to prosecution by governing officials.

Hip Hop Hippies Incorporated did not except responsibility for you and your life’s decisions before you entered this web site, and we will not accept responsibility for you and your life’s decisions after you leave!!!

We are located, right next door to the Flea Market, in the Hillcrest Shopping plaza. Take the Port of Entry Exit off of I-90, and go west on Highway 14-16 to East Side Liquors. Turn left on Butler Spaeth, and go two blocks south, then turn right into our parking lot at the Hillcrest Shopping Plaza.

Bill Edelman Grievance to the Wyoming Bar

On august 10th 2005, officers from the Gillette Police Department, Sheriffs Department, and the Wyoming Department of Criminal Investigation entered my store, Hip Hop Hippies, with a search warrant, and confiscated my entire inventory of smoking accessories, claiming that they were intended for use with illegal substances.

According to the Police report, ( 0n 08-12-05 ) they were there, because, William “Edelman informed us that it was his interpretation of the laws that the Items being sold at Hip Hop Hippies were in fact drug paraphernalia”. apparently, Detective Boisvert and an investigator by the name of Spencer were concerned that I might be selling drug paraphernalia at Hip Hop Hippies, and “prior to taking action, investigator Spencer and I went to the Campbell County Attorney’s office and met with Deputy County Attorney Bill Edelman.”

In accordance with the Police report, the two officers “explained (as in a verbal description ) to Edelman the Items being sold at Hip Hop Hippies”. and from that “verbal description” Edelman was able to determine that they “were in fact drug paraphernalia”.

The Police report goes on to say, that, “With the assistance of Bill Edelman, a search warrant for Hip Hop Hippies was drafted”. and, then, “taken to Circuit Court Judge Terell Tharp, who reviewed the search warrant and signed it , which authorized us to search the premises”.

The Police report from 08-12-05 is concluded with a case disposition statement that reads as fallows, “This case will be forwarded to Deputy County Attorney Bill Edeman for determination of charges”.

The nature of my grievance is not to establish my innocence. A Jury of my piers awarded me a Judgment of Acquittal on all counts associated with the charges Bill Edelman invented against me, concerning drug paraphernalia, and possession of drug paraphernalia.

My grievance evolves from the fact, that, William Edelman was appointed to represent me as Head Public Defender here in Gillette, Wyoming, back in 1998, on a conspiracy to commit grand larceny charge, and I’m positive that it is a major violation of my constitutional rights for my former Attorney, Mr. William Edelman, to participate in criminal proceedings against me. He has blatantly breached my client/attorney privilege.

Bill Edelman, who is my former attorney, ( according to police reports ) sent officers into Hip Hop Hippies to acquire a verbal description of the smoking accessories sold there, and from that verbal description he, himself, miss-interpreted ( according to the jury ) them to be “in fact drug paraphernalia”.

Based on his miss-interpretation of the laws, a warrant was drafted, signed, and executed on Hip Hop Hippies. Bill Edelman, didn’t simply participate in this process, he orchestrated it, in it’s entirety, thinking that he could get away with it as long as he, himself didn’t prosecute me.

After the warrant was executed I spoke to Bill Edelman on the phone, and I told him unequivocally, that I as my former attorney, it was illegal for him to be preparing a case against me, and that if he didn’t back off, I would absolutely bring this grievance against him, and ask that his license to practice law be revoked for malicious, and selective prosecution.

He informed me at that point, that, he didn’t intend to press criminal charges against me. He said that I wasn’t in any trouble, as long as I didn’t try to sell my pipes again. He also said, that, the seven thousand dollars worth of inventory, him and his officers illegally confiscated from my store, would be destroyed, instead of returned to me.

I told him, that, what he was doing amounted to theft. The warrant was obtained under illegal circumstances, effectively making the warrant itself illegal. I also informed him, at that point, that my attorneys had both advised me to re-open my store, and that he had no legal right to intervene. He said that if I did re-open Hip Hop Hippies, he would have me thrown in Jail.

The fallowing day, I re-opened, Hip Hop Hippies, with an even largest selection of smoking accessories, in an attempt to force his hand.

I called Bill Edelman on the Phone to let him know, that, I was in fact, Open again, but he wouldn’t take my phone call, so, I left a message, with the secretary, saying that if he was going to arrest me for re-opening Hip Hop Hippies, that he needed to get ‘er done.

Fallowing that conversation, I was arrested, and taken to jail.

In accordance with the second police report, even after Bill Edelman was informed, unequivocally, of who I am, he still couldn‘t let it go. “I informed Deputy County Attorney Bill Edelman that I had warned Doles on 08-10-05 that if he was to re-open and offer the same type of items for retail sale, again I would seize those items and he would be arrested. Edelman agreed that if Doles was doing this he was once again in violation of the law”.

It’s my understanding of the law, where a conflict of interest is concerned, that he had a legal obligation to inform me, and every other former client of his, that he was taking on a new position in law, and that he would, at that point no longer be able to represent me, as well as prosecute me, or prepare me for the prosecutor. The fact that he did not notify me in righting, eliminates any excuse he might dream up about not knowing it was me, because if he would have notified me in righting, like the law requires him to, then, he would have known who I was, and acted accordingly. Consequently, he did not act accordingly!

He knew, beyond any doubt,. who I was when he had me arrested. There is nothing in the written record to indicate why Bill Edelman elected to finally back out of the case, but I don’t really see the relevance in that anyways. What he did is obvious, He prepared this case against me in it’s entirety, then walked across the hall to his buddy’s office, and said “I can’t prosecute Jeffrey W. Doles, because of a conflict of interest , but“… and his buddie obliged him. .

In 1998, after my trial, I fired Bill Edelman for ineffective assistance of council, because I was found guilty of felony theft and sentenced to four to nine years in the Wyoming State Penitentiary for stealing a three hundred dollar camera from Wall-mart. I got a felonies amount of time for a misdemeanor crime, and I spent more than 14 thousand dollars on Writ of habeas corpus’s trying to get the conviction overturned, by asserting the fact that I believed Bill Edelman sold me down the river.

I was unsuccessful in acquiring a reversal on my case, but did say all of those things about Bill Edelman’s ability to represent me, and you can’t tell me, in light of that, that, it’s o.k. for him to come after me four months after I get out of a prison.

To say that he didn’t seek revenge, and try to trump charges up on me, by abusing his position of authority would be an even larger miscarriage of justice. He did selectively prosecuted me, and I want his license to practice law revoked as a result of it! Respectfully Submitted By, hiphophippiesinc@vcn.c