KENNETH M.

WILKINSON RECORD RACKETEERING & EXTORTION

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT ISSUED AS MANDATES JUNE 11, 2009
1. The publicly recorded $24.30 money judgment “issued as mandate June 11, 2009”. See
Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1).
$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT UNDER FRAP 39, COSTS
2. The $24.30 money judgment was awarded pursuant to Rule 39, Fed.R.App.P.
COPY OF $24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT, DOC. # 386-3
3. A copy of the final $24.30 money judgment issued as mandate was included in Defendant
Appellee’s facially fraudulent “motion for issuance of a writ of execution”, Doc. # 386. See
pages 10 and 24.
4. Of the $29.70 requested in Racketeer Wilkinson’s Bill of Costs, Doc. # 386, the 11th Circuit
allowed $24.30 for Costs under FRAP 39:

$24.30 WERE THE ALLOWED ACTUAL AND NECESSARY COSTS

5. Here, $24.30 were the allowed actual and necessary costs.

$24.30 MONEY JUDGMENT BECAME FINAL ON JUNE 15, 2009

6. Pursuant to Doc. ## 365 (p. 1), 386-3 (p. 1), the U.S. District Court received and filed the
$24.30 money judgment on June 15, 2009:

RACKETEERING: EXTORTION OF MONEY:

“FRIVOLOUS APPEAL” MOTION WAS ADMITTEDLY NEVER FILED
7. Defendant Racketeer Wilkinson extorted money, Doc. # 386, by fraudulently pretending
a Rule 38 motion, which Wilkinson knew he had never filed:
“The Judgment
4. On August 22, 2008, Wilkinson filed a Motion for Sanctions pursuant to Eleventh
Circuit Rule 27-4 …”
Said Rule 27-4 motion could not have possibly been for a “frivolous appeal”.
 RACKETEERING & EXTORTION IN VIOLATION OF:
FED.R.CIV.P. 54; LOCAL RULE 4.18; 28 U.S.C. 1921-1924

“LOCAL RULE 4.18 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS OR ATTORNEY'S FEES

(a) In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, all claims for costs or attorney's fees
preserved by appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be asserted by separate
motion or petition filed not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry of
judgment. The pendency of an appeal from the judgment shall not postpone the filing
of a timely application pursuant to this rule.”

REQUIREMENTS UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1920-1924

Itemization was for $24.30.
No documentation for $24.30.
Bill of Costs was for $24.30.
Bill of Costs must be verified as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1924.
No known affidavit.
Plaintiff(s) objected to the $24.30.

2
RULE 4.18 APPLICATIONS FOR COSTS OR ATTORNEY'S FEES

(a) In accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 54, all claims for costs or attorney's fees preserved
by appropriate pleading or pretrial stipulation shall be asserted by separate motion or petition filed
not later than fourteen (14) days following the entry of judgment. The pendency of an appeal from
the judgment shall not postpone the filing of a timely application pursuant to this rule.

12/1/09 4 - 22
7/30/2010 United States Code: Title 28,1924. Ver…

Search Law School Search Cornell

LII / Legal Information Institute

hom e se arch find a la wyer dona te

U.S. Code
m a in page faq index sea rch

TITLE 28 > PART V > C HAPTER 123 > § 1924

§ 1924. Verification of bill of costs

Before any bill of costs is taxed, the party claiming any item of cost or disbursement shall attach thereto an affidavit, made by himself or by his
duly authorized attorney or agent having knowledge of the facts, that such item is correct and has been necessarily incurred in the case and
that the services for which fees have been charged were actually and necessarily performed.

Ask A Lawyer
Online.
Get an Answer ASAP!

Dona tions cover only

20% of our costs.

Franchise
Attorney
Full Service
Franchise Law
Practice Scott
Weber-Partner
(813) 472-7892
www.franchiselegalteam

Employment Law
Attorney
Sexual
Harassment,
Unemployment,
Overtime,
Minimum Wage
239.262.2141
www.WeldonRothman.c

Adams &
Associates PA
Know your
Bankruptcy
Rights. Call for
Free Consultation.
www.richardadamslaw.c

Randall Spivey -
Attorney
Spivey Law Firm -
Personal Injury &
Wrongful Death
www.spiveylaw.com

LII has no control over and does not endorse any external Internet site that contains links to or references LII.

about us sitemap help terms of use friend us follow us contact us

…cornell.edu/…/usc_sec_28_0000192… 1/2
7/30/2010 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - Rule…

Search Law School Search Cornell

LII / Legal Information Institute

hom e se arch find a la wyer dona te

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

m a in page se arch | civil procedure overvie w

VII. JUDGMENT > Rule 54. Prev | Next

Rule 54. Judgments; Costs

Donations cover only

(a) Definition; Form. Notes
20% of our costs. “Judgment” as used in these rules includes a decree and any order from whic h
Law About ... Civil
an appeal lies. A judgment should not inc lude recitals of pleadings, a master's
Procedure
report, or a rec ord of prior proceedings.
Divorce Attorney
SW FLA (b) Judgment on Multiple Claims or Involving Multiple Attorneys: reach
Martin Law Firm, interested clients by
Parties.
P.L. Divorce sponsoring an LII page
Attorney in Cape When an action presents more than one claim for relief — whether as a claim,
Coral
www.mlg-legal.com counterclaim, c rossclaim, or third-party claim — or when multiple parties are
involved, the court may direct entry of a final judgment as to one or more,
but fewer than all, claims or parties only if the court expressly determines that
Adams & there is no just reason for delay. Otherwise, any order or other decision,
Associates PA however designated, that adjudicates fewer than all the claims or the rights
Know your
and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to any
Bankruptcy
Rights. Call for of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a
Free Consultation. judgment adjudicating all the claims and all the parties' rights and liabilities.
www.richardadamslaw.c

(c) Demand for Judgment; Relief to Be Granted.

Don't Pay Debt
A default judgment must not differ in kind from, or exceed in amount, what is
Collectors
Sue Harassing demanded in the pleadings. Every other final judgment should grant the relief
Debt Collectors. to which each party is entitled, even if the party has not demanded that relief
Make Them Pay in its pleadings.
You. 100% Free &
Fast Help
WeStopDebtCollectors.c
(d) Costs; Attorney’s Fees.
(1) Costs Other than Attorneys’ Fees.
Divorce
Attorneys Unless a federal statute, these rules, or a court order provides otherwise,
Life is Better after costs — other than attorney's fees — should be allowed to the prevailing
Divorce 30 years party. But costs against the United States, its officers, and its agencies
combined
may be imposed only to the extent allowed by law. The clerk may tax costs
experience
www.roberts-robold.com on 14 days' notice. On motion served within the next 7 days, the court may
review the clerk's action.

(2) Attorneys’ Fees.

(A) Claim to Be by Motion. A claim for attorney's fees and related

nontaxable expenses must be made by motion unless the substantive law
requires those fees to be proved at trial as an element of damages.

(B) Timing and Contents of the Motion. Unless a statute or a court order
provides otherwise, the motion must:

(i) be filed no later than 14 days after the entry of judgment;

(ii) specify the judgment and the statute, rule, or other grounds entitling
the movant to the award;

(iii) state the amount sought or provide a fair estimate of it; and

(iv) disclose, if the court so orders, the terms of any agreement about
fees for the services for which the claim is made.
www.law.cornell.edu/…/Rule54.htm 1/2
7/29/2010 FindACase™ | United States v. Lasteed

Buy Document Now

United States v. Lasteed

U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

Docket Number available at www.versuslaw.com

Citation Number available at www.versuslaw.com

November 24, 1987

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,

v.
RONALD ALBERT LASTEED, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

F. Lee Bailey, Daniel Patrick Leonard Bailey & Fishman, for Appellant.

Leon B. Kellner, U.S. Attorney, Samuel Rosenthal, Chief, Criminal Appellate Section, Department of Justice, Joel M. Gershowitz,
Department of Justice, for Appellee.

Hill and Vance, Circuit Judges, and Propst,*fn* District Judge.

Author: Vance

Vance, Circuit Judge:

This case presents an intricate timing issue involving a retrial, an interlocutory appeal followed by an intercircuit transfer, and an
uncertain period of excludable delay under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The question is whether the 70 day period
following a mistrial within which a defendant must be tried again begins to run when the court of appeals issues its mandate, or
when the district court receives the mandate. We affirm the district court's ruling in this case that the clock begins to run against the
government upon the district court's receipt of the mandate.

I.

Appellant Ronald Lasteed was indicted along with Joseph Peeples for mail and wire fraud, inducing interstate travel in execution of a
fraudulent scheme, and conspiracy to commit these offenses, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1342, 1343, 2314, and 371. Appellant was
tried originally in October, 1984 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On October 10, 1984 the district
court declared a mistrial because of prosecutorial misconduct. In August, 1985 the district court in Texas denied defendant's motion
to dismiss,*fn1 but granted defendant's motion to change venue to the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida. Defendant took an interlocutory appeal of the Texas district court's denial of his motion to dismiss. The United States Court
of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed, refusing to dismiss the indictment. The Fifth Circuit issued its mandate on March 13, 1986.
Appellant contends that the Speedy Trial Act's 70 day period commenced on that date.

The district court in Florida did not receive the Fifth Circuit's mandate until May 19, 1986, more than two months after it was
issued.*fn2 The government contends that the Speedy Trial Act's 70 day period commenced on that date. On June 6 defendant filed
a motion to dismiss on Speedy Trial Act grounds, which the district court denied on June 23.

At the second trial, there was evidence that appellant had engaged in a fraudulent scheme to obtain money from investors by
falsely representing that he had invented a process for transforming water into combustible fuel.*fn3 Appellant called the product of
this process "Ionagen," and claimed it was a gasoline substitute.*fn4 There was evidence that appellant made numerous other
false statements and misrepresentations relating to his education, background, other investors in the Ionagen process, and
governmental interest in his work. The prosecution also produced various wire transmissions and recordings of meetings between
appellant and Al Hill, Jr., a potential investor in the scheme.

II.

…findacase.com/…/wfrmDocViewer.aspx 1/4
Case 2:07-cv-00228-JES-SPC Document 425 Filed 02/02/10 Page 1 of 1
 2JS 44 (Rev. 12/07) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided
by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating
the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURTS,
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER UNITED STATES CUSTOM & IMMIGRATION SERVICE, TONY
FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSS WEST, BEVERLY B. MARTIN, JOHN EDWIN STEELE, RYAN BAR
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant WASHINGTON, D.C.
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE
LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorney’s (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
DR. JORG BUSSE AS PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, JENNIFER U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
FRANKLIN PRESCOTT AS PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL,

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
u 1 U.S. Government u 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State u 1 u 1 Incorporated or Principal Place u 4 u 4
of Business In This State

u 2 U.S. Government u 4 Diversity
Defendant
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
CONTRACT TORTS
u 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY
u 120 Marine u 310 Airplane
u 130 Miller Act u 315 Airplane Product
u 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability
u 150 Recovery of Overpayment u 320 Assault, Libel &
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander
u 151 Medicare Act u 330 Federal Employers’
u 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability
Student Loans u 340 Marine
(Excl. Veterans) u 345 Marine Product
u 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability
of Veteran’s Benefits u 350 Motor Vehicle
u 160 Stockholders’ Suits u 355 Motor Vehicle
u 190 Other Contract Product Liability
u 195 Contract Product Liability u 360 Other Personal
u 196 Franchise Injury
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS
u 210 Land Condemnation u 441 Voting
u 220 Foreclosure u 442 Employment
u 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment u 443 Housing/
u 240 Torts to Land Accommodations
u 245 Tort Product Liability u 444 Welfare
u 290 All Other Real Property u 445 Amer. w/Disabilities -
Employment
u 446 Amer. w/Disabilities -
Other
u 440 Other Civil Rights
PERSONAL INJURY
u 362 Personal Injury -
Med. Malpractice
u 365 Personal Injury -
Product Liability
u 368 Asbestos Personal
Injury Product
Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY
u 370 Other Fraud
u 371 Truth in Lending
u 380 Other Personal
Property Damage
u 385 Property Damage
Product Liability
PRISONER PETITIONS
u 510 Motions to Vacate
Sentence
Habeas Corpus:
u 530 General
u 535 Death Penalty
u 540 Mandamus & Other
u 550 Civil Rights
u 555 Prison Condition
Citizen of Another State
Citizen or Subject of a
Foreign Country
FORFEITURE/PENALTY
u 610 Agriculture
u 620 Other Food & Drug
u 625 Drug Related Seizure
of Property 21 USC 881
u 630 Liquor Laws
u 640 R.R. & Truck
u 650 Airline Regs.
u 660 Occupational
Safety/Health
u 690 Other
LABOR
u 710 Fair Labor Standards
Act
u 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations
u 730 Labor/Mgmt.Reporting
& Disclosure Act
u 740 Railway Labor Act
u 790 Other Labor Litigation
u 791 Empl. Ret. Inc.
Security Act
IMMIGRATION
u 462 Naturalization Application
u 463 Habeas Corpus -
Alien Detainee
u 465 Other Immigration
Actions
u 2 u 2 Incorporated and Principal Place u 5 u 5
of Business In Another State
u 3 u 3 Foreign Nation u 6 u 6
BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
u 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 u 400 State Reapportionment
u 423 Withdrawal u 410 Antitrust
28 USC 157 u 430 Banks and Banking
u 450 Commerce
PROPERTY RIGHTS u 460 Deportation
u 820 Copyrights u 470 Racketeer Influenced and
u 830 Patent Corrupt Organizations
u 840 Trademark u 480 Consumer Credit
u 490 Cable/Sat TV
u 810 Selective Service
SOCIAL SECURITY u 850 Securities/Commodities/
u 861 HIA (1395ff) Exchange
u 862 Black Lung (923) u 875 Customer Challenge
u 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 12 USC 3410
u 864 SSID Title XVI u 890 Other Statutory Actions
u 865 RSI (405(g)) u 891 Agricultural Acts
FEDERAL TAX SUITS u 892 Economic Stabilization Act
u 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff u 893 Environmental Matters
or Defendant) u 894 Energy Allocation Act
u 871 IRS—Third Party u 895 Freedom of Information
26 USC 7609 Act
u 900Appeal of Fee Determination
Under Equal Access
to Justice
u 950 Constitutionality of
State Statutes

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Appeal to District

u 1 Original u 2 Removed from u 3 Remanded from u 4 Reinstated or u 5 Transferred from
another district u 6 Multidistrict u 7 Judge from
Magistrate
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Litigation
(specify) Judgment
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
18USC§1964,18USC§§1961-1968,18USC§1341,4th,7th,14th,1st,5th,11th U.S. Const.Amend. Civil Rights Act
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Racketeering/Civil RICO, Corruption, Obstruction of Justice, Extortion of Property & Money; 4th, 7th, 14th, 1st U.S.
VII. REQUESTED IN u CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER F.R.C.P. 23 19,000,000.00 JURY DEMAND: ✔
u Yes u No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

07/27/2010 PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERALS /S/DR. J. BUSSE /S/J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER

FRANKLIN PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE, JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT,
STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER FRANKLIN
PRESCOTT, DR. JORG BUSSE AND JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT AS
PRIVATE ATTORNEY(S) GENERAL,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 1-2010-cv-000_____

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURTS, UNITED STATES

CUSTOM & IMMIGRATION SERVICE, TONY WEST, BEVERLY B. MARTIN,
JOHN EDWIN STEELE, RYAN BARRY, CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL,
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, KENNETH M. WILKINSON, RICHARD A.
LAZZARA, JACK N. PETERSON, RYAN BARRY, DREW HEATHCOAT, BETTYE
G. SAMUEL, STANLEY F. BIRCH, JR, GERALD B. TJOFLAT, SUSAN H. BLACK,
JOEL F. DUBINA, SHERRI L. JOHNSON, EUGENE C. TURNER, LEE COUNTY,
FL, COMMISSION AND COMMISSIONERS, ED CARNES, JOHN E. MANNING,
U.S. RACKETEERING AGENTS, HUGH D. HAYES, JOHN LEY, RICHARD
JESSUP, DIANE NIPPER, LYNN GERALD, JR., KENNETH L. RYSKAMP,
CHARLIE CRIST, CHARLES “BARRY” STEVENS, JOHNSON ENGINEERING,
INC., MARK ALLAN PIZZO, ANNE CONWAY, CHARLIE GREEN, REAGAN
KATHLEEN RUSSELL, RICHARD D. DEBOEST, II, CHENE M. THOMPSON, et al.,
Defendants.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL AND $19,000,000.00
__________________________________________________________________________/
COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
COMPLAINT OF RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, PUBLIC CORRUPTION
IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT, MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA,
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT,
20TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE & COLLIER COUNTIES, FL, AND OF
UNLAWFUL AND CRIMINAL ACTS BY GOVERNMENT AGENTS & OFFICIALS
IN THEIR PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL CAPACITIES OUTSIDE ANY “IMMUNITY”
COMPLAINT UNDER CIVIL RICO, 18 U.S.C. § 1964, 1961-1968
COMPLAINT OF GOVERNMENTS’ MALICIOUS CIRCULAR ARGUMENT
FOR PURPOSES OF RACKETEERING, EXTORTION, AND RETALIATION:
‘THE CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN ALLEGATIONS ARE FRIVOLOUS.
THEREFORE THE CASE IS FIXED AS FRIVOLOUS.’
REPORT TO THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, THE HAGUE

[PAGES TOTAL: 196 + 213 (Exhibits)]