Karguy Appeal Brief - Appellate Argument on Vehicle Charges

This document is an appellate brief prepared for the case of Mr. Karguy, who was convicted on charges related to vehicle theft, dismantling, and trafficking. The brief, based on the 2018 Code of Alabama, challenges the conviction, presenting arguments against the evidence and procedures used. It discusses jurisdictional issues, the interpretation of relevant statutes (specifically, Title 32, Article 4 of the Alabama Code), and the reliability of witness testimonies, particularly that of Mr. Patterson. The brief argues that the evidence presented, including drone surveillance and witness statements, does not sufficiently prove Mr. Karguy's direct involvement in the alleged offenses. It highlights inconsistencies in the testimonies and the potential for misinterpretation of the evidence, requesting the court to review the verdict and consider a new trial with a focus on a fair and equitable assessment of the facts and legal context.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF ALBAMA
__________________
(Petitioner)
Vs.
________________________
(Respondent)
[Pick the date]

Table of Contents
Index of Authorities.......................................................................... ii
Statement ofjurisdiction.................................................................. iii
Questions presented......................................................................... iii
Statement of facts............................................................................ iii
Arguments......................................................................................... iv
Solutions............................................................................................ v
Relief.................................................................................................. v

Index of Authorities
Case
Mr. Karguy v. State of Alabama.
Statutes
2018 code of Alabama and various provisions.

Statement of Jurisdiction
The Honourable court has jurisdiction pursuant to 2018 Code of Alabama
Title 32 - MOTOR VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC1.
Section 32-8-87 - Dismantling, destroying, changing identity of vehicle; certificate
requirements; insurance claims; "total loss"; removal of identification numbers,
plates, etc.; transfer of salvage vehicles; inspections; "component parts"; rebuilt
vehicles; flood vehicles; online verifications.
Article 4 - Antitheft Laws.
Chapter 8 - UNIFORM CERTIFICATE OF TITLE AND ANTITHEFT ACT.
Clause E and clause F under section 32-8-87 provides for punitive actions against
any individual, firm or association involved in dismantling, tampering with
identification numbers of vehicle, trafficking of theft vehicles etc. Also Article 4 of the
2018 code of Alabama provides for actions regarding practice of theft and to proceed
for anti theft activities2.
Question(s) presented
1- Does Alabama jurisdiction provides for investigations for offencessuch as
theft, dismantling, and trafficking of theft vehicle under Code of Alabama ?
2- Does the code of Alabamaprovides for arrest under abovementioned
situations ?
3- Do the local authorities has adequate evidence to prove direct involvement of
Mr. karguy in the me mentioned offence ?
Statement of facts
Mr. Karguy convicted under charges of theft, trafficking of unauthorised vehicles,
dismantling vehicle number plates to avoid identity of vehicles. Before his arrest,
1 (Justia Law, 2019)
2 (State v. Spurlock, 2019)

there was action of drone surveillance by local authorities to make themselves sure
about the calls they recieve regarding suspicious activities inside his yard. There was
also presence of pile of number plates, dismantled parts of vehicles and some
suspicious construction. Also locals accused presence of drones early morning
caused panic among residents of locality and consequently major setbacks. Mr
Patterson who was a short wave radio enthusist stated that he recorded presence of
suspicious activities from west side of property. Also Mr. Dimwinkle accused Mr
Patterson for creating chaos as he started calling neighbours early morning. Court
observed all these testimonies and convicted Mr. karguy for the said offences.
Arguments
A person with a yard full of piles of dismantled and stolen vehicle parts and pile of
number plates that was supposed to facilitate the trafficking of stolen vehicles. It has
been confirmed under video footage by drone surveillance of said premise. Video
surveillance by local authorities and testimony by Mr. Patterson indicated the
legitimacy of the crime for which Mr. Karguy was accused. However under the
provisions of 2018 Code of Alabama, there are mentions regarding above mentioned
offences under various sections.
Section 32-8-82 of Alabama code- taking possession of vehicles being aware about
the condition that it is stolen or dismantled leads Mr. Karguy to be guilty to felony3.
Section32-8-83 of Alabama code- Dismantling vehicles without having any
authoritycaused Mr. Karguy to be guilty of misdemeanor4.
Section 32-8-86 of Alabama code- Removing license plates from vehicle without
having any authority and changing identity of vehicle is punishable offence under
law5.
3 (2006 Alabama Code - Section 32-8-82, 2019)
4 (2017 Code of Alabama :: Title 32, 2019)
5 Alabama Code 32-8-86

With reference to above trial of Mr. karguy has been conducted by the
relevantjurisdictional authority to proceed trial further. However as stated by Mr.
Patterson, a radios wave enthusiast who interceptedtalks of anti government talks
and accused Mr. Karguy of plannig something big. Howeverit has nowhere
mentioned that Mr. karguy has been involved in the offences charged upon him. Mr.
Patterson was a person of insane intellect as his neighbour Mr. Dimwinkle accused
his dronesfor creating panic and drama. Mr. Patterson speculations created havoc
and drama that causes discomfort to other neighbour because of his calls to wake
them up. Also early morning presence of drones in the locality causes separate
drama.
Solutions
Various sections of the 2018 code of Alabama has direct relations with the offence
chargedon Mr. Karguy, however there must be presence of varied circumstances
that lead to misunderstoodconviction of Mr. Karguy . Also the statements of Mr.
Dimwinkle towards Mr. Patterson and his drones must be noted on records as it
creates speculations over the statement testified by Mr. Patterson.Judicial officers
mustorder investigations in the case with varied viewpoints to avoid convicting any
innocent. However as evident, possessing unauthorised vehicles and number plates
within his yard can be a offence for which the present conviction can get commuted
aur fined6.
RELIEF
Therefore petitioner respectfully request to the Honourable court to review7 its
verdict. Also allow Mr. Karguy fair and equitable trial again from starting keeping in
mind all the relevant contexts.
6 (Judicial.alabama.gov, 2019)
7 Marbury v. Madison establishes judicial review