Tales From The Cells is the reality inside United States Prisons, both Federal and State. We are involved in advocacy and reform! Redemption and confession with our My Story section and lost, lonely souls with our Pen Pal section. We give prisoners a voice, a platform to tell their story, to offer up their lifestyle inside, and to air problems within the prison walls. This is as close to the inside as you will ever get without actually walking inside the world within a world. Reality at it's finest, Can you handle the Truth?

Home My Story My Story Listing (A) WILLIAM ARCHER *My Story*
WILLIAM ARCHER *My Story* PDF Print E-mail
Written by Nikita   
Tuesday, 31 March 2009 23:07

Read this to understand what he has been going through — and still is...

This overview is a letter to L. Wishart concerning Archer's 2255 Motion and Hearing that was granted. The issues were: I) A Brady Issue and II) Ineffective Assistance Of Counsel (J. Momot) as a result of counsel not bringing Ron Stevens to my trial to testify on my behalf.

William Archer is a federal inmate serving a sentence in federal prison for violations of Title 21 U.S.C. § 841, the drug statute. Archer was indicted by a federal grand jury in 1993 and charged with continuing criminal enterprise offense and as a predicate for the CCE charge conspiracy to violate drug laws.

Archer proceeded to jury trial and was convicted of the charged offenses. The Ninth Circuit reversed his conviction for the CCE offense but affirmed the conspiracy offense and sentence

Archer filed a petition for post-conviction relief pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. § 2255. After an evidentiary hearing the district court denied the petition.

The following is a chronology of events from a letter sent to attorney L. Wishart from Archer concerning the § 2255 petition and the evidentiary hearing, that followed. The issues that Archer advanced on his § 2255 petition and ,was the subject of the hearing was: (1) The government willfully withheld exculpatory Brady material from the defense; and (2) Defense counsel was ineffective for not calling, as a defense witness, Ron Stevens who would have testified that he was the person who supplied drugs to the target of the investigation (the only drug transaction that tied Archer to drugs). Attorney Momot committed numerous errors of constitutional magnitude that, in effect, left Archer without representation at all.

(a) In the State of Nevada:

1. William Ralph Archer was arrested in January 1992 and charged with ex-felon in possession of a firearm in Nevada, Eighth District. He bonded out of jail by posting the mount of $3,000.00 An attorney was obtained and the charges were dismissed upon Archer providing documentation proving that he was not an ex-felon. Archer paid a fine for carrying a concealed weapon - a knife - he had on his person and he was released from custody.'

In July 1992, the United States government (the DEA and the FBI) picked up the ex-felon in possession of a firearm charge and arrested Archer. He was held without bail by the federal officers. (The FBI-, Archer believes, knew they arrested him of false grounds; contrary to the Estoppel Doctrine).

Early in the morning hours, agents for the United States Government kicked open Archer's front door, rushing in with automat weapons, to capture Archer, two pre-teen children and Archer's girlfriend. The agents forced Archer, half dragging him, into

his front yard to be shown-off to more than a hundred people with guns and cameras. The masked agents [?] threatened Archer's girlfriend with violence if she did not vacate the property, while the other men placed Archer and his little, scared children in two cars. Afterwards, the masked agents threatened to murder Archer's dogs in the yard if he didn't command the dogs into a truck to be taken away.

4. Archer was able to communicate with his girlfriend letting her know that his scared little children were in a police [?] car and that she, as the baby-sitter, should command custody from the agents. The agents let the girlfriend take the children take the little children, and, not knowing where to go, they went to the children's grandmother's home...to find 11 men in black with masks holding the scared little children's grandmother (74 years old) looking scared to death not knowing who these people were and if she was to be "murdered" as the girlfriend and the two small children overheard the unidentified masked men state to their grandmother: "We don't care who we kill here this morning!" Only in America!!

5. The threat of "summary murder" if the little children's grandmother [74 years old] presented any problems to the men in
black with masks, plus, they would not let her have a drink of water nor go to the bathroom until she would sign a waiver for the men in black to search her only home. Grandmother was forceful coerced to sign the consent to search after seeing her scared little grandchildren standing out in the street crying. She signed she signed her rights away for her little grandchildren, afraid and crying. Only in America.

6. Archer was held in false detention for over 72 hours without bail, so that Special Agent Landrum, DEA, and AUSA Little and Green could formulate a new set of charges... No less than 5 indictments in an 18 moth period.

At last, Landrum, Green and Little found that they could charge Archer with C.C.E. without any crime being committed, :i.e., by way of Archer speaking on the phone and a weapons charge because there was weapons in his home.

One of many defenses of Archer's was the "Brucker" discove: papers that were delivered by Cheri Wheeler to Ron Stevens' home. These documents were taken in a raid by Landrum, Green and Little and are still in evidence. Only in America...somewhere.

The "Brucker" discovery documents were missing and there was information that Archer',s counsel was named in them concerning drug related matters with Brucker. .Attorney Momot, at trial, motioned at "side-bar" to suppress the documents even though there was favorable information for the dismissal of charges against Archer. [His trial].

10. So, the court withheld the "Brucker" evidence to save the "good name" of Momot... a conspiracy to convict Archer of crimes he is innocent of through United States overnment misconduc malice of prosecution and the ineffectiveness of defense counsel, that will be investigated!




Attorney John Momot's investigator, M. Wysocki delivered the Paul Robinson papers to Archer's mother and sister - after Archer's trial and before Ron Stevens signed his plea agreement. If you let Stevens see front page of envelope with Ted Manos' name on it, with Stevens' hand-written notes on the front page [you have a copy], that would have jarred his memory at the hearing for the § 2255 petition.

John Momot withdrew as Archer's counsel since Archer was angry that Momot did not call Ron Stevens to the stand at Archer's trial. Momot also failed to call Seymour Brown to the stand during the trial. All through the trial he was supposed to be there. In addition, Momot failed to call Bertram Brucker

to the stand. Momot swore to Archer that Stevens, Brown and Brucke. would all be present at Archer's trial to be able to testify on Archer's behalf. With Archer being angry at Momot for failing to call these critical witnesses, Momot filed a motion to withdraw as defense counsel citing a conflict of interest as justification. Immediately afterwards, Archer's sister, Ruby Connor, delivered to John Momot, a copy of the Paul Robinson papers.

13. Attorney Don Green was eventually appointed to Archer's case for sentencing and direct appeal. Don Green furnished Archer
with the trial transcripts just before the sentencing hearing. At this time, Don Green possessed copies of the Brady material, the Paul Robinson paperwork, yet Green elected not to mention this fact at sentencing. (Ruby Connor had delivered these papers to Green).

After Archer reviewed the trial transcripts something very important caught his attention: At day one, pages 1 through 46, Archer noticed, for the first time, that there was a "side-bar" discussion regarding Bertram Brucker, "a black guy" being involved with John Momot in buying and selling drugs, as per a DEA-6 report of Brucker's 1990 drug case, which Archer knew nothing about. (Brucker is a white man).

The Brucker papers were what Cheri Wheeler delivered to Ron Stevens - believed by the Government to be drugs for the Stevens McGregor DEA entrapment drug buy. These papers were taken by

the Government from Stevens' home at the time of the search and his arrest. These papers were shown to the news media before the trial. Archer was supposed to be involved in devil cults, child pornography and "snuff flicks," where people got killed. This prejudiced any publicity coming out of this case and was surely a strong foundation for a change of venue. But, no!

The Landrum affidavit, in support of the search, involved Burt Brucker, stating that Archer was involved in child pornography devils cults and "snuff flicks."

After being moved from CCDC downtown, Archer was placed in N.L.V.D.C., North Las Vegas Detention Center. When Archer arrived there, Ron Stevens and Burt Brucker were also there. Bruck< informed Archer that he did not make those statements; he said there was a "trap and trace" on his phone in 1990, and that Allen Waid called him when Waid was high on drugs - spaced out of his mind - and was making statements about him being in a devil's

cult and making movies and killing the stars. Brucker said that he did not believe him, that he was just high on drugs. Brucker said he did not talk to DEA Agent Landrum about this and never made statements to him about Archer.

Brucker was to be a key witness at Archer's trial -with him testifying and refuting the Landrum affidavit, proving it, in fact, to be a false document. He would also have testified to the fact that he never made statements attributed to Archer.

John Momot agreed to meet with Brucker, thinking he might throw out the Landrum affidavit in support of the search warrant, thus making the search warrant an invalid document, thereby getting that thrown out as well. Burt Brucker was a major key

to Archer's case.

20. John Momot met with Burt Brucker in 1992 at the N.L.V.D.C Via -t-r-K-iV RmnVpr's rlpnnsi nn. Momot returned the next day with the Brucker affidavit and Ron Stevens' affidavit. Therefore, it can be concluded that they all knew each other, at that time, in 1992. Brucker and Stevens both signed the affidavits.

At this time, or a few days later, Brucker stated to Archer that he, Brucker, had sold drugs - mainly twenty five thous dollars ($25,000.00) worth of cocaine and quaaludes to John Momot.

At Momot's next visit with Archer, Archer revealed what Brucker told Archer regarding Brucker selling drugs to Momot. John Momot said not to worry about it, that it was all lies and never happened. Brucker and Stevens were still to be-witnesses at Archer's trial. It was around this time that John Lewis came to visit Archer at the North las Vegas Detention Center.

John Lewis was in jail, in the holding tank, at C.C.D.C. downtown when Archer was arrested on July 14, 1992. (records will show this). When Archer was sent upstairs he was placed

in the same cell as Lewis. Archer did not like Lewis. John Lewis was a drunk; he liked to beat up on women and was an all-around ass-hole. Lewis hung around Archer's house, completely drunk, eating all of the food he could get his hands on and just generall making a mess everywhere he went. In Archer's cell, Lewis read Archer's indictment to Archer, since Archer did not have his readi glasses with him.

Lewis tried to repair Archer's swamp cooler when Archer first met Lewis, but Lewis failed to do so. This was a one-time event, and other than that, Lewis never worked for Archer.

When lewis arrived at the North Las Vegas Jail to visit Archer, Lewis tried to get Archer to give Lewis a motorcycle that Archer had been working on. The motorcycle was at Archer's mother house, and Lewis knew that he was not to go to Archer's mother's house.

Lewis kept talking stupid about Archer letting him go beat up on the confidential informants (CI's) in his case and stating that he could get titles for cars and bikes and other stupid stuff. Archer was not aware that Lewis was working for DEA Agent, Timmy Landrum and AUSA Tom Green or that Lewis was trying to entrap Archer into saying anything that could be used to convict Archer of a crime; unbeknownst to John Momot (Miranda).

Landrum and Green knew their case was falling apart with the Brucker and Stevens affidavits, which Momot revealed to Tom Green. After the Lewis/Archer U/C meeting at the jail,

the AUSA, after debriefing Lewis, made a decision to charge Archer with a CCE. - a new charge to save his crumbling case.

28. Tom Green went to the grand jury to seek a new indictmen against Archer. Tom Green used Lewis' word that there were drug labs in Colorado and Minnesota. However, he clearly had no clear evidence and Tom Green had to know Lewis was lying.

The AUSA, Tom Green, committed perjury and guborned perjured statements at the grand jury hearing, stating that he had evidence of drug labs, yet no drug labs ever existed, and this fact of non-existence was supported by testimony of a lab expert at Archer's sentencing hearing. No labs, no drugs, no drug money and no drug buyers were ever found to testify, except for John Lewis and Toy Webb. This was Green-to-Landrum suborning perjury. ' "

The DEA Agent, Tim Landrum, testified at the hearing that Archer was arrested many, many, many times with gun charges. How many times is "many, many, many?" Archer went to court two (2) times with a lawyer, Stuart Bell, and all charges of any guns were dropped. Thus, Green and Landrum committed perjury - subornin.< perjury at the grand jury hearing.

The grand jury voted to allow Green a second superceding indictment; this one including a C.C.E. charge, a search warrant for the Rezac ranch in Colorado and an indictment for Rezac, Bullit and Kicker, all from Colorado.

Colorado issued the search warrant. The SWAT team hit the ranch and found no drugs, no lab and no money. They were confused and angry for violating rights. The Colorado judges were very upset, as Green stated in his affidavit in support of a search warrant that Green had evidence that there was a drug lab and drugs at the ranch. When none were found, the Government wrote to AUSA Tom Green chastising him for a false document.

33. The indictment against all of the people in Colorado

(listed above at f 31) was dropped. Docket Number:______________________ .

Rezac's attorney, Charles Waterman, from Las Vegas, Nevada, was the attorney who got the charges dropped in Colorado. Attorney Momot moved to join in the motion. In essence, Lewis was an agent for the DEA (Landrum) per his immunity agreement at the time of the U/C jailhouse visit, which was known to Tom Green and Landrum. This was a violation of Archer's constitutional rights - Miranda/ Misaha.

Archer was unable to get any appointed Federal Public Defender to litigate this issue.

Soon after the U/C jailhouse visit, Archer was moved to CCDC downtown.to keep him away from Brucker and Stevens. He and Stevens' case were severed by John Momot, according to Ron Stevens. (Momot_ and Green began to work together).

Momot showed Tom Green the Brucker/Stevens affidavits, per his trial strategy. Momot applies to become Archer's appointed lawyer even though AUSA Tom Green informed John Momot the^he was

to be a suspect in a drug buy between him and Bertram Brucker. (Momot is furious).

37. Day one of the trial: Momot informs the court that

Brucker is this "black guy." At pages 1 through 46 of the trial transcripts, it deals with statements about Momot buying drugs from Brucker and that Tom Green was threatening to file charges against Momot. AUSA Tom Green also stated that if Brucker came to trial Momot would have to take the stand to refute the charges made by Brucker.

38. Judge McKibben, AUSA Tom Green and defense attorney John Momot held a side-bar hearing during the trial and entered into a conspiracy to keep Brucker (this "black guy"), a potentially valuable defense witness, from testifying for Archer. (This was a conflict of interest... the plot thickens).

39. At trial, after Momot rested his case, he told Archer that the Government was unable to locate Brucker at the time of the trial. Momot also refused to put Archer on the stand nor did he subpoena Judge Seymour Brown. Ron Stevens' case was severed from Archer's; Stevens says by John Momot.

40. Richie Rich was told by John Momot to leave town or else he would be arrested. Rich was to be a witness that could refute the three quart jars of "drugs" (actually jelly and jam) that Webb testified at trial stating that the "jelly/jam" was

the drugs (meth oil), that the court used at the sentencing hearing to base Archer's sentence on. The fact is, there never was any meth oil... it truly was spoiled jelly.

41. John Momot dumped Archer at trial to save his own ass. He was suffering under the worst case of conflict of interest. Charges were to be filed against Momot these people were brought to court to testify for Archer (Richie Rich). Archer did not find this out until after the trial when he read the trial transcri; that were given to him by Don Green. That's when he knew that Momot had a serious conflict of interest in defending him.

The conflict of interest that existed between Archer and Momot was that Momot had to save himself from jail, or worse by letting Archer be convicted by an overzealous prosecutor that had absolutely no evidence and suppressed, not only evidence but took an active part in suppressing defense witnesses to the point that Archer virtually had no defense against the charges.

After trial, but before the sentencing hearing, John Momot withdrew from Archer's case claiming a conflict of interest.

John Momot was supplied with a copy of Paul Robinson's three-page DEA-6 report - the Brady material supplied by Stevens. Archer's sister, Ruby Connor, supplied them to Momot. (At this point Momot still could helped Archer).

Don Green, Archer's attorney for the sentencing phase of the case, was also supplied a copy of the Paul Robinson papers before the sentencing hearing, supplied to him by Ruby Connor. However, Don Green failed to even acknowledge the papers at the

sentencing hearing. Don Green also failed to file Archer's direct appeal brief on time to the Ninth Circuit; he totally refused to do so.

46. Archer was in touch with Professor Charlie Wesalburg, at the USC Law School, who filed a motion to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court contacted Attorney Green notifying him that he had 25 days to file an appeal brief on Archer's hehalf. Don Green failed to meet this order from the court and he was fined $500.00 and lost his license to practice law in the State of Nevada for nine months. (ineffective assistance).

Archer was then appointed new counsel, Richard Cornell out of Reno, Nevada, to complete Archer's direct appeal. (Cornell was a close friend of Judge McKibben).

Richard Cornell never felt it necessary to visit with Archer to discuss his case and the pending appeal. Archer asked attorney Cornell if he could assist with the appeal, as well as review a copy of the opening brief before it was filed with the Ninth Circuit so that he could correct any errors or make suggestio: before it was filed. Attorney Cornell sent Archer a copy of the brief after it was filed - too late for Archer to make any correcti or make any suggestions.

Richard Cornell made a statement in the appeal brief, "With guns drawn and ready to fire," cinching a § 942(c) gun charge for Archer. This statement was not found in the trial record or in any transcripts; it was never presented to the jury at trial, Cornell made it up!

Richard Cornell also made a statement that the two (2) pounds of drugs seized from the Stevens/McGregor sale was found at Archer's mother's house. No drugs were ever found at Archer's mother's house. Cornell made it up!

When Archer contacted attorney Cornell regarding these errors, Cornell responded, saying that he was trying to make the worst case for the prosecutor, and then clean it up, leaving no case for the prosecutor.

Attorney Cornell failed to clean these issues up. Archer called Cornell, very angry. Cornell sent Archer a letter stating, "if he wanted to die an old man in jail he shouldn't piss off his attorney." (ANOTHER DUMP-TRUCK ATTORNEY!)

Attorney Cornell was furnished with a copy of the Paul Robinson papers before the first direct appeal brief was filed. He chose not to address the issue.

Nobody wanted to acknowledge these papers or the implicat that they presented; nobody wanted to file Government misconduct issues at all. Nobody would even address the possibility of Archer receiving ineffective assistance of counsel.

55. It is apparent that, if the Judges, the prosecutors and the defense lawyers all belong to the American Bar Association, it is kind of hard to get them to point fingers at each other. There is simply no justice in the State of Nevada; is there anywhere




56. Archer had used the USC Law in the past so he enlisted their help in trying to have Don Green removed from his case. Archer was on remand for resentencing from the Ninth Circuit, where, at oral arguments, a Judge on the Panel stated to Richard Cornell that he (Cornell) was ineffective for not charging John Momot with ineffective assistance of counsel on the direct appeal; for not asking for a jury instruction for a lessor-included offense (the oral argument decision ..led Graves to file an amendment),
which would have dismissed the Ccpunt, Two conspiracy before the jury convicted, leaving no conspiracy to fall back on after the C.C.E. charge was dismissed - per the Government's admission, at trial in front of John Momot. Tom Green stated that the conspiracy charge was the lessor included offense of the C.C.E. charge, and as such, would have to be dismissed. The trial court, Judge McKibben, stated, "Then that's how we will handle it then." But no!

57. At the ^sentencing, the Judge ambushed the defense

by sentencing Archer based on a case called Midina. The defense never had a chance to ask for the lessor included offense instructic

John Momot had withdrawn from the case before the sentence hearing, but he could have asked the court for a jury instruction before trial, but he didn't.

Attorney Don Green, at the sentencing hearing, never had a chance to ask for a lessor included offense instruction, it was too late. (No jury)(Ever notice how they overlap the responsibility so that no one is at fault?VII guess that's why they go to school for so long.).

Richard Cornell never charged John Momot for not asking for the jury instruction - that means he was also ineffective,

so now he can't file Archer's § 2255 petition because he would have to be a witness. (How convenient now, no lawyer!). So now without a lawyer to file Archer's § 2255 petition, he was faced with forgoing the petition because of the Anti-terrorism and Effect] Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) one-year deadline for filing the petition.

61. The court couldn't appoint Archer counsel to assist in the preparation of the § 2255 petition because he still had an attorney of record (for the remand appeal). So Archer turned, once again, the the USC Law School Professor, Charles Wesalburg, who assigned Archer a student whom he got to see and work on his
nasp Tiji t~h. The Paul Robinson (Brady) papers were put into a motion (a bare bones motion) asking for leave to stay the tolling of the one-year time limitation and leave to amend. Archer finally got something into the courts that might help get him out.

When the district court found out that Archer had filed a Brady issue with leave to amend it, he was transferred to FCI Safford, Arizona, where it made it impossible for him to confer with the student lawyer. When Archer contacted the USC Law School about his case, he had been assigned another student lawyer. (He thinks).

Archer never got to see this student. When he tried to contact the Professor, he was informed that he had also been assigned another Professor, a woman. Archer tried to talk to

her about his case, but she would hear nothing about any amendments, The Professors from USC Law School were not licensed to practice law in the State of Nevada so they gave a girl out of the public defender's office the authority to cosign for the USC Law School. (Is this even legal?). Archer tried but could not contact this lady.

64. When "Dan the Man" Roberts, the student lawyer, talked

to Archer on the phone, he didn't want to hear about any amendments, he said they would weaken the case. So Archer waited... (The student got a grade).

65. The brief was due soon so Dan filed the brief. Archer refused to sign the brief until he had a chance to read it. When Archer finally got to read the brief he noticed that Dan had made a serious error, he gave away the prejudice prong on the ineffective of counsel issue. On page 11 of the brief Dan had answered a question with1 a yes instead of a no. Archer still refused to sign until Dan corrected the error.

Dan got angry with Archer and the Professor was also angry because to make the correction it would have made Dan look bad and would have lowered his grade that he had already received. Hey! I said, this is my life. (What can I do?). So Dan corrected the error and then filed a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. The Judge granted the motion to withdraw and refused to appoint new counsel.

On the opposition brief, the Government took one-year to respond, even though the court gave them 30 days to file the brief, they did not file it for over a year. So with no lawyer, Archer had to respond to the Government's opposition. The court refused to appoint counsel to file a traverse.

Archer then contacted an attorney from San Francisco, 7.1 Alan Ellis, a post-conviction specialist. Archer paid Attorney Ellis one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) to read the paperwork of the case and another three thousand dollars ($3,000.00) to file a traverse to the government's opposition brief.

Alan Ellis wanted an additional twenty five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) to appear at the hearing. (I would have paid it if I had it. My sister would have had to take a second mortgage out on her home to raise the money. I could not chance it).


On February 3, 2000, the government appointed John J. Graves, Jr., Esq. from Graves & Leavitt Attorneys at Law. Mr. Graves seamed alright at first. It is understandable that Mr. Graves had to be brought up to speed on the case, but after six continuing months of visits he still would ask the investigator, "well who do we have for witnesses, and have you contacted any of them?" The investigator would counter with, "no, but I am still trying." (This after five visits).

Attorney Graves and his investigator were furnished with the names and addresses of all the witnesses at the onset of their representation. The attitude that Attorney Graves and his investigator exhibited in Archer1s presence tended to get

on his nerves and made him think that, maybe Mr. Graves was growing a little senile. (He could have been wrong).

Attorney Graves did file an amendment alleging the lesser-included jury instruction, which to Archer, was right on. An amendment, that meant that Archer had about six more issues, all good. He was stoked!

In June of 2000, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey. What a windfall, this decision was right-on with Archer's case. It was an issue that fit Archer's case perfectly. Mr. Archer informed Attorney Graves of this fact and the attorney said he would check on it.

At the next visit at the jail, Mr. Graves brought with him a motion amending the petition based on the Apprendi decision. It was all good, except Mr. Graves failed to point out the increase of two levels for the gun enhancement. He stated that there was

no gun enhancement - Archer was sure that there was - so they argued about it. Archer was absolutely sure that he had been enhanced for a gun possession under the guidelines and stated to Attorney Graves that he would get it in the Apprendi motion because it was covered under the double jeopardy doctrine under double counting on the 924(c) gun charge. Archer would not sign until the attorney checked out his claim and added it to the motion. Well, nobody likes to make mistakes, especially lawyers. Archer should have used more tact, know what I mean?

74. Attorney Graves was upset. He had already put the date on the motion. I suppose that's why they like to file their motion; before showing them to the client. He left the motion with Archer and left the jail - the visit was over. There's no doubt that Archer should have shut-up, this was the only attorney helping him - he was, at least, filing motions and amendments and all things. Perhaps Archer was gun-shy. It had been 9 years that he had been fighting to get back in court, and he didn't want to leave anything out that might help his case. (Know what I mean?).

Attorney Graves had had it. He told Archer that he had 40 other cases - no wonder he seemed confused at times. On August 30, 2000, Attorney Graves filed a motion asking to withdraw as counsel (Docket No. 444) and the court granted his request. The court then appointed Patricia M. Erickson, Esq. on this same date to represent Archer. The evidentiary hearing that was set for September 19, 2000, was vacated and was to be reset by the Clerk ((775) 686-5827) upon request by counsel.

Attorney Graves' investigator, David Groover knew that Brucker was to be a witness (3/29/00), and that Graves was working on a conflict-of-interest issue because of Brucker/Momot. (9/28/20C David was now working with Attorney Erickson and came to see Archer at the jail in Northtown, almost one month after being appointed.

Attorney Erickson was made aware of the Apprendi motion made up by Attorney Graves and the lesser included jury instruction issue that Attorney Graves had already filed in Archer's behalf. She was brought up to speed on the case. She stated to Archer that she was working on a capital murder case and she was very busy at that time.

After many continuances, Attorney Erickson's father died, she moved her office^so she had to be brought up to speed on the hearing.because of the large amount of paperwork developed in the case. (10 to 15 banker boxes).

(2/23/2001). Now 6 months after her appointment as counsel, Attorney Erickson realizes that there is a conflict of interest between herself and Ron Stevens. Attorney Erickson states that she had represented Ron Stevens in 1992. (In fact, she did represent him at an evidentiary hearing in 1992). At that time she withdrew as his counsel for a conflict of interest because

she was dating the D.E.A. Case Agent, Tim Landrum. (It took this lawyer 6 months to discover she couldn't represent her client).

Archer was serving time in a low-security Correctional Institution in Safford, Arizona before being brought to the North Las Vegas Jail, M.C.C. which is a high-security holding facility. Archer was brought here on a writ of habeas corpus for a 1-hour hearing in February of 2000. He waited over 2 years for this hearing in a maximum security holding facility.

After Patricia Erickson withdrew at the hearing, Archer asked the Judge for permission to be able to work with his new lawyer on his case. The Judge, Howard McKibbin, stated that he would see to it (on the record)(You would think that, in this case, that would be the law, I mean the Judge giving you his word on the record).

82. (11/10/2001) The Review Journal, Page 10: The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Association President, Irwin Schwartz said, "There can be no effective representation without communication." The American Bar Association took the same view, said Association President, Robert A Hirshon, in a letter demanding Federal action on this serious matter.

In May 2001, Archer met his newly appointed lawyer, Lawrence D. Wishart and investigator David Groover. Attorney Wishart then stated that he had not review the case as of yet, that there were 15 boxes of papers. He also stated that Archer could write to him and give any input as to the amendments yet to be litigated. Archer then showed Attorney Wishart a, copy of the Apprendi motion authored by Attorney Graves. Archer told Attorney Wishart that he felt the Apprendi motion was good, but there were new cases out now that would make it even better, as this motion had not been filed but definitely should be. Attorney Wishart read the motion, made some notes on a yellow legal pad and told Archer that he would be back on June 19, 2001, and then again two weeks before the hearing.

Archer tried to contact Attorney Wishart by phone three times but, either could not get through or the attorney would not accept the calls, so Archer had his sister try and contact the attorney by phone. (Archer thought that it was because the calls that he tried to make were collect and that the attorney did not want the charges). Archer's sister tried 10 to 20 times to reach Attorney Wishart by phone but he was never available and he refused to return her calls. The attorney also missed the June 19th visit.

Attorney Wishart did show up for an Attorney/Client visit on July 9, 2001, with his law clerk, or his boyfriend. He did not so much as bring a writing pad, pen or pencil to the visit. The attorney stated that he was very busy and that it was a long drive down here. Attorney Wishart's office is in Reno Nevada. Archer informed him that he was upset and that he wanted to work with the attorney on the case. Attorney Wishart just smiled.

(I guess he thought that was amusing). The attorney stated to Archer that he lived in Reno, Nevada, and that he did not know why the Judge (McKibbin) would appoint him to represent Archer since Archer's case and the court was so far away.

86. Archer advised Attorney Wishart that they had missed the one-year deadline for filing the Apprendi motion (June 26, 2001). The attorney stated, "Oh, wasn't that filed?" He knew damn well it had not been filed from when Archer showed him the motion during his May visit to the jail with investigator Groover! Well, he now says it is too late and that he did not believe it (the Apprendi case) was retroactive as to the one-year time limitati under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 's
provision for filing writs under newly discovered evidence. Archer told the attorney that he was well aware of that, but if he had kept his appointment visit on June 19, 2001, there would have still been time to file the motion under the deadline. (The attorne just smiled).

Archer mentioned all of the phone calls that his sister had placed to the attorney concerning the Apprendi matter. The attorney smiles and states that he will return her calls as soon as he leaves the jail from this visit. Needless to say, he did not return her calls. More lies, he had no remorse. (Guess what, another dumptruck lawyer appointed by Judge McKibbin, out of Reno, Nevada - a friend of Richard Cornell's. Why do I see a pattern here?) .

Both lawyers knew Judge McKibben. Richard Cornell played golf with him and Larry Wishart was out of the Public Defender's Office previously. They were all from Reno, Nevada and Larry Wishart was the Chief Public Defender, so his contact with Judge McKibben was extensive. (Do I smell a trap here? I sure do).


89. On the last visit to the North Las Vegas Jail, Archer asked Attorney Wishart whether he had filed a Misaha Moranda motion on his behalf. They had talked about it, Archer's sister had left messages about a Misaha Moranda motion on Wishart's phone recorder. Wishart said, not yet. Archer then asked about the Apprendi issue. Wishart stated that he thought it was already filed. Archer informed him that, no, it had not been filed, that was the reason he had shown it to the attorney on his last visit.
Wishart then stated that he did not know if Apprendi was going to be applied retroactive. Archer told him that, as new law, it should have one-year to file, as the AEDPA allows, and that if he would have kept his June 19 visit/appointment he would have had time to file the motion. Wishart stated he did not remember that they had an appointment for a visit. (Attorney Wishart knew he had an appointment on June 19. After all, David Groover was there at the time he made the appointment).

So, they talked about the case some more. Attorney Wishart did not sound like he had Archer's best interest at heart. He told Archer that the Judge would not allow the amendments. This guy was spooky; there is no justice.

Archer then filed a motion, pro se, to have Attorney Wishart dismissed as counsel of record and another attorney appointed. (No answer). Then, on the day of the hearing Judge McKibben denied the motion. He said that I could proceed in forma pauperis or I could let Mr. Wishart do the hearing. I thought, why not? I could always appeal later. "Quis Custodiat ipsos custodes," which means "who will watch the watchmen," written

by a Roman named Juvenal. Failure to present a Judge with all the pertinent facts is considered perjury by omission.

92. JUly 23, 2001. The hearing goes on: There were to be between 6 and 10 witnesses for the defense, as far as Archer knew. That's how many were on Mr. Graves, witness list. But now? I knew I was getting dumped by Wishart; what with all of his grinning when I asked serious questions and his lacsidasical going on. I thought I would just let the hearing continue and see what would happen. There really was nothing else I could do, or so I thought.

Ron Stevens took the stand at the hearing. It was clear from the start that Attorney Wishart did not interview Stevens before the hearing. I couldn't figure out why the lawyer would not have interviewed such an important witness. You would have thought that the lawyer would have, at least, interviewed the most important witness, wouldn't you? But, no. Stevens could not remember where, when or how he obtained the Paul Robinson papers - the main Brady papers. If Attorney Wishart would have let him (Stevens) review those papers it would have become clear to him as he had made notes on the papers and that would have jogged his memory.

Attorney Wishart without establishing that the government withheld the Robinson DEA-6 report until after Archer's trial,

but that Stevens would not sign his plea agreement until after he had seen the papers. After seeing the DEA-6 report of Robinson, Stevens gave a copy to Mike Wysockie, who was John Momot's investigator, who was also hot called as a witness by Attorney Wishart. (Nice planning). Mike gave the papers to Archer's mother and sister, Ruby Connor, who could have testified to that fact if either one had been called to the stand. But no. Archer could have also testified to that if he had been called to the stand, but Attorney Wishart chose not to call Archer to the stand. Archer was scheduled to testify at the hearing and who was in a better position than Archer to explain the facts to the court than Archer? For some reason Attorney Wishart did not call Archer to testify.

95. Stevens answered all of the questions posed to him bythe defense and the government attorneys. All-in-all he made a good witness. He told the truth as he remembered it. If he had been asked the right questions it would have been better, or if Attorney Wishart had interviewed him prior to the hearing the correct questions could have been asked. But no.

96. Paul Robinson was also scheduled to testify at the hearinc He stated, prior to the hearing, that he was afraid of saying something that could incriminate him, that he feared that new charges could be brought against him. If you look at Exhibit One, it was a signed statement by Paul Robinson wherein it stated that, as a condition of probation, Robinson was not to testify on Stevens behalf and that if he did, his probation would be revokec and he would be put back in jail and new charges would be brought. (No wonder he was scared). He thought the plea agreement was still binding, and a hell of a plea agreement it was. (Is this legal?).

97. Attorney Patty Erickson found Paul Robinson's contract, that was authored by Tom Green, the same A.U.S.A. that prosecuted Archer, from 1992. This guy was a classic! Know what I mean. When she was working as Archer's lawyer, she was supposed to get a copy to Archer but she never did. It was, however, included in the paperwork supplied to Attorney Wishart when he took over the case. At the hearing it was Exhibit One, so now it is part of the record and in evidence.

98. Paul Robinson was appointed an attorney from the Public Defender's Office just prior to the hearing. Can they do that to a witness that has been subpoenaed to a hearing? This Public Defender advised him not to testify, so instead of placing him in contempt of court, he was dismissed from testifying and he left the courtroom.

99. Paul Robinson would have been a good witness. He was the person who supplied Stevens with his drugs, it is already a matter of record. He was afraid of a probation agreement that the time had ran out on. Why couldn't they advise him of that instead of scaring him into not testifying?

10 0. The DEA Agent, Tim Landrum and the AUSA, TOm Green entered into a conspiracy involving Judge McKibben and defense attorney John Momot to convict the defendant William Archer of crimes that were never committed. They were from an ex-felon in possession of a firearm, which Archer was not, to a CCE charge that did not exist. They made this charge up. There were no drugs, no drug labs, no drug money no implication of drug dealing by Archer. There was not a single witness who claimed that they bought drugs from Archer. Just the paid informant, John Lewis who was promised 10% of all seizures; property, cars, guns, money, homes, motorcycles, etc. He was also paid $40,000.00 to relocate himself and his girlfriend. He was granted immunity from prosecutic of all of his crimes, his 4 failure to appear charges for marijuana and guns were dismissed with the help of AUSA Tom Green and $4,000.( that Lewis owed in fines for traffic tickets were dismissed. (Is this legal?). If this witness wasn't paid-off to lie on the stand I don't know what is.

101. Naomi Webb (Toy) was threatened with 45 years in jail if she did not roll-over and testify for the government against Archer. She was a border-line retard. She was tested by the government at Night's Crossing, where she was found to have a third grade I.Q. They scared her so bad that she was willing to tell the court anything the prosecutor, Tom Green suggested, whether it was true or not. Anything to keep from serving 45 years in jail. (Is this legal?) .

Add New Search
Corvette Jeff   |72.2.163.xxx |2010-12-04 20:25:14
Bill we had our ups and downs but a lot of people still think about you and I w
ant you to know that you are not forgotten.I aint got much but if thier is any
thing I can do for you drop me a kite.This story is fucked sad and depressing I
feel for you and I hope you can find a way outta there. Your fr
iend J.
z k wheeler   |24.224.55.xxx |2012-09-20 09:37:00
Corvette Jeff   |72.2.163.xxx |2010-12-04 20:27:37
Bill my address is 810 e gamebird rd. pahrump nv 8 9048
Heather   |24.205.108.xxx |2011-04-20 16:20:49
I need to contact William. Anyone have a good addr ess for him or know where he
is so I can visit? I' m his cousin....
Andy   |71.202.197.xxx |2012-06-15 23:43:12
Im his nephew...wos heather? lol My mom ( his sist er ) passed in Oct 2006. Id l
ike to visit him...I think hes in Lompoc Prison
jeannie magno  - re: william archer hes in fci lompoc. fed corr. in   |70.173.75.xxx |2012-02-21 16:35:32
Heather wrote:
I need to contact William. Anyone have a good addr ess for him or know wher
e he is so I can visit? I' m his cousin....
z k wheeler  - bill is my step dad i am his only daughters 1/2 si   |24.224.55.xxx |2012-09-20 09:34:22
i know where he is if you want to know find m e on face book zita king and
ask me :chee r:
Write comment
[b] [i] [u] [url] [quote] [code] [img] 
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

!joomlacomment 4.0 Copyright (C) 2009 Compojoom.com . All rights reserved."

Last Updated on Thursday, 16 April 2009 22:03