SUMMARY

Mr. Korsen believes that some of the issues and claims in his pretrial Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus have become moot due to the fact that he has now had his trial in case #H0001009. However, several of his claims are still cognizable by the court. Those claims that he feels have exceptional merit are as follows:

1. That Judge Dennard erred in issuing a Temporary Custody Order in case #CVDR0001056D without proper jurisdiction or authority.
2. That Judge Dennard’s temporary order modifying custody and/or visitation of Bryce and Stephanie Korsen was void for lack of jurisdiction.
3. That Judge Dennard illegally charged, arrested and jailed Mr. Korsen without a warrant or probable cause for indirect contempt of a void order.
4. That a void order cannot be the basis for any criminal charge that has no other element than those prescribed by said void order.
5. That Mr. Korsen was punished for allegedly violating a void order, without due process or a trial, by the 22 days he served in Ada County Jail between September 3, 2000 and October 4, 2000.
6. That Mr. Korsen has now been put in jeopardy a second time for the same alleged act, that of violating a temporary visitation order that was issued without jurisdiction and clearly in opposition to the children’s safety.
7. That extremely conflictive state statutes (I.E. Injury to Child vs. Contempt) created an entrapment scenario in which Mr. Korsen could face harsh punishment for choosing either alternative.
8. That the Grand Jury Indictment is void on its face for lack of jurisdiction, as well as, it’s foundation, being a void temporary custody order (H0001009).