Milo Rose # 090411
Union Correctional Institution
PO Box 221 A-1 P1211S
Raiford Florida 32083

June 10 1999-06-17

Mr John Tomasino and Ms. Linda McDermott
Attorneys CCRC Northern Region
Post Office Drawer 5498
Tallahassee Florida 32314 5498

Dear John and Linda;

Please find enclosed a copy of the June 10, 1999 letter I have sent to Governor Bush, I have also enclosed a copy of an article that appeared in the July 4, 1999 Press Journal.

What transpired at the December 1998 Huff Hearing and since has deeply troubled me.

1. Schaeffer denied me the privilege of attending.
2. Sylvia did a poor job of arguing the issues.
3. I filed the Pro Se Motion which Sylvia failed to support and protect.
4. Judge Schaeffer files her written summation on the Huff Hearing on March 22, 1999. I don’t receive notice or a copy of her summation. Nor am I informed that Sylvia will not file for rehearing, but on the same day March 22, 1999 files a Notice of Appeal directly to the Florida Supreme Court.
5. It wasn’t until Sylvia’s visit on June 2, 1999 that I learned of the State’s Attorney’s April 12, 1999 motion to strike my Pro Se motion from the record, and Judge Schaeffer’s, April 18, 1999 order granting the State’s motion to strike — all of which was done without notifying me in order to deny me my due process right to challenge the State motion to strike.
   It appears from all of this that State’s attorney King, Judge Schaeffer and Sylvia, were pretending the issues raised in my Pro Se motion do not deserve the credence of being heard, which seems to confirm what Jerry Spalding infers in the July 4, 1996 Press Journal article. That not only CCR, but also the whole legal system will pretend even when found that there are no issues worthy of a new trial. With this inference coming from a former head of CCR, it cannot be taken lightly, especially since I can give other examples of such behaviour in my case.

• Failure to raise the Tom Sawyer case with all its implications in any of my appeals.
  
• Failure to timely challenge on Federal relief the State’s failure to meet Court order deadlines as procedurally barred.
  
• In fourteen years of CCR representation none of the issues raised in my Pro Se motion were ever investigated, developed, or brought out except by me. John and Linda, as my newly assigned advocate counsels I hope you will take everything into advisement and give me the diligent zealous advocacy I deserve. Since I can no longer tolerate any appearance of pretending the trial issues in my case do not overwhelmingly warrant my conviction and sentence be vacated. So, I am prepared to put a copy of this letter, the Spalding excerpt and everything else on my website at the first appearance of neglect. I hope you both will give me your total support.
  

I look forward to meeting with you both soon.

Respectfully,

Milo Rose.