112706-Motion for reconsideration - Alaska State of Corruption

civil law. 7Rom uses this fiction to advance the theory that theevidence gathered during a post-conviction relief procedurewould not be allowed in Haeg's appeal – and thus his appealshould not be stayed pending a post-conviction relief procedure.Yet this is the exact reasoning for the vast majority of courtsto require post conviction relief – so an appeal without anadequate record may move forward after the record issupplemented through a post-conviction relief procedure. Romcites Appellate Rule 210 in support. Rom again is mistaken -Appellate Rule 217 governs appeals from district court. Rule217(c) states: "the record on appeal shall consist of the entiredistrict court file, together with recordings of the parts ofthe electronic record designated by the parties." In otherwords, all Haeg's post conviction procedures, as by rule theywill be conducted, recorded, and filed in the district court,will be admissible on appeal.Rom again uses the perjury that Appellate Rule 210 governsto argue that official proceedings before the Alaska BarAssociation, district court representation hearing, and AlaskaCommission on Judicial Conduct are "excluded by this rule." AsHaeg already explained Rule 217 governs and allows the additionof these proceedings by stating, "Unless otherwise ordered bythe court of appeals, the record on appeal shall consist of theentire district court file..." Also, Haeg again maintains it is7 See Rule 35.1. Post-Conviction Procedure. (a) Scope. A person who has been convicted of or sentenced for acrime may institute a proceeding for post- conviction relief under AS 12.72.010 - 12.72.040 if the person claims:Motion for Reconsideration Page 36 of 47