By Ascari Bryant
SANTA BARBARA, CA – Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Clifford Anderson late last week was forced to remind Jeffrey Scott Smith that if he had any legal concerns they should be addressed with his attorney and not the judge.
Smith appeared in Dept. 8 via Zoom for a warrant arraignment. Smith was in court to discuss matters of a bench warrant out on him.
During the opening statement pertaining to Smith, question arose as to why Scott had not appeared or contacted the court priorly despite having the means to do so.
When Judge Anderson began to read information about Smith’s case, Smith interrupted and said, “Did you read the filing on my case? The People vs who? I would ask that you dismiss the case because I am both the plaintiff and the defendant.”
Smith attempted to make the argument that his case is “The People of California vs. Jeffrey Scott Smith” and he is part of both parties – Smith and the “People” – and therefore his case should be dismissed.
Judge Anderson told Smith he did not know what he was talking about. Smith’s Public Defender Dorsa Karric then quickly interjected to remind Smith that during their meeting prior to appearing before Judge Anderson, there was no mistake within the legal work about the case.
Smith, however, seemed to be devoted to proving what point he believe he had, interrupting his counsel saying, “I would like the judge’s opinion please.”
Judge Anderson responded to this saying, “I can’t provide opinions or legal advice, that’s why you have attorneys.” Judge Anderson then went on to explain the issue of concern by Smith had already been explained to him by his counsel.
Smith remained persistent making the argument that he is a resident of California therefore part of the People and he is also Jeffrey Smith, making the statement, “I am two people but yet I’m one, so your filing is putting me against me.”
The argument seemed to shock the court. Following the statement were nine seconds of silence only to be broken by Smith.
PD Karric then interrupted as Smith looked as if he were doing more harm than good for himself, advising Smith not to discuss the case in open court but rather privately with her, noting “at this time the judge is indicating that he will not recall the warrant, until you appear in person. He may remand you at that time.”
Judge Anderson then attempted to reschedule a date for Smith to appear in court. When asked by his counsel if he would he be able to appear in court in a week, Smith replied, “I don’t know, not until I have my legal opinion (about) this case because right now, I’m not sure, I’m going to run the risk of being remanded for something that would be completely erroneous and incorrect.”
Deputy Public Defender Brian Mathis then responded to Smith informing him that he has warrant and failure to go in court to address the warrant could result to his being arrested, adding that “my advice to you, is to be on calendar as soon as possible. So, you can rectify the situation with pre-trial services and hopefully be allowed to remain out of custody.”
Deputy PD Mathis then told Smith his interpretation of the law is completely wrong, and he should address the situation as soon as possible before he ends up in custody waiting to go to court.
Smith then agreed to set a date to return to court in person and PD Karric informed him he must return to court next week, otherwise his warrant would remain out, and he would be subject to arrest. Smith then asked if his attorney is not prepared next week what could he do.
PD Karric informed him his attorney would be prepared. Smith then asked who his attorney would be, to which PD Karric informed him it would likely be herself or Deputy PD Mathis. Upon hearing Deputy PD Mathis’ name Smith made the request that he not be allowed to represent him.
Judge Anderson seemed to be growing frustrated with Smith, responding to his statement saying to “either show up next Thursday or don’t.” Smith responded by saying, “I just don’t want to embarrass the court.”