So in this unpub from 2/1 today, a repeat pro-per, who at "last count" had filed nine appeals or writs, claims an inability to speak English at his latest oral argument. But... well, let's let the court tell it:During oral argument, Patel claimed he was unable to speak English; however the court has reviewed the recording of the oral argument in Mayflower v. Patel (Patel I, B288872) from June 26, 2019, during which Patel did not request an interpreter and spoke in perfectly understandable English.Doh! That argument was recorded?!
(Footnote 6 is nice too.)
Posts
