Request to the Missouri Supreme Court for Nostra Sponte Superintending Authority Review of Sweeney v. Ashcroft in re Missouri Marijuana Legalization Amendment

UPDATE:  Conversations with those involved indicate that the certification issue is dead, not appealable, and that Amendment 3 is in effect.  However, the Constitutional issues are valid.  Legislators have standing to file requests to have Amendment 3 reviewed by the Missouri Supreme Court on the Constitutional issues identified in this Request.  We will redraft the Request and publish a new request at a later date.  We believe the Court will be motivated to rule in our favor.

January 23, 2023

To: The Missouri Supreme Court, en Banc
Chief Justice Paul C. Wilson
Judge Mary R. Russell
Judge W. Brent Powell
Judge Patricia Breckenridge
Judge Zel M. Fischer
Judge Robin Ransom
Judge George W. Draper III

Dear Justices,

This Notice is a request for nostra sponte review and reversal of decisions by the Cole County Circuit Court and the Western District Court which resulted in Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft being forced to certify Amendment 3 Marijuana Legalization on the November 8, 2022 election absent the court-ordered supervised recount of petition ballot signatures in District 6 necessary to legally certify Amendment 3 for the November 8th election.

My analysis indicates that improper jurisprudence by both the Cole County Circuit Court and the Western District Court is the sole reason why Amendment 3 was improperly certified for the election.   

Below, you will see that the decision of the Western District Court of Appeals improperly rewrote RsMO 116.140, giving the Secretary of State authority to accept ballot petition signatures that may be forged or fraudulent.  Although it did not require the Secretary of State to accept forged or fraudulent ballots, it placed the Secretary of State in an unconstitutional position of being forced to certify Amendment 3 or face lawsuits from proponents for violating the Western District Court of Appeals decision, for costs and damages, and perhaps criminal charges.

The Missouri Supreme Court en Banc has superintending authority under Missouri Constitution Article V, Section 4 to review actions of lower courts nostra sponte without an active case filing, and may have authority to correct errors made by courts beyond disciplinary measures up to and including deciding that Amendment 3 was not legally placed on the ballot, the vote invalid, with issuance a permanent Stay order barring implementation of Amendment 3.

We do not fault the Missouri Supreme Court for rejecting the appeal in Sweeney v. Ashcroft.  The effect of the Western District Court of Appeals decision forcing Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft to certify Amendment 3 was not conspicuous.

If the Court cannot issue Orders within an Article V, Section 4 proceeding, the Court has authority to nostra sponte revisit its decision rejecting the appeal in Sweeney v. Ashcroft. The evidence I bring forth suggest review and reconsideration is of paramount importance to the State of Missouri.  Whether or not this requires hearing is at the judgement of the court.  I suggest the court might be able review the case record and issue orders as no additional testimony is needed as relitigation of the case is not requested here.  The case record speaks for itself.  If necessary, a hearing limited to adjudicating the issues presented in our request would be both efficient and productive.

John Quincy Adams once said: “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”  I suggest that the rule of law exists only when the People can implicitly trust Courts to stand firm when facts require upholding the rule of law.

We are aware that Amendment 3 will impose tremendous costs, restrictions, liabilities, and harms on the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches; and the citizens of the State of Missouri.  I will therefore be requesting that public officials file similar Requests with the Court.  The Missouri Supreme Court is, in fact, the only institution capable of defending the State of Missouri from what may be the biggest Constitutional crisis in state history.

Please review evidence submitted below our signatures.  

Respectfully submitted,

David R. Usher, CEO, Civitas Economic Engineering, LLC [digtal signature redacted on the web]


Joy Sweeney, Petitioner in Sweeney v. Ashcroft, subject matter expert on marijuana policy issues, [digital signature redacted by request]


(Name and Title of public official)

  1.  I am an experienced, self-educated, pro-se litigant who successfully appealed a constitutional matter in Suffian v. Usher, 19 S.W.3d 130 (Mo.banc) cited in RsMO Section 452.423.  
  2. I have made every effort to relate the situation we face in this Request accurately and absent hyperbole.  Please grant leniency to me afforded to diligent pro-se individuals in the Courts.
  3. Some articles linked in this letter are published on esteemed public politically-oriented websites.  Please understand articles based on facts and evidence presented, not political innuendo.
  4.  All links in this Request have been checked with Malwarebytes antivirus software, or located on prominent websites safe from viruses. 
Access to hyperlinked and printable 29-page versions of this Request:
  1. Where web publication interfaces do not lend themselves to presentation of formatted documents, the majority of this Request is published at the links below in PDF format.
  2. If you received a printed version of this Request, the PDF document may be viewed and printed on the internet with working hyperlinks at
  3. Members of the Legislature and Administrative branch are encouraged to print out the Request with line numbers and file it with the Court En Banc.  It is accessible at or directly via if your security system does not allow short urls.
I am including Section 1 of the full document containing the Request for Nostra Sponte Emergency Order barring implementation of Amendment 3 Pending Review so everyone undertands the constitutional crisis faced by the State of Missouri and the need for the Court to act quickly:
  1.         Request for Nostra Sponte Emergency Order Barring Implementation of Amendment 3 Pending Review:
  • It appears that Amendment 3 takes effect on February 6, 2023; and
  • Releasing hundreds or thousands of convicted drug cartel felons and destroying criminal records is a great security risk to the welfare of the citizens, and will substantially increase drug cartel violence, human trafficking, and drug smuggling at great cost to the State; and
  • Filing of a case about Amendment 3 by the Legislature, Attorney General, or organization is not possible because they were not aware of the facts and constitutional issues necessary to file a valid case, and where there is no funding available; and
  • The Governor cannot modify or declare Amendment 3 unconstitutional by Executive Order; and
  • After February 6, 2023, The Missouri Supreme Court may not have superintending authority to ability to modify, limit, or to declare Amendment 3 unconstitutional’ and  
  • Courts are concerned about their ability to prosecute many kinds of criminal matters as the powers of the Courts may be constrained or blocked;
We request an immediate Emergency Stay Order barring implementation of Amendment 3 pending timely full review of Sweeney v. Ashcroft, Amendment 3, and decision of the Missouri Supreme Court en Banc.
Missouri Supreme Court by Will Osborne is licensed under Google Maps N/A