SOUTH CAROLINA CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES DANIEL COBLE AND BENTLEY PRICE, COMMITTED FELONY CRIMES OF CONSPIRACY TO KIDNAPPING/FALSE IMPRISONMENT AND UNLAWFUL SUBJECTION TO "SLAVERY" WHEN THEY TURNED A "BLIND EYE" TO TERRON GERHARD DIZZLEY'S ILLEGAL INCARCERATION BY REFUSING TO ADJUDICATE TERRON'S "EMERGENCY PERMANENT RESTRAINING ORDER AND INJUNCTION FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE" AND RELEASE TERRON FROM BEING HELD ILLEGALLY INCARCERATED FOR ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS REASONS WHICH VIOLATED TERRON'S FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS 

JUDGE DANIEL COBLE 

On January 26, 2024, I, Terron Gerhard Dizzley filed an "Emergency Permanent Restraining Order And Injunction for Immediate Release," and a civil action for false imprisonment against the South Carolina Department of Corrections. The record proves that Judge Daniel Coble issued an order prepared by defendants attorney which had nothing to do with the merits of my case, and indicated that even if it is true that I am being held illegally incarcerated, that I couldn't obtain relief pursuant to S.C. Code 20-4-50, which was a statute that I cited for the purpose of procedural due process in my request for an emergency hearing within 24 hours of filing the emergency injunction for my immediate release, not for the purpose of obtaining relief. Judge Coble disregarded my entire injunction and intentionally turned a "blind eye" to my illegal incarceration and based his entire order on intentionally misrepresenting the truth as to my reasons for citing a particular statute as grounds for condoning an illegal incarceration.

JUDGE BENTLEY PRICE 

On February 9, 2024, I filed an "Emergency Permanent Injunction for my Immediate Release, Double Jeopardy, False Imprisonment, Lack of Trial Court's Jurisdiction To Impose Sentence," and a civil action against the Georgetown County Solicitor's office for malicious prosecution and false imprisonment, and against the Georgetown County Sheriff's Department for false arrest and false imprisonment. On April 18, 2024, I had a hearing in Georgetown County pursuant to my injunction for my immediate release. The record proves that the judge that was initially supposed to presided over the hearing was Judge McFadden. At the hearing, the judge, who never announced who he was, extremely, intentionally deprived me from the opportunity to be heard, and to fully and faily present my case, and denied my motion for immediate release and my civil actions without ruling on  merits of my case and told the defendants attorneys to prepare a proposed order of dismissal and he would sign off on it. When I got back to the institution, I called my mother who informed me that the bailiff told them that the judge who presided over the hearing was not Judge McFadden, that Judge McFadden had got "caught up in traffic," and that he did not know who the judge was. After investigating the matter, we found out that the judge that replaced Judge McFadden at the last minute name was Judge Bentley Price, and that he was disqualified as a judge. Anyone can see what's going on here.

On May 15, 2024, I received an order from Judge Price, which was the same proposed order of dismissal prepared by defendants attorneys. In the order, Judge Price indicated that he agrees with his Solicitor Defendants who argued that it was not necessary for Judge Price to discuss the "merits" of my Permanent Injunction nor apply the legal standards pursuant to my illegal incarceration and that "even if" my arguments are true, I cannot obtain injunctive relief pursuant to SCACR, Rule 407, 3.8, which is a rule establishing that when a Solicitor's Office receives information of a wrongful conviction, or that a person is innocent that was prosecuted by them, they must take appropriate measures to remedy the wrongful conviction. Although the record proves that I demanded immediate release from ten years and counting of being held illegally incarcerated pursuant to SCRCP, Rule 65, which is the appropriate rule for requesting injunctive relief; I also requested relief on the grounds that my illegal incarceration violated my Fourteenth, Thirteenth, and Eighth Amendment rights. Judge Price did the same thing that Judge Daniel Coble did, he took one court rule that I cited and based his entire order on this rule by intentionally misrepresenting the truth in his order that I requested relief solely pursuant to SCACR, Rule 3.8.

Judge Coble and Judge Price's contentions in their orders that they have the authority to authorize the kidnapping/false imprisonment of me and refuse to adjudicate my case on the merits "even if true" that I am being held illegally incarcerated because I "allegedly" cited the wrong court rule or statute (which was not the case), is contrary to S.C., Fourth Circuit, and U.S. Supreme Court law. See: Conley v. Ryan, 92 F. Supp. 3d 502 (4th Cir. 2015), citing Topchian v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, NA, 760 F. 3d 843 (2014), "The well pleaded-facts alleged in the complaint, not the legal theories of recovery or legal conclusions identified therein, must be viewed to determine whether the pleading party has stated a claim. The failure in complaint to cite a statute or cite the correct one, in no way affects the merits of the claim. Factual allegations alone are what matters. Accordingly, a complaint should not be dismissed merely because a plaintiff's allegations do not support the particular legal theory he advances, for the court is under the duty to examine the complaint to determine if the allegations provide for relief on any possible theory." Spence v. Spence, 368 SC 106 (2006); Baird v. Charleston County , 333 SC 519 (1999); Gentry v. Yonce, 337 S.C. 1 (1999); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).

The U.S. Supreme Court determined in Fay v. Noia, 372 U.S. 391 (1963), "When a man is brought by habeas corpus to the Court, and upon retorn of it, it appears to the Court, that he was against law imprisoned and detained, he shall never be by the act of the Court remanded to his unlawful imprisonment, for then the Court should do an act of injustice in imprisoning  de novo, against law."

When I appeared before Judges Daniel Coble and Bentley Price with evidence supported by the record and clearly established U.S. and South Carolina Supreme Court precedents which proves that I am being held illegally incarcerated for ten years and counting without any legal nor jurisdictional authority; for Judge Daniel Coble and Judge Bentley Price to turn a "blind eye" to my illegal incarceration and remand me to an unlawful imprisonment was an act of "injustice," conspiracy to kidnapping/false imprisonment, terrorism, "unlawful subjection to slavery," and federal hate crimes. 

QUESTION: Why would the court, at the last minute, replace Judge McFadden from presiding over my hearing with Judge Bentley Price who was disqualified as a judge by the South Carolina Bar Association for misconduct and not notify me nor announce the judge’s name when he entered the courtroom? Note: Judge Price had never even read my case prior to the hearing, and the entire time, I thought I was presenting my case in front of Judge McFadden who had my case for months, and whom I personally sent a copy of my case to. How could Judge Price make a decision on a case he never read?