Until agent of the state #1 can present evidence to support their claim of jurisdiction I don't see how the case can be allowed to move forward by agent of the state #2.

What is a county?
It's a legal fiction.
I can't be within a legal fiction.
Sounds more like a dba of the local (scum) lawyers.

If geographical boundaries are the evidence, then am I a catholic because some catholic diocese has jurisdiction over this geographical area?
Am I a boy scout, some troop has 'jurisdiction' over the area, too.

No, of course not.
There has to be further evidence to support that claim.

Any judge that lets the case move forward absent foundational evidence of a key element of all crimes is a criminal.
Unless you know how to compel him to follow the law, he can rule against you with impunity.
This is why so damn many of them are corrupt.

Look up the rules for the appellate court, and follow them for a writ of mandamus ordering the judge to do his damn job and hold the prosecution to its burden of proving all elements of the crime.

I did that and that da got some get right.
I walked with no fines and no time.

I can imagine the phone calls they got asking what the hell I was doing at the cca with an argument likely to prevail.
A misdemeanor was about to monkey wrench the entire scam.

The next time I asked the same questions, and a couple more, the judge dismissed my case, told me my motions were crap, and signed the dismissal order.
I'm 1-0-1 asking for this evidence.