#23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

#23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Document 1 | Filed 02/JAN/2023 | Page 1 of 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE STATE OF SAN ANDREAS



  • Docket Number:
    23-CM-0003
    Date Filed:
    02/JAN/2023
    Violations:
    GF07 - Felony Fraud
    GF02 - Robbery
    GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion
    State of San Andreas

    v.

    Apol Kolar


INDICTMENT


  • THE PROSECUTION CHARGES THAT:
    • On the 8th of June 2022 at 02:59, a civilian of the State of San Andreas by the name of Travis Hawk engaged in a undersigned contract with Apol Kolar, then named Apol Falcone. The agreement was to buy the property of 5 North Conker Avenue in the city of Los Santos for a total price of $3,300,000 to be paid in a so called "lease to own" construction, in which the prospective buyer receives the economic ownership of the property during the time of the lease instalments but not yet the judicial ownership of the property, the latter only being received after the final instalment payment. The payment instalments were agreed upon $150,000 per week.

      As per the contract and as bank records of both parties show, following this contract Travis Hawk made three separate weekly payments of $150,000, totaling to $450,000. After the third payment, Apol Kolar had the locks of the house changed (( Player Apol_Kolar had supposedly removed property access from player Travis_Hawk )) after which Travis Hawk was unable to further lease and eventually own the house.

      In the time up until this point, Travis Hawk has tried to contact Apol Kolar multiple times regarding the above without any success. Even when seeing him in person, Apol Kolar would ignore him. Following the aforementioned, the Prosecution believes there is ill intent from Apol Kolar and as such would like to indict him for the charges as listed above.

      In the absence of a civil court, apart from the criminal allegation as per this formal complaint, the Prosecution would also like to request the court to include the claim of the payments totaling to $450,000 to be returned to Travis Hawk in material damages and $100,000 in material and immaterial damages.



  • Presiding:


    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Document 2 | Filed 02/JAN/2023 | Page 1 of 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE STATE OF SAN ANDREAS



  • Docket Number:
    23-CM-0003
    Date Filed:
    02/JAN/2023
    Violations:
    GF07 - Felony Fraud
    GF02 - Robbery
    GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion
    State of San Andreas

    v.

    Apol Kolar


NOTICE TO RESPOND


  • Notice is given that Apol Kolar is ordered to respond using the Plea Form below or appear in person at Rockford Hills City Hall between the dates of;
    • 02/JAN/2023
      • and
    • 09/JAN/2023
    Or make contract with the presiding judge;

    For the purpose of an Arraignment.


Failure to comply with this notice may result in additional charges and/or detainment by law enforcement.



  • Presiding:


    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Document 3 | Filed 02/JAN/2023 | Page 1 of 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE STATE OF SAN ANDREAS



  • Docket Number:
    23-CM-0003
    Date Filed:
    02/JAN/2023
    Violations:
    GF07 - Felony Fraud
    GF02 - Robbery
    GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion
    State of San Andreas

    v.

    Apol Kolar


ARRAIGNMENT FORM

  • Apol Kolar you are facing felony charges for alleged conduct that occurred on or about 08/JUN/2022

    This form will formally read you the charges filed against you. You may plead in one of three ways for each charge:
    • Guilty
      A plea of guilty indicates to the court that you confirm your guilt of the alleged conduct that was in violation of Penal Code. If you plead guilty, the charge and fines will be placed on your record and you will have to turn yourself into law enforcement.
    • Not Guilty
      A plea of not guilty indicates to the court that you dispute the charges being filed against you. If you plead not guilty, preliminary pretrial proceedings will begin and a criminal trial will be scheduled in the near future.
    • No Contest
      A plea of no contest is similar to that of a guilty plea, but indicates to the court that you accept the conviction, with the exception of avoiding a factual admission of guilt. If you plead no contest, the charge and fines will similarly be placed on your record and you will have to turn yourself into law enforcement.
    Before the court can accept a plea of guilty or no contest, you must be advised of your rights in this situation.
    1. You have the right to plead not guilty to any and all of these charges.
    2. You have the right to be represented by counsel at trial and at every other stage of the proceedings.
    3. You have the right to testify and present any evidence of your own in your defense against these charges.
    4. You also have the right to not testify during any of the proceedings in accordance with your right to remain silent.
    5. Please be advised that anything you say or do during the proceedings can and will be used against you by the prosecution.
    Apol Kolar, please be aware that any plea you give must be made voluntarily and of your own volition, and did not result from force, threats, or promises made by any person, with the exception of a Plea Agreement that can be arranged between yourself and the prosecution.

    Count 1 is GF07 - Felony Fraud, a felony charge punishable by 45 months of incarceration and a fine of $3,000.

    Count 2 is GF02 - Robbery, a felony charge punishable by 50 months of incarceration and a fine of $2,000.

    Count 3 is GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, a felony charge punishable by 40 months of incarceration and a fine of $10,000+.


    The prosecuting is seeking a total of 135 months of incarceration and a total fine of $15,000+ plus $450,000 in restitution.

    With all previous information in mind, please make your formal plea using the following form;

Code: Select all

[img]https://i.imgur.com/UM5h3vl.png[/img]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/6h9z9Jh.png[/img]
[divbox=antiquewhite]
[b]Defendant Name:[/b] Firstname Lastname
[b]Defendant Phone:[/b] ###-####
[b]Defendant Address:[/b] Here
[b][color=#0040FF](([/color] Defendant Discord:[/b] Here [color=#0040FF][b]))[/b][/color]
[b]Requested Attorney:[/b] [i]N/A if none[/i]
[/divbox]
[img]https://i.imgur.com/F76nFHB.png[/img]
[divbox=antiquewhite]
[b]On the charge of GF07 - Felony Fraud, I am entering a plea as follows:[/b]
[list=none]
[ ] Guilty
[ ] Not Guilty
[ ] No Contest
[/list]

[b]On the charge of GF02 - Robbery, I am entering a plea as follows:[/b]
[list=none]
[ ] Guilty
[ ] Not Guilty
[ ] No Contest
[/list]

[b]On the charge of GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, I am entering a plea as follows:[/b]
[list=none]
[ ] Guilty
[ ] Not Guilty
[ ] No Contest
[/list]

[hr][/hr]
I, [b]FIRSTNAME LASTNAME[/b], hereby affirm that this pleading is being made voluntarily and of my own volition, and did not result from force, threats, or promises made by any person, with the exception of a Plea Agreement arranged between myself and the prosecution.
[/divbox]


  • Presiding:


    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Document 1 | Filed 12/JAN/2023 | Page 1 of 1

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE STATE OF SAN ANDREAS



  • Docket Number:
    #23-CM-0003
    Date Filed:
    02/JAN/2023
    Violations:
    GF07 - Felony Fraud
    GF02 - Robbery
    GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion
    State of San Andreas

    v.

    Apol Kolar


ARREST WARRANT


  • To any law enforcement officer operating within the State of San Andreas:


    You are hereby directed to arrest Apol Kolar and bring him/her to Rockford Hills City Hall at 1 Rockford Dr. without unnecessary delay who is accused of an offense or violation based on the following document filed with the court:
    • [ ] Complaint
      [✘] Indictment
      [ ] Order of the Court

    This offense is briefly described as follows:
    • GM22 - Contempt of Court

    You are directed to make contact with the San Andreas Judicial Branch upon arrest for the purposes of an immediate Arraignment Hearing.


    Should no judges be available, you are directed to inform him/her of the following and then imprison him/her at Mission Row Police Department, Paleto Station, or Bolingbroke Penitentiary to begin serving his/her sentence immediately:
    • You are ordered to appear before a judge at the Rockford Hills City Hall at 1 Rockford Dr. within the next seven days, make contact with the San Andreas Judicial Branch to schedule an Arraignment Hearing for crimes alleged against you, or post your plea on your criminal indictment. Failure to comply with this notice may result in additional charges and/or detainment by law enforcement, including but not limited to an additional charge of GM22 - Contempt of Court.




  • Presiding:


    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Judith Mason »

Image
Image
The following pleading was filed on behalf of the defendant, Apol Kolar, by the presiding judge, Judith Mason, during an arraignment hearing.

On the charge of GF07 - Felony Fraud, I am entering a plea as follows:
  • [ ] Guilty
    [✘] Not Guilty
    [ ] No Contest
On the charge of GF02 - Robbery, I am entering a plea as follows:
  • [ ] Guilty
    [✘] Not Guilty
    [ ] No Contest
On the charge of GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, I am entering a plea as follows:
  • [ ] Guilty
    [✘] Not Guilty
    [ ] No Contest
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

NOTICE OF ACTIVATION


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on the 22nd of March, 2023.


The case of the State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar is hereby activated by this Court under #23-CM-0003.

As the defendant has indicated they are pleading Not Guilty on all counts this case will be moving forward.

Both the State and Defendant in this case are now awaiting adequate representation. At this time the court will delay the Order for Discovery until adequate representation has been assigned for the Defendant and a State Prosecutor has been assigned to the case and both parties inform the court they are ready to proceed.




Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Blake Eli
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2021 5:04 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Eli Blake

LSEMS Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Blake Eli »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 22nd of March, 2023.


I, Blake Eli, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Apol Kolar. I will be taking the responsibility of Co-Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


Image
Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 323-9861 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 22nd of March, 2023.


I, Cyrus Raven, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Apol Kolar in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Primary Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


Cyrus Raven
Deputy Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 22nd day of March, 2023.


The purpose of this notice is to inform you that as of this moment I, Roderick Marchisio, will be representing the State of San Andreas in all the proceedings pertaining to the underlying case.

I will take it upon myself to reach out to the involved parties to collect and review all evidence in relation to the underlying case to ensure a proper and smooth continuation of this process.


Respectfully,


Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    As you are aware, I will shortly be departing on an approved Leave of Absence. As such, I would like to ask you to keep this in mind when determining the various time sensitive parts of the underlying case.


    Respectfully,


    Attorney General
    Director of Public Notary
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Colt Daniels,

    We would request that the court not extend any continuance and proceed with the regular timeline regarding the Order for Discovery.

    Unlike previous situations, opposing counsel has decided to take this case before an LOA that will last 14 days. While I understand that perhaps opposing counsel is wanting to take this case in specific, his division currently has 6 prosecutors.

    The Defense has no issues in delaying the final trial date (if one is had) to accommodate the LOA. However, unnecessarily delaying this case at such an early stage like Discovery given the other available prosecutors in our eyes would be seen as an undue burden on the Defendant.

    Respectfully,

    Cyrus Raven
    Deputy Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    This indictment has been activated since January 2, 2023. Only on March 16, 2023, after having had to be searched for and brought in by the Special Enforcement Detail of the Los Santos County Sheriff's Department as well as having received an active warrant for contempt of court, did the Defendant come in.

    The Prosecution notes that if the Defense had been so keen on adhering to timelines, surely they would have not let the court wait a full two months and two weeks for their plea? If the Defense had no problems waiting these two and a half months, the Prosecution does not see why these two weeks should matter. This is also in line with the Court Decision in #22-CM-0057, State of San Andreas v. Ali Valentine.


    Respectfully,


    Attorney General
    Director of Public Notary
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Colt Daniels,

    The earliest notice of counsel by the Defense was today. As such, we are ensure of opposing counsel's argument about ''adhering to timelines'' in regards to our client's plea, although I am sure our client tried his best to comply with any court order.

    The 6th Amendment of the constitution asserts that ''the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial''. To this end, it seems improper that opposing counsel can claim a case knowing he will be absent for half a month before the case has begun, instead of assigning it to an alternative prosecutor or at the very least, bringing in a co-counsel that can continue with basic proceedings such as a Motion for Discovery.

    We are understanding in the fact that opposing counsel wants to be apart of this case, which is why we have no issue if the eventual trial date is delayed. We just ask that the court enforce the rights of the Defendant and avoid unnecessary delays.


    Respectfully,

    Cyrus Raven
    Deputy Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

ORDER FOR DISCOVERY


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A court order was entered in the above case on the 11th of April, 2023.


The case of #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar is hereby opened and acknowledged by the Court.

The prosecution is hereby ordered to provide all evidence collected from the arresting Law Enforcement Agency and submit it to the Court via Motion for Discovery within seven days. If additional time is needed, the prosecution can file a Motion for Continuance.

Once evidence has been submitted to the official docket the defense can begin filing motions.




Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

MOTION FOR DISCOVERY


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 12th of April, 2023.


The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Discovery, and presents the following as evidence;

  • Exhibit #1: Mugshots Apol Kolar, Los Santos Police Department
    Spoiler
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
  • Exhibit #2: Contract between Travis Hawk and Apol Kolar, Travis Hawk
    Spoiler
    [ATTACHMENT]

    ((

    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image
    Image

    ))
  • Exhibit #3: CCTV Footage 8/JUN/2022, Los Santos Bank
    Spoiler
    [ATTACHMENT]

    ((
    Image
    ))
  • Exhibit #5: Copy executed Search Warrant 08/NOV/2022 12:42AM including Confirmation Execution mail, San Andreas Judicial Branch
    Spoiler
    Roderick Marchisio wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:42 pm Image

    San Andreas Judicial Branch

    Search Warrant
    "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

    • Dear Apol Kolar/Falcone,

      Please find attached a copy of the search warrant the Prosecution division of the San Andreas Judicial Branch has recently executed on your records.
      Search warrant
      Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch

      Re: [Search Warrant Request] Apol Kolar / Travis Hawk
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

      • To:
        The San Andreas Judicial Branch operating within the State of San Andreas and their respective prosecution division;

        You are hereby directed to conduct a search of Bank Logs within the Bank of San Andreas for the following designated records:
        • Bank Records of Travis Hawk and Apol Kolar/Falcone from 08/JUN/2022 - Current
        [X] Any evidence of crimes in violation of the San Andreas Penal Law Article GM to SF included but not limited to:
        • GF07 - Felony Fraud
          GM07 - Criminal Fraud
          GF10 - Grand Theft
          GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion
          GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion
          GM05 - Receiving Stolen Property
        You are directed to execute this warrant between the hours of:
        • [ ] 06:00 - 21:00
        • [X] 08:00 - 22:00 (Hours of Operation for the Bank of San Andreas)
        • [ ] Any time day or night.
        You are being directed to send a copy of this warrant to Apol Kolar & Travis Hawk once executed, and return a copy with all property seized pursuant there to your respective department without unnecessary delay. The court requires a copy be submitted to the warrant application for internal archive.



        This warrant is issued on 07/NOV/2022 and is effective for 7 days. Should an extension be required please submit a notice no less then 12 hours prior to this warrants closing.


        Chief Justice
        San Andreas Judicial Branch
        (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
      Image

    Respectfully,

    Senior Prosecuting Attorney
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
    Image
  • Exhibit #6: Bank Logs Travis Hawk and Apol Kolar
    Spoiler
    [ATTACHMENT]

    ((
    RP proof
    ImageImage
    Server logs confirmation
    Image
    ))
  • Exhibit #7: Bodycam footage 27/JUN/2022, Travis Hawk
    Spoiler
    *Click*
    ((
    RP proof
    Image
    ))
  • Exhibit #8: Proof of purchase and sale, San Andreas State Government
    Spoiler
    Image



Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

MOTION TO AMEND


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Motion to Amend was filed in the above case on the 12th of April, 2023


The State of San Andreas/Defendant, name, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Amend, the original charges with the underlined amended charges.


  • Original Charges
    • GF07 - Felony Fraud
    • GF02 - Robbery
    • GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion

  • Amended Charges
    • GF07 - Felony Fraud
    • GF02 - Robbery
    • Primarily GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, subsidiarily GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion
    • GF10 - Grand Theft
    • GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting

  • Detailed Explanation: As made clear by the evidence the Prosecution has provided the court, the Prosecution was not able to find any tax payments made to the State. As it is up to the court which principle of taxable moment has to be followed as well as the recent introduction of the lesser included doctrine, the Prosecution is including GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion subsidiarily as such. Further, it is abundantly clear the Defendant took property of the victim without consent of a value over $5,000, namely $450,000 and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF10 - Grand Theft. Finally, it is abundantly clear this contract, which is a legal binding document, was made by the Defendant with the intent to deceive as well as the intent for personal gain and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting.





Deputy Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
Online
User avatar
Hope Kant
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2021 7:56 pm
ECRP Forum Name:

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Hope Kant »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 13/APR/2023.


I, Hope Kant, a Junior Prosecuting Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the State of San Andreas in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Co-Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


Image
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 321-2132 — [email protected][/list]

Image
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    We note that the Discovery period has expired as well as the usual 72 hours after the Prosecution presenting their Discovery has been had. As such, we would like to move on and schedule a trial in the underlying case.


    Respectfully,


    Attorney General
    Director of Public Notary
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Docket Response
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Colt Daniels,

    The Defense will be filing a motion soon. I would like to remind opposing counsel that the Defense has 72 hours to submit any motions after the Order for Discovery has expired, NOT from the time the Discovery is initially posted. You can find this information outlined HERE.

    Respectfully,

    Cyrus Raven
    Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch - Command
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

MOTION TO DISMISS


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Motion to Dismiss was filed in the above case on the 18th of April, 2023.


The Defendant, Apol Kolar, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Dismiss, and the reasoning for request is as follows;


  • Reasoning: Lack of Evidence + Civil Matter
    • Detailed Explanation:
      • This is a civil matter. The Superior Court has made it clear in the past that they will only oversee Criminal matters yet the prosecution has filled a criminal indictment for an alleged breach of contract without providing evidence of an initial attempt of contact by either party to resolve this matter.
      • It has come to our attention that the Prosecution, a representative of the State is also simultaneously representing the alleged victim, further indicating the civil nature of this trial. This a Conflict of Interest for the Prosecution as it now has to represent and protect the interests of the State and the ''victim'', which might not always align.
      • In other jurisdictions a grand jury is used to analyze the indictment and attached evidence and decide whether to formally charge the Defendant. While Los Santos operates differently, a similar initial review of the evidence should take place. It is clear from the Discovery posted that the majority of the statements provided in the THE PROSECUTION CHARGES THAT of the Indictment are missing any evidence and is based purely on speculation by the prosecution.
        • After the third payment, Apol Kolar had the locks of the house changed (( Player Apol_Kolar had supposedly removed property access from player Travis_Hawk )) after which Travis Hawk was unable to further lease and eventually own the house. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period.
        • In the time up until this point, Travis Hawk has tried to contact Apol Kolar multiple times regarding the above without any success. Even when seeing him in person, Apol Kolar would ignore him. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period.
        • The Prosecution was not able to find any tax payments made to the State. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period. The bank logs only highlight three transactions between Mr. Kolar and Mr. Hawk and not the lack of payment of taxes. Additionally, it would be reasonable to assert that the payment of the sales tax would only apply upon completion of the contract, in other words ''at the time of sale'' as outlined in the penal code under GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion
        • Further, it is abundantly clear the Defendant took property of the victim without consent of a value over $5,000, namely $450,000 and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF10 - Grand Theft. - Mr. Hawk signed a contract agreeing with the payment plan and willfully transferred these funds as shown by the contract and his own body-cam of one of the transactions taking place. According to the prosecution's own evidence, he stopped paying any further instalments after June 27th. Not only was there consent, there was uncoerced consent.
        • Finally, it is abundantly clear this contract, which is a legal binding document, was made by the Defendant with the intent to deceive as well as the intent for personal gain and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting. - The only evidence provided that remotely indicates ''intent to deceive'' is that of Mr. Hawk who failed to continue with his weekly payments. There is no wording in the contract that would indicate intent to deceive and once again this contract was signed by the Defendant without coercion and witnessed by a Third-Party.


        The Discovery Period is now over. It is extremely concerning that this Indictment was filed with claims that have no evidence behind them, especially when the prosecution is requesting 550,000$ in damages to be paid.


      It is with the above considerations we request this court dismiss the case with prejudice.

      Cyrus Raven
      Chief Public Defender
      San Andreas Judicial Branch - Command
      5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • To whom it may concern,

    In relation to the Motion to Dismiss as filed by the Defense on the 18th of April, 2023, the Prosecution would like to respond as follows.

    First of all, the Prosecution points out that the charges GF07 - Felony Fraud, GF02 - Robbery, Primarily GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, subsidiarily GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion, GF10 - Grand Theft and GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting are all in fact charges as listed in our penal code. As such, claiming that this is a civil matter is nonsense.

    Secondly, it is indeed true that the victim has requested to have the undersigned attorney appointed as their lawyer during the proceedings of this case, if any need be. In this respect, the Prosecution notes that it is in both the State's interest as well as the victim's interest that the Defendant is in fact convicted for the crimes committed, as this verdict would also lead to the Defendant having to renumerate the victim as stated in the formal indictment. As such, claiming that this is a conflict of interest is simply unfounded. Nevertheless, if the court wishes, the undersigned attorney is willing to relieve themselves of this duty, which has only been undertaken at the request of the victim.

    Finally, the Prosecution strongly believes the probable cause for the crimes committed is shown in the evidence as previously provided to the court. The arguments of the Defense all hinge on whether payments were uncoerced or not. In this respect, the Prosecution also kindly likes to point out - as the Defendant himself has written on the contract as per evidence exhibit #2 - the following:
    Should Travis Hawk will to pull out of the deal during his contract all cash paid to date would be refunded minus 25%
    As shown in the bank logs in evidence exhibit #6, the payments were made at the time, whereas no payment had indeed been paid back to the victim. Further, as shown in evidence exhibit #8, the San Andreas State Government has confirmed the Defendant had sold the house after being very clearly aware of this existing contract.

    Following the above, the Prosecution has proven the probable cause and can only conclude the Motion to Dismiss should be denied in full.


    Respectfully,


    Attorney General
    Director of Public Notary
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Colt Daniels,

    A few counter arguments to the latest prosecution reply.
    First of all, the Prosecution points out that the charges GF07 - Felony Fraud, GF02 - Robbery, Primarily GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion, subsidiarily GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion, GF10 - Grand Theft and GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting are all in fact charges as listed in our penal code. As such, claiming that this is a civil matter is nonsense.
    These charges exist, but are not applicable. A brief break down.
    Charge Breakdown
    • GF07 - Felony Fraud - ''The intentional deception of a victim by means including but not limited to a false display of information, identity, or documents with the intent of personal or financial gain causing greater than $5,000 in damages.'' - In the Discovery provided, there is no evidence to suggest there was an ''intentional deception of a victim'' in anyway. The terms of the contract were clear. Payments made weekly by Mr. Hawk in the amount of 150,000$ minimum, which he stopped paying after the 27th of June, breaching the contract with the Defendant. Any evidence that the locks were changed or Mr. Hawk attempted to contact the Defendant does not exist.
    • GF02 - Robbery - ''Taking the property of another person off of them without uncoerced consent.'' - There was no property taken at any point, nor is there any evidence of this. Any payments made by Mr. Hawk were done consensually without coercion as evidenced by his own body-cam footage.
    • GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion - ''Any person who, with or without intent to evade taxes, fails to report and pay sales tax at the time of sale, and instead of remitting it to the government, pockets it. The current sales tax in San Andreas is 5%. The total value of the tax has to be $50,000 or more for this charge to apply.'' - Doesn't apply, no sale was finalized. At the time of Sale in this case would be at the completion of the contract upon final payment. Additionally, the only amount ever exchanged was 450,000$, 5% on this would total to 22,500$, bellow the 50,000$ minimum for this charge to apply.
    • GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion - ''Any person who, with or without intent to evade taxes, fails to report and pay sales tax at the time of sale, and instead of remitting it to the government, pockets it. The current sales tax in San Andreas is 5%. If the total value of the tax exceeds $49,999 this escalates to Grand Sales Tax Evasion.'' - Same as above. No sale was finalized.
    • GF10 - Grand Theft - ''Taking the property of another person without consent of a value over $5,000.'' - Same as GF02, no evidence of any property, including money, having been taken from Mr. Hawk without consent.
    • GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting - ''Making, altering or copying seals, documents, currency with the intent to deceive or for personal gain. '' - The contract signed by the Defendant and Mr. Hawk is the one provided in discovery. The only evidence provided by the prosecution is the bank logs showing Mr. Hawk, the alleged ''victim'' breaching the signed contract by halting further payments to the Defendant.
    As such, claiming that this is a conflict of interest is simply unfounded.
    Given the nature of the breach of contract and the evidence kindly provided, it is possible the Defense will file a criminal complaint against Travis Hawk. Having the Attorney General represent both the state and a third-party that might be looking at criminal prosecution is a conflict of interest.
    Finally, the Prosecution strongly believes the probable cause for the crimes committed is shown in the evidence as previously provided to the court. The arguments of the Defense all hinge on whether payments were uncoerced or not. In this respect, the Prosecution also kindly likes to point out - as the Defendant himself has written on the contract as per evidence exhibit #2 - the following:
    Should Travis Hawk will to pull out of the deal during his contract all cash paid to date would be refunded minus 25%
    As shown in the bank logs in evidence exhibit #6, the payments were made at the time, whereas no payment had indeed been paid back to the victim. Further, as shown in evidence exhibit #8, the San Andreas State Government has confirmed the Defendant had sold the house after being very clearly aware of this existing contract.
    The Defense didn't mention probable cause at any point. The argument was clear. The indictment was issued with statements that have not been substantiated.
    Spoiler
    It is clear from the Discovery posted that the majority of the statements provided in the THE PROSECUTION CHARGES THAT of the Indictment are missing any evidence and is based purely on speculation by the prosecution.
    • After the third payment, Apol Kolar had the locks of the house changed (( Player Apol_Kolar had supposedly removed property access from player Travis_Hawk )) after which Travis Hawk was unable to further lease and eventually own the house. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period.
    • In the time up until this point, Travis Hawk has tried to contact Apol Kolar multiple times regarding the above without any success. Even when seeing him in person, Apol Kolar would ignore him. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period.
    • The Prosecution was not able to find any tax payments made to the State. - No evidence of this claim has been provided within the Discovery Period. The bank logs only highlight three transactions between Mr. Kolar and Mr. Hawk and not the lack of payment of taxes. Additionally, it would be reasonable to assert that the payment of the sales tax would only apply upon completion of the contract, in other words ''at the time of sale'' as outlined in the penal code under GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion
    • Further, it is abundantly clear the Defendant took property of the victim without consent of a value over $5,000, namely $450,000 and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF10 - Grand Theft. - Mr. Hawk signed a contract agreeing with the payment plan and willfully transferred these funds as shown by the contract and his own body-cam of one of the transactions taking place. According to the prosecution's own evidence, he stopped paying any further instalments after June 27th. Not only was there consent, there was uncoerced consent.
    • Finally, it is abundantly clear this contract, which is a legal binding document, was made by the Defendant with the intent to deceive as well as the intent for personal gain and as such, the Prosecution will also pursue GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting. - The only evidence provided that remotely indicates ''intent to deceive'' is that of Mr. Hawk who failed to continue with his weekly payments. There is no wording in the contract that would indicate intent to deceive and once again this contract was signed by the Defendant without coercion and witnessed by a Third-Party.
    With the Order for Discovery now being expired, it is clear that the majority of the claims made by the Prosecution in the initial filling of the indictment were false and unsubstantiated.


    Respectfully,

    Cyrus Raven
    Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch - Command
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    In line with your Court Decision in #23-CM-0028, State of San Andreas v. DeAndre & Arnold King, the Motion for Discovery filed by the prosecution layout the alleged crimes and the evidence for each crime for which the defendant stands accused.

    Once this case does go to trial, the prosecution will present this evidence to the court, and within their case-in-chief present the nature and cause of the accusation. If the prosecution cannot prove these alleged crimes beyond a reasonable doubt, then the defendant will be found not guilty.

    Following the above, we remain of the position that the Motion to Dismiss should be denied in full.


    Respectfully,


    Attorney General
    Director of Public Notary
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A Motion for Involuntary Dismissal was filed in the above case on the 29th of May, 2023.


The Defendant, Apol Kolar, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Involuntary Dismissal, and the reasoning for request is as follows;


  • Reasoning: Unreasonable Delay + Breach of the Defendant's 6th Amendment Rights
    • Detailed Explanation:

      The court has failed to adhere to the principals set out by the 6th Amendment of the Constitution of San Andreas, specifically the ''right to a speedy and public trial''.

      As of this motion, a total of 41 days have elapsed since the Defense's initial Motion to Dismiss without response from the Superior Court.

      Additionally, this delay has caused an undue burden on our client who has to continue with his day to day life with this indictment over his head, severely impacting his ability to continue doing business.

      Lastly, we recognize the prosecution is not at fault for this delay as they have responded in a timely manner on the docket.
      However, the Defendant's constitutional rights take priority to the state's interest in pursuing this case.

      it is with the above considerations that we strongly urge the court dismiss this case against our client.




Cyrus Raven
Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch - Command
5356160 — [email protected]
Image
Online
User avatar
Hope Kant
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2432
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2021 7:56 pm
ECRP Forum Name:

SAJB Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Hope Kant »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Docket Notice
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,

    The Prosecution agrees that the time spent waiting for a ruling is disappointing. We also agree with the note in regards to the defendants 6th amendment rights to a speedy trial. However, dismissing the case entirely based on time can only work to disservice the victim of the crime and benefit the perpetrator. While the Prosecution respects and acknowledges that the Defense does not cite the Prosecution for the fault in the time delay, a dismissal because of a lack of response would hurt the victims right to justice. Both considerations need to be weighed before a dismissal is considered as the Prosecution feels this puts a severe and undue burden on the victim, if dismissed. The preference of the Prosecution would be to have the Judge make a ruling and continue to trial, if necessary.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Prosecuting Attorney
    Notary Public
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 321-2132 — [email protected]
Image
Image
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Counselors,

    I apologize for the lack of communication from the court on this case. I am currently on a Leave of Absence out of the state and will return back to San Andreas on June 11th. Following my return I will be addressing the recent motions and arguments brought forth on this case and look at how to proceed forward in a timely manner. Thank you.

    Respectfully,

    Associate Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1966
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #23-CM-0003, State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch

Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

COURT DECISION


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Apol Kolar
#23-CM-0003

A decision was reached in the above case on the 17th day of June, 2023.


First and foremost I would like to thank both sides of counsel for their continued patience whilst this case moves through the judicial process.

To begin I will first be addressing the most recent motion entered to the court, this being the Motion for Involuntary Dismissal filed by the defense on the 29th of May, 2023. This case began with the courts filing an Indictment on the defendant on January 1st, 2023. It stood for 11 days before the courts issued an Arrest Warrant for the defendant as he failed to show up for arraignment. There were then 63 days before the defendant decided to show up and be arraigned on these charges. Less than one week later this case was activated and began to go through the judicial process. This case has been activated now for 87 days, additionally, the last correspondence from the presiding judge came just 67 days ago. In terms of cases that come through the Superior Court, this is not an unreasonable delay or a violation the the defendants 6th Amendment Rights and therefore this motion is denied.

Secondly, in regards to the Motion to Dismiss filed by the defense on the 18th of April, 2023. This motion was filed on the basis that this case is a civil matter and has a lack of evidence. The court would agree that the request made to the court to collect the payments totaling $450,000 and material damages of $100,000 from the defendant and returned to Travis Hawk is a civil matter and thus will not be ruling or making any decision on that matter within this criminal case.

The court will also be agreeing that their is a lack of evidence to support some of the charges listed within the indictment and the Motion to Amend filed by the prosecution on the 12th of April, 2023. First, I will be allowing the charge of GF07 - Felony Fraud to be pursued as there is probable cause to pursue this charge as it is argued that the defendant had an intent to deceive the victim for personal or financial gain causing greater than $5,000 in damages.

Secondly, the court will not be allowing the charge of GF02 - Robbery or GF10 - Grand Theft as their has been no evidence provided within the Motion for Discovery showing the defendant took the property of Travis Hawk to give probable cause for the prosecution to pursue these two charges. Within the case of 23-AP-0004 the court ruled that "the prosecution can pursue additional charges against a defendant in a case using the Motion to Amend Charges, but only if, they can provide evidence to prove probable cause."

Additionally, in regards to GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion and GM20 - Minor Sales Tax Evasion, the prosecution has had 60 days since this motion was filed to provide any evidence showing records that the defendant has not paid any taxes to give probable cause to pursue these charges but has failed to do so. The court will not be allowing the prosecution to pursue these charges in this case.

Lastly, GF12 - Forgery or Counterfeiting, like before, the prosecution has failed to show any evidence to the court alleging that the defendant had made, altered, or copied any seals, documents, or currency with the intent to deceive Travis Hawk. Therefore the court will also no be allowing the prosecution to pursue this charge in this case.

This leaves the prosecution to only be allowed to pursue the charge of GF07 - Felony Fraud in this case. As there has been no additional motions filed, I move to hear this case at trial.



Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
Locked

Return to “SAJB - Archived Criminal Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests