#23-CM-0090, State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser

[Jay Garbanzo]

Defendant Name: Tommy Dayser
Defendant Phone: Withheld
Defendant Address: Withheld
(( Defendant Discord: mightywow ))
Requested Attorney: Jay Garbanzo

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 14/07/2023 22:16
Charge(s):

• GM10 – Failure to Comply
• WM02 – Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
• WM01 – Unlawful Brandishing of a Firearm
• WF01 – Assault with a Deadly Weapon
• WF03 – Possession of a Class 2 Firearm

Narrative:
I am filing this dispute on behalf of my client, Tommy Dayser. All legal contact or questions regarding this court filing will need to go through me.

---

I, Jay Garbanzo, hereby affirm that all information provided above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and understand that knowingly providing false information could result in additional charges and/or fines. (( I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means. ))

[Jay Garbanzo]

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. Tommy Dayser

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 15th of July, 2023.

I, Jay Garbanzo, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Tommy Dayser, in the underlying case.

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



Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 523-3622 — [email protected]

[Hope Kant]

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. Tommy Dayser

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 16/JUL/2023.

I, Hope Kant, a 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 Primary Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.



Senior Prosecuting Attorney
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 321-2132 — [email protected]

[Judith Mason]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF RECEIPT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 18th day of July, 2023.

The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the court system runs on a first-come, first-served basis and will only activate cases out of order for special circumstances.

During this time, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense, otherwise, a court-appointed attorney will be assigned to the case upon its activation.

The defendant is further encouraged to speak with an authorized individual at Rockford Hills City Hall, Mission Row Police Station, or Paleto Bay Sheriff's Office for official clarification on the specific charges received and their respective date and times, as once the case has been activated, any omitted charges will be considered abandoned and unable to be disputed within this case.



Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

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. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on the 14th of September, 2023.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser is hereby activated by this Court under #23-CM-0090.

At this time the State has adequate representation, however, the Defendant is still seeking representation. At this time the court will delay the Order for Discovery until adequate representation has been assigned and they inform the court they are ready to proceed.

In accordance with guidelines set forth by the Supreme Court of San Andreas, this case shall require an in-person trial. Once all pretrial matters have been resolved, a Notice of Scheduling will be issued to arrange an appropriate time for trial.



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

[Lisa Winter]

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. Tommy Dayser

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 14th of September 2023.

I, Lisa Winter, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Tommy Dayser in the underlying case.

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



Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 233-5420 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

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. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A court order was entered in the above case on the 14th of September, 2023.

The case of #23-CM-0090, State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser 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.




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

[Hope Kant]

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. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 17th of August, 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: Tommy Dayser Arrest Report 14th of July 2023

  

  

  Los Santos Police Department ARREST REPORT "TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"

  
  

  ---

  MUGSHOT

  • SUSPECT DETAILS
    • 
      Full Name: Tommy Dayser
      Phone Number: 5891415
      Licenses Suspended: No
      Officers Involved:
      Charges:
      • Aggravated WF01 - Assault with a Deadly Weapon
      • WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
      • WF03 - Possession of a Class 2 Firearm
      • GM10 - Failure to Comply / Identify
      • WM01 - Unlawful Brandishing of a Firearm or Weapon
    INCIDENT NARRATIVE
    • Incident Date: 14/JUL/2023
      
      Explain what happened, sufficient detail must be given to justify the placed charges, videos could be provided.
      • Explaind in greater detail in Investigation Logs - Mikael Cowell.
        
        Mr. Dayser was apprahended as he matched the description of a suspect in a shooting. He refused to identify himself to a law enforcement officer when ordered to. A weapon was found inside of his vehicle.
        
        After further investigation, it was found that probable cause for the other charges existed.
        
        DOC transported him from Mission Row.
    EVIDENCE DETAILS
    • Document the possessions confiscated from the arrested suspect.
      Possessions are to be documented individually, examples of documented illegal possessions are "Pistol .50" or "12 grams of Cocaine". Legal possessions that can be categorized may be grouped, eg. "Clothing" to describe all clothing items. Body camera footage/pictures may be attached as an evidence exhibit.
      
      Where possible, the serial number of each firearm seized as evidence should be noted.
      • Illegal Possessions:
        Exhibit A: 4x Clothing, 1x Pistol .50
        
        
        Legal Possessions:
        Exhibit A: Legal items taken to DOC with him.
        
        
        Photograph of Possessions (MANDATORY)

        

  
  Exhibit #2: Police Detective I Mikael Cowell Witness Statement

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 4/AUG/2023

  Witness Information

  • Name: Mikael Cowell
    Date of Birth: 23/APR/1995
    Phone Number: Withheld
    Occupation: LSPD Gang Detective

  Witness Statement

  • During the evening of the 14th of July, dispatch received a 911 call about a shootout involving heavy weaponry at BurgerShot. I responded promtly and discovered a bloody scene with one male injured (Ellaban Sensei (4842067). I treated him and took him to the hospital. From the crime scene, bullet casings and deformed bullets were found.
    
    I talked to the victim whilst transporting him to the hospital, getting an overview of the situation. The victim told me that he had been working at BurgerShot and a person had entered the shop on a bicycle, more specifically a BMX. The victim had advised him to leave, and an argument had sparked. The suspect later returned with an Assault Rifle and shot the victim inside of Burger Shot.
    
    The victim could outline the clothing the suspect had, specifically which mask, gloves and bracelet he was wearing. He also knew that the persons first name was Tommy.
    
    I continued my patrol and kept an eye for anything suspicious, when at the corner of San Andreasa Ave and Peaceful St. I noticed a white male driving away from the direction of burgershot, on a BMX in similar looking clothing. I pulled it over, and attempted to identify him. The person asked why & asked for my name. We spoke for a bit and I told him that unless he identifies himself, he will go down to jail. He chose not to identify him, so I placed him into custody.
    
    Once he was in custody, the investigation continued, CCTV from burgershot was gathered. During the time that Sgt. Luigi was at Burger Shot, I was at Mission Row with the suspect. As we were waiting on JB, we spoke more casually. I asked if the suspect ever had any "beef" with burgershot employees, to which the suspect responded with "not anymore". He also mentioned someone had gotten mad at him for driving with the BMX inside of Burgershot earlier.
    
    CCTV

    
    
    
    
    Spoiler

    
    The suspect was charged for the crimes, but the investigation had not ended. I had intel that the suspect resided close to BurgerShot. A search warrant was approved to the same property. Inside multiple Class 2 firearms were found.
    
    This included one Assault Rifle. I conducted ballistic forensics and determined that it was the same weapon used in the brutal shooting at BurgerShot.
    
    The weapon and the bullets are all stored at Mission Row along with some clothing.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Mikael Cowell, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
    Gang and Narcotics Division
    Los Santos Police Department
    Date: [04/AUG/2000]

  
  Exhibit #3: BurgerShot CCTV

  
  
  
  
  Exhibit #4: Photograph of Tommy Dayser at Arrest

  
  Exhibit #5: Andy Tyrie Wittness Statement

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Case Number: N/A At this Point
    Incident Date: 21/MAY/2023

  Witness Information

  • Name: Andy Tyrie
    Date of Birth: 16/JUL/2023
    Phone Number: 394-5986
    Occupation: House Clerk, Law Review Committee

  Witness Statement

  • On the 21st of May 2023, we conducted a meeting in the Law Review Committee. This meeting is significant as it was the official introduction of a bill to the House, regarding some charges which Mr. Tommy Dayser has been charged with. In this meeting, after the introduction from The Honourable Elena Blake representing the Los Santos Police Department, a formal debate followed. There is one point in particular I would like to bring to your attention, and this can be backed up by not only body-worn cameras but also our camera system inside the Hall of the House.
    
    The Delegate for the San Andreas State Government asked if someone was to be caught with multiple classes of firearms, would they get charged for all three? To which The Honourable Elena Blake representing the Los Santos Police Department said only the highest applicable charge would be applied.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Andy Tyrie, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Andy Tyrie
    House Clerk
    Law Review Committee
    
    Date: 16/JUL/2023

  
  Exhibit #6: CCTV of LRC Meeting

  
  (())

---

A Director of Public Notary
Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 321-2132 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

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. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A decision was reached in the above case on the 21st day of September, 2023.

The defense has now had over seventy-two hours to file any motions they might have in this case. Since no motions have been filed on their behalf I will continue this case under the assumption they do not wish to file any. If there are no objections to this court decision I will be be attempting to schedule trial immediately following this decision.



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

[Colt Daniels]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF SCHEDULING

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on the 21st of September, 2023.

All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case.

In the event all parties have overlapping availability the Presiding Judge will determine the best date and time to have a trial take place and post a Notice of Trial informing all of the upcoming proceeding.

In the event some or all parties do not have overlapping availability, the Presiding Judge will continue to attempt to schedule the proceeding or seek alternative avenues to conclude the case.

If either party has the intentions of calling a witness to the stand during the proceeding they must inform the court by filing a Witness List at the time of filing their availability. If no Witness List is filed before the Notice of Trial is filed you will be unable to call a witness during the proceeding.



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

[Hope Kant]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A Motion for Summary Judgement was filed in the above case on the 21st of September, 2023.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Summary Judgement, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Reasoning: No despute of facts.
  • Detailed Explanation: The Prosecution and defense are in agreement of the events that occurred. We are looking for a ruling on the letter of the law in congruence with the words spoken at the LRC. We are hoping this case will set precedence for...
    • New gun laws and what is/isn't considered "charge stacking"
    • Importance of what is said during the introduction of a law/words spoken at the LRC
    The Prosecution is requesting, that specifically for this case the defendant is not given court fees despite the outcome as the main goal of this case is to set precedence for Law Enforcement Agencies as well as the Judicial Branch.

Deputy Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 321-2132 — [email protected]

[Lisa Winter]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Update "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• Honorable Justice Colt Daniels,
  
  The defense has no objections to the motion put forward by the prosecution
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 233-5420 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0090, State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• Counselors,
  
  Before I grant the Motion for Summary Judgement I would like to get some clarification on a couple of key details. Firstly, a Motion for Summary Judgement asks the judge to rule on the case before trial as both parties are in agreement of the facts of the case and only the interpretation of the law needs to be decided. With that being said, is the defense in agreement with the prosecution about the facts of the case and how the events played out and that the defense is not disputing them? Mainly the Witness Statements and Arrest Report details are agreed upon as fact by both parties?
  
  Second, is the defendant still disputing all of the charges listed in the filing of this case or only the charges related to the firearms? Once I receive clarification on this I will make my ruling.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Associate Justice
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]

[Lisa Winter]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Update "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• Honorable Justice Colt Daniels,
  
  The Defense is not disputing the facts of the case or the evidence put forth by the prosecution. The defendant is no longer disputing the charges placed against him minus WM02 – Possession of a Class 1 Firearm, or more specifically, whether or not this charge should be placed when a higher charge is already in place.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 233-5420 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

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. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A decision was reached in the above case on the 25th day of September, 2023.

I will be granting the Motion for Summary Judgement filed by the prosecution. As the defense has stated in their last correspondence, the only charge in question is WM02 – Possession of a Class 1 Firearm so please keep all further arguments just related to this charge.

We will be running off of standard procedure as outlined in #23-AP-0010; "The court should allow the prosecution seventy-two hours to present their initial arguments to the court on why they should rule in their favor. The defense will then be given the same opportunity the prosecution was to give a response. At that point the prosecution will then be given another seventy-two hours for any counter-arguments to be made, once again allowing the defense the same opportunity after. Once both sides have been given their opportunity to make their stance on the case known, the judge will then render their decision and issue a verdict."


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

[Hope Kant]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Notice "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  The Prosecution believes the evidence to speak for itself. We have presented all evidence that could be seen as beneficial to the defense, fulfilling both our Constitutional and ethical obligations. Whether or not what was stated at an LRC session holds weight on the placement of charges/application of the law is up for the Judge to determine. We await further instruction from the Judge and/or the verdict.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Deputy Attorney General
  Director of Public Notary
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 321-2132 — [email protected]

[Lisa Winter]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Notice "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  The Defense agrees with the prosecution and is only seeking a ruling on whether or not what was stated at an LRC session holds weight on the placement of charges/application of the law.
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 233-5420 — [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

ISSUANCE OF VERDICT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tommy Dayser
#23-CM-0090

A decision was reached in the above case on the 29th day of September, 2023.

I have carefully considered the evidence, legal arguments, and the relevant provisions of the Weapons Classifications Act. The defendant, Tommy Dayser, is disputing a firearm-related charge, specifically WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm as it related to another of his charges not currently being disputed, WF03 - Possession of a Class 2 Firearm.

The crux of this case revolves around the ideal that being charged with the Class 2 offense should preclude a person from also being charged with the Class 1 offense. However, upon reviewing the applicable law, it is clear that the Penal Code of the State of San Andreas does not preclude multiple charges for the possession of different classes of illegal firearms, as long as the evidence supports each charge independently.

The Weapons Classifications Act, which serves as the foundation for these charges, was designed to establish a fair and graduated system of penalties for the possession of illegal weapons. It explicitly acknowledges that individuals in possession of lower-classed illegal weapons, such as Class 1 firearms, should not be penalized to the same extent as those with higher-classed weaponry, such as Class 2 firearms.

Considering the evidence presented in this case, it is evident that the defendant was in possession of multiple illegal firearms, including a .50 Pistol (Class 1), a Pump Shotgun (Class 2), a Compact Rifle (Class 2), and an Assault Rifle (Class 2). Each of these firearms falls into its respective classification as defined by the Weapons Classifications Act.

The argument that possession of a Class 2 firearm should negate the possibility of a Class 1 charge does not align with the legislative intent of the Weapons Classifications Act. This legislation clearly seeks to differentiate between the severity of penalties based on the classification of the firearm in question. Therefore, multiple charges are permissible when a defendant is found to be in possession of firearms from different classifications, as it reflects the intention of the law.

It should be noted that while an individual can be charged concurrently with both WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm and WF03 - Possession of a Class 2 Firearm, the court emphasizes that they cannot be charged separately for each Class 2 firearm within that classification. In this case, the defendant possessed multiple firearms classified as Class 2, including a Pump Shotgun, a Compact Rifle, and an Assault Rifle. These firearms all fall within the same Class 2 category, and the law does not permit multiple separate charges for possession of multiple firearms within the same classification. The intent of the law is to distinguish between different classes of firearms, not to multiply charges within a single classification based on the number of firearms possessed. Therefore, the individual shall be charged once for the Class 2 offense, encompassing all Class 2 firearms in their possession.

It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:

• On the count of WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm, I find the defendant, Tommy Dayser, guilty.

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