Vince Williams v. State of San Andreas

[Shaun Harper]

Appellant Name:
Appellant Attorney(s):

Trial Docket Number: #23-CM-0101
Presiding Trial Judge: Bret Hyland
Notice of Appeal Filed: 20/4/2024

• [ ] Before Verdict
  [X] After Verdict

Reason for Notice of Appeal:

• [ ] Motion to be overturned
  [ ] Errors in the trials procedure
  [X] Errors in the judge's interpretation of the law
  [ ] New evidence proving appellants innocence

Grounds for Appeal: (Maximum 150 words)

• We the defense believe the verdict is unjust as PD's reputation did not suffer reputational damage. The presiding judge did agree that the defendant did not harm another person or personally benefitted from the situation.

[Hope Kant]

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

---

• Honorable Judge and pertaining parties,
  
  The Prosecution would like to question the initial validity of the current appeal on several grounds. To being with the defense states "We the defense believe the verdict is unjust as PD's reputation did not suffer reputational damage. The presiding judge did agree that the defendant did not harm another person or personally benefited from the situation."
  
  The prosecution would like to point out that "Filing a Notice of Appeal is done after an issuance of verdict for one of two reasons, you wish to appeal a verdict based on arguments that there were errors in the trials procedure or errors in the judge's interpretation of the law, or new evidence has come to light proving the appellants innocence". The defense states that the verdict is "unjust as PD's reputation did not suffer reputational damage". The prosecution would like to note that a feeling that their client was not 'justly' charged is not enough grounds to reopen a case for appeal.
  
  Additionally, the prosecution would like to discuss the absurdity of the courts considering overturning the ruling. Any verdict other than guilty would essentially set precedence stating that it is okay to impersonate a member of the LSPD. The prosecution would like to point to the multiple different ways a judge can determine a verdict. The majority of these rulings are done to avoid a ruling that would appear ridiculous to the common person.
  
  The law GF14 - False Impersonation is specifically designed and created to prevent people adopting the persona of another person in order to harm that person to gain a benefit. If adopting the persona of an LSPD representative, which includes officers, is not found to be illegal by our courts, what is to stop another individual from dressing up as a cop and pulling individuals over for detainment. Is our basis for guilty vs. not guilty to be whether or not the individual claims they committed those actions in jest? We ask the courts to see this appeal for what it is, another misguided attempt to get Mr. Williams off of charges he rightfully deserves.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Attorney General
  Director of Public Notary
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 505-9925 — [email protected]