#24-CM-0020, State of San Andreas v. Cyrus Raven

[Hugh Allgood]

Allgood Law 24-CM-0020 "Right Firm. Right Now"

---

• To all concerned,
  
  The witness list submitted by the Defense is merely to comply with the directive of the Court. The individuals listed are all potential witnesses the Defense could use, should we choose to. It's interesting the State wishes to question the validity of them as fact witnesses, considering each name appears in some form on the evidence on this docket.
  
  Once a trial date is announced, these individuals will be informed on behalf of the defense, and if they are available to come, there is a chance they could be called to testify in the Defense case-in-chief. We will not entertain any further discussions on whether we intend to use them or not, or what we intend to question them about, as we will not reveal defense strategy. The list is submitted so Defense has the option to call them if we decide to do so. Nor will we entertain a question on whether the witnesses have been paid to testify or not - this is of no concern to the State (not to mention, the State pays its witnesses all the time) and the State should be instead concerned with meeting their burden of proof.
  
  The "asked and answered" objection is not appropriate, as none of the witnesses have ever been asked questions by the Defense. The fact someone has submitted a witness statement does not that person does not have other viable information that could come out during direct or cross examination.
  
  Defense wishes to remind the State that the only person's time "wasted" up to this point is the Defendant who has had their right to speedy trial continuously violated and now with this "concern" aimed at attempting to take away the Defendant's right to have his own witnesses, and defense counsel who submitted multiple motions on their clients behalf to redress these violations, only for the Court and the State to take no steps to afford the Defendant this right (including through the ignoring of multiple motions). Responding to this "concern" of the State is a waste of Defense counsel's time -- bring your concerns to Court and address them properly.

---

Respectfully,

Owner/Attorney
Allgood Law
(909) 235-6076 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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

---

COURT NOTICE

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Cyrus Raven
#24-CM-0020

A Notice is issued as of the 5th day of October 2024

The court requests both parties to remain professional and address the court, not each other.

Secondly after reviewing the notice of scheduling document it appears we could not come to an agreement of scheduling this round. I will put up another one, later this week for a FINAL attempt to schedule this trial. I ask both Defense and Prosecution to brief colleagues in the event they are not able to attend. I wish to get this completed before month end, we have drawn out this trial to long as it is.


Superior Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 225-3056 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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. Cyrus Raven
#24-CM-0020

An attempt to schedule has been made and recorded by the court on 21st day of October 2024

Due to lack of availability of all participants and the new council we will attempt to schedule this trial once again.

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.



Superior Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 225-3056 — [email protected]

[Terence Williams]

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

---

WITNESS LIST

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Cyrus Raven
#24-CM-0020

A Witness List was filed in the above case on the 27th of October, 2024.

• The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Witness List, designating the following list of individuals as witnesses, who may be called to the stand.
  
  Name of Witness:
  Hope Kant
  Description: (party, fact witness, expert, other)
  Fact/character witness
  Witness Agency:
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

Terence Williams
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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

---

NOTICE OF TRIAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Defendant
#24-CM-0020

A trial date was set on the above case on 28th of October, 2024.

In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 20:00 utc on 3rd of November 2024 at Rockford Hills City Hall, Carcer Way, Metro Los Santos, SA.

Both parties are ordered to be present in the Judges Chambers no later than 15 minutes prior to the above listed date for pretrial arrangements. If complications occur that must result in a delay or cancellation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.


So ordered,


Superior Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 225-3056 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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. Cyrus Raven
#24-CM-0020

A decision was reached in the above case on the 3rd day of November, 2024.

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

• GF07 - Felony Fraud Charge, - I find the defendant, Cyrus Raven, Not guilty, as made clear by the exhibits presented by the defense, Mr. Williams, and Mr. Erikson donated these funds to Mr. Raven willing fully and with intention. It was clear that the defendant received these funds for his campaign as both outlined by the defense and the exhibits at this time.
  
  GF09 - Embezzlement Charge, - I find the defendant, Cyrus Raven, Guilty, as stated by the exhibits presented by the defendants council, the funds donated to Mr. Raven where passed on to him for the use in is campaign in the LRC. Whilst Mr. Williams states there was no conditions imposed he does however state that the money is for his political career. It is clear as stated by both sides, funds received were for his campaign, and funds were used to purchase multiple properties and vehicles as stated in an interview with a member of the LSPD.
  
  GF18 - Racketeering Charge, I find the defendant, Cyrus Raven, not guilty. At this time we find the evidence to be lacking to prove a case of racketeering has occurred. We do agree a relationship has been determined between Mr. Raven, Mr. Erickson, Mr. V. Williams but at this time, believe it to be that of a business owner and collogues. At this time, we are unable to confirm these charges.
  
  GF23 - Grand Sales Tax Evasion - I find the defendant not guilty at this time, as the burden of proof that the defendant was selling items without paying taxes has not been met.
  
  But on this note the Business Licensing board will be notified of the false application by Luke Raven for his license, and notified of the invalidity of all funds, and business transactions as per the Business licensing boards regulations.
  
  
  As such the defendant will be compensated for time served in accordance with out guidelines as well as funds spent in fines.

Superior Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 225-3056 — [email protected]