#22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

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: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Docket Entry
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Judith Mason,

    Motion to Suppress - Exhibit #2: Witness Statement Hector Mayfield
    • Witness Statement does not follow proper formatting nor does it include witness affirmation statement.
    • Precedent established under #22-CM-0036, State of San Andreas v. Hailee Copyak
      Exhibit 3:Witness Statement - Luca Andollini however will not be allowed as it uses the incorrect witness format without the witness affirmation at the bottom. This ruling will set precedent that any testimony or witness statement must have the affirmation to be admissible in court.

    Motion to Amend Charges by Prosecution
    • Motion to Amend charges does not follow recent procedures regarding what charges can and can not be added by prosecutors.
    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: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Mason,

    In relation to the Motion to Suppress as filed by the Defense, the Prosecution would like to note the following.

    The Defense refers to #22-CM-0036, State of San Andreas v. Hailee Copyak, which has set precedent that testimonies or witness statements must have the affirmation to be admissable in court. In every other state in the United States, there is no specific format that witness statements must follow in criminal court. However, they are generally taken in the form of a sworn affidavit or a recorded statement, and must be given under oath or affirmation as well as the statement should also be signed or otherwise verified by the witness.

    Following this, the Prosecution can only conclude that the meaning of the witness statement format is that it has to be at least a recorded statement with an affirmation as well as signing of the statement.

    With reference to evidence exhibit #2, the Prosecution points out the following statement as written by now ex-Detective Hector Mayfield:
    Please let me know if you need me to submit this directly to JB, or if that will be handled by your office.
    This statement shows clearly that the now ex-Detective had written this statement up to be used in court exactly as is. Further, it is evident this is a recorded statement and it has been signed by the now ex-Detective. As such, the Prosecution can only conclude that given the reasoning and systematic approach of the witness statements, this statement should still be allowed in court.

    In relation to the Motion to Amend Charges, the Prosecution indeed notes changes have been made to the Docket. However, taking into account the courts of the State of San Andreas are seemingly the only criminal court system worldwide that maintain a ex nunc test of application of newer policy ans as such, we would like to voice our absolute displeasure at this breach of legal principles that previous case law has set in this regard. We hope that in the underlying case, the court will revisit these decisions as well as the impact on the various legal principles this very court system has been built on.

Respectfully,

Deputy 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: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Docket Notice
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Judith Mason,

    Is there an update on the current motions? Apologies for the insistence, but this situation has been pending for sometime and the Defendant is looking to get this situation behind him as soon as possible.


    Respectfully,

    Cyrus Raven
    Deputy Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

A decision was reached in the above case on the 31st day of January, 2023.


When it comes to the Motion to Suppress the Witness Statement written by ex-Detective Hector Mayfield, I will be granting the motion as prior case law has determined that without the witness affirmation confirming that the details contained therein are to be sworn or affirmed to be true under penalty of perjury, the statement is considered inadmissible. Though the prosecution has introduced some reasoning behind why the document was not written in the correct format, the standing case law with #22-CM-0036, State of San Andreas v. Hailee Copyak has been in place since mid-August of 2022, before this incident had occurred. The remaining exhibits within the Motion for Discovery are admissible.

On the Motion to Amend Charges, the court will note the displeasure from the prosecution on how the Superior Court has handled the change in policy which places limits on the Motion to Amend Charges, however, there have been multiple cases since the introduction of this policy which have ruled in favor of immediately adhering to the policy upon it's publication - this court will be ruling the same way. The Motion to Amend Charges is denied, with the only charge of this case being SF01 - Domestic Terrorism.

This case is now pending trial.


Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 31st of January, 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.



Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 16th of February, 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.



Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

A trial date was set on the above case on 19th of February, 2023.


In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 8:30 PM on the 23rd of February, 2023 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.


Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 24th of February, 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.



Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [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: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

A Witness List was filed in the above case on the 27th of February, 2023.
  • The defense designates the following list of individuals as witnesses, who may be called to the stand.

    Name of Witness:
    Hassan Readick
    Description: (party, fact witness, expert, other)
    Defendant
    Witness Agency:
    N/A



Image
Deputy Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 515-6160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image



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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

A trial date was set on the above case on 27th of February, 2023.


In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 8:15 PM on the 28th of February, 2023 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.


Image
Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [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: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Mason,

    As this trial was already scheduled for last Sunday and the Defense did not bring up the wishes to bring a witness then, as well as taking into account the short amount of time in preparation for this trial, the Prosecution objects to the witness on grounds of principles of due process.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Greg Kumerow
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2023 8:44 am
ECRP Forum Name: Doctor_Diddler

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Greg Kumerow »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
#22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Honorable Judith Mason,

    I, Junior Prosecuting Attorney Gregory Kumerow, will be co-counseling with Deputy Attorney Roderick Marchisio, and will be representing the State of San Andreas in all the proceedings pertaining to the underlying case.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Junior Prosecuting Attorney
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 219-6537 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image


San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

  • Parties,

    As more than 24 hours notice has been given to the prosecution to prepare questions for cross examination, I will not be denying the defense's wishes to call the defendant to the stand at trial. I understand that the defense had not brought up this intention until this most recent scheduling, however, I believe this notice of the witness list to be within an adequate amount of time for the prosecution to prepare questions in advance.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Associate Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 257-9183 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Judith Mason
Judicial Branch
Posts: 2578
Joined: Fri May 21, 2021 3:11 am
ECRP Forum Name: Judge Judy

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick

Post by Judith Mason »

Image


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. Hassan Readick
#22-CM-0072

A decision was reached in the above case on the 28th day of February, 2023.


The case of #22-CM-0072, State of San Andreas v. Hassan Readick has been resolved.

At the end of August 2022, the State of San Andreas was thrown into darkness by what was described by the San Andreas State Government as an isolated terrorist attack on the Palmer Taylor Power Plant, which provides electricity to hundreds of buildings and thousands of citizens throughout the state. As a result, many critical systems were placed in jeopardy due to the lack of available power to sustain the buildings in which they were operating. Needless to say, the San Andreas Judicial Branch takes these matters extremely seriously and, of course, wants those responsible to be brought to justice.

The case before us involves an individual who allegedly was involved in the incident at the Palmer Taylor Power Plant. Though the defendant in this case was not allegedly directly involved in the bombing of the plant itself, the prosecution alleges that Mr. Hassan Readick had been involved in distracting law enforcement officers and members of the State Government from providing an effective response to the destruction and aftermath of the incident.

With such a wide-reaching impact on the whole state, I want to make it clear that the court's role today is to review the facts and and evidence that have been presented in this courtroom and make a determination on whether the actions undertaken by Mr. Readick, based on the evidence presented before the court, rises to the level of Domestic Terrorism.

For those unaware, Domestic Terrorism is defined as extreme violent activities that appear to be intended:
  1. to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
  2. to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
  3. to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping.

This court has found that while Mr. Hassan Readick was allegedly working at the direction of the criminal organization known as The Blessings, his lack of apparent direct involvement in the mass destruction at the Palmer Taylor Power Plant and the prosecution’s lack of evidence connecting him to The Blessings organization in any way, besides Mr. Readick’s own initial testimony, would not place him at the same level of extreme violent activities required to be in violation of the SF01 - Domestic Terrorism charge.

The conduct Mr. Readick is alleged of committing involves wearing a mask in a public place, causing the public to become alarmed, and causing law enforcement officers to be diverted away from the Palmer Taylor Power Plant in order to apprehend Mr. Readick. While these actions may have been in violation of a number of citations, misdemeanors, and/or felonies, this court does not believe this conduct rises to the level of Domestic Terrorism.

The court, however, admonishes Mr. Readick for his attitude during his detention, interrogation, and testimony. Taking advantage of the heightened alarm that the public is facing during one of the most egregious terrorist acts in our state’s recent history is not a laughing matter and should not be joked about in any way, shape, or form. However, this court is bound by the Penal Code and will rule in accordance with the laws set forth by the San Andreas State Government.

It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:
  • On the count of SF01 - Domestic Terrorism, I find the defendant, Hassan Readick, not guilty.


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

Return to “SAJB - Archived Criminal Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests