#24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks

Post by **Leo Marks** » Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:35 pm

Defendant Name: Leo Marks
Defendant Phone: 522-1857
Defendant Address: Undisclosed.
(( Defendant Discord: marksy ))
Requested Attorney: Rockford Law

Charging Department: LSSD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 16/AUG/2023
Charge(s):

VM01 - Operating a Vehicle without a Valid License
WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
WM03 - Possession of Weapon Modifications

Narrative:
I have been unlawfully arrested and I'd like to appeal my charges

I, Leo Marks, 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. ))

Post by **Robert Winejudge** » Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:46 pm

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. Leo Marks

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 21st of August, 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.

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-4223 — [email protected]

Post by **Jay Wellberg** » Mon Aug 21, 2023 8:21 pm

Rockford Law
Re: State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks

To whom it may concern,,

I, Jay Wellberg of Rockford Law, will be representing the defendant Leo Marks in all matters pertaining to this case. I have familiarized myself with the contents of the case and I am ready to proceed with the case once it is activated.

Respectfully,

Defense Attorney | Rockford Law
(909) 2956979 — [email protected]

Post by **Kendall Groyce** » Sun Oct 01, 2023 8:52 pm

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. Leo Marks

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 1st of October, 2023.

I, Kendall Groyce, 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.

Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 489-9881 — [email protected]

Post by **Hudson McNamara** » Mon Dec 18, 2023 8:00 pm

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. Leo Marks

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 18th of December, 2023.

I, Hudson McNamara, 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 Co-Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.

Hudson McNamara
Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 327-8882 — [email protected]

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Thu Jan 04, 2024 3:42 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on the 4th day of January, 2024.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks is hereby activated by this Court under #24-CM-0001.

Both the State and Defendant have adequate representation in the case, as such, immediately following this notice, the Presiding Judge will be filing the Order for Discovery.

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]

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Thu Jan 04, 2024 3:44 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A court order was entered in the above case on the 4th day of January, 2024.

The case of #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks 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]

Post by **Kendall Groyce** » Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:00 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 4th of January, 2024.

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

Exhibit #1: Arrest Report of Leo Marks, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Arrest Report of Leo Marks 16/AUG/2023
ARREST REPORT

MUGSHOT
SUSPECT 1 DETAILS
- Full Name: Leo_Marks
  Telephone Number: 5221857
  Licenses Revoked: No
  Charges:
  VM01 - Operating a Vehicle without a Valid License
  
  WM02 - Possession of an Unlicensed Firearm
  
  WM03 - Possession of Weapon Modifications
  
  How did the suspect plea to the above charges?
  Suspect pleaded guilty to all charges.
  Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :
VEHICLES INVOLVED
- Vehicle A:
DEPUTY DETAILS
- Full Name: George Fern
  Badge Number: 12161
  Callsign: 11-R-18
INCIDENT DETAILS
- Date of Arrest: 2023-08-16
  Deputies Involved: Greg Devine-Scott Enis
  
  Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
  The suspect was seen leaving Bayview at a high rate of speed and was pulled over. After getting his ID and running it in the MDC it came out as suspended and the suspect admitted to having been in DOC the day before. The suspect was taken into custody on scene and searched. After the search, a .50 with a silencer was found in his bike. He admitted to owning it and was charged accordingly.
EVIDENCE DETAILS
- Exhibit A:
ARRESTING DEPUTY SIGNATURE

Exhibit #2: Witness Statement of Scott Pierce, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Master Deputy Pierce, Witness Statement
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Case Number: [Unknown]
  Incident Date: [16/AUG/2023]
Witness Information
- Name: [Scott Pierce]
  Date of Birth: [10/JUL/2000]
  Phone Number: [406-3428]
  Occupation: [Deputy Sheriff III ]
Witness Statement
- [First off I want to state that my memory is quite foggy of this arrest as it has happened multiple weeks ago. I am going to give my best description of what happened.
  During the time before Deputy Fern called for backup myself and Deputy Devine were on a passive DELTA patrol. From what I remember Deputy Fern had called for a 10-70 as he witnessed a vehicle speeding and he was going to pull it over. My unit had responded to this, when we arrived Deputy Fern had the vehicle pulled over near Bayview on Great Ocean Highway. From what I remember fern had already ID the person and had stated that the person had a suspended license. As he told me this I had asked what he was going to do and he said add the charge for the person driving with a suspended license. During this whole time I spent time in my cruiser allowing Deputy Fern to do what he needed to do with placing Mr. Marks under Arrest. I had been in my cruiser for most of the time filling out paperwork. Once again this entire scene is foggy for me on the details. I remember that after Fern had placed Mr. Marks in cuffs he had searched the vehicle and found a firearm. I then believe Deputy Fern placed the other charges onto Mr. Mark. We had arranged for the passenger to deal with the vehicle as I made sure she had a valid license and no warrants. From there myself and Deputy Devine cleared and went back 10-8. During that scene myself and Deputy Devine just did our own things do to Deputy Fern handling everything with the arrest.]
Witness Affirmation
- I, [Scott Pierce], 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,
  
  [Scott Pierce]
  [Legal Affairs Witness Statement - Leo Marks
  ]
  [Los Santos County Sheriffs Department]
  
  Date: [8/SEP/2023]

Exhibit #3: Witness Statement Greg Devine, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Deputy Sheriff III Greg Devine Witness Statement
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Case Number: Unknown
  Incident Date: 16/August/2023
Witness Information
- Name: Greg Devine
  Date of Birth: [01/JAN/2000]
  Phone Number: not disclosed
  Occupation: Deputy Sheriff III, LSSD
Witness Statement
- This case happened some time ago and I have not been able to locate footage from the day. I do remember the key facts of the matter clearly though. On the day I was patrolling with Deputy Enis and Deputy Fern was on duty as well.
  
  We were near Bayview when Fern advised he was conducting a 10-55 and requested additionals as there was many onlookers present. Fern mentioned that Mr Marks had a suspended licence and thus he was going to be arresting him for driving/riding the Gargoyle whilst having a suspended licence.
  
  As we were going to be impounding the Gargoyle per protocol we searched it. During this search we located a firearm with modifications. At that point both suspects were detained and mirandized whilst we attempted to confirm who had the weapon in their possession. I clearly remember asking Mr Marks whilst aware of his right to remain silent if he was the owner of the weapon. He said words to the effect of "of course it is are you dumb" (or similar). This was taken as a confession to the ownership/possession of the weapon. After Mr Marks was transported to DOC by Deputy Fern, Deputy Enis and I ended our watch.
Witness Affirmation
- I, Greg Devine, 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.))[/spoil]
  
  Signed,
  
  Greg Devine
  Deputy Sheriff III
  Los Santos Sheriff's Department
  
  Date: 08/Sep/2023

Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 489-9881 — [email protected]

Post by **Jay Wellberg** » Fri Jan 05, 2024 1:37 pm

Rockford Law
State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks

MOTION TO SUPPRESS

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

#24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks

A Motion to Suppress was filed in the above case on the 05 of January, 2024.

Defendant, Leo Marks, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Suppress, and requests to following be suppressed from evidence;

Exhibit #01: Arrest Report of Leo Marks, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Requested Evidence to Suppress:Highlighted areas due to hearsay.
Arrest Report of Leo Marks 16/AUG/2023
ARREST REPORT

MUGSHOT
SUSPECT 1 DETAILS
- Full Name: Leo_Marks
  Telephone Number: 5221857
  Licenses Revoked: No
  Charges:
  VM01 - Operating a Vehicle without a Valid License
  
  WM02 - Possession of an Unlicensed Firearm
  
  WM03 - Possession of Weapon Modifications
  
  How did the suspect plea to the above charges?
  Suspect pleaded guilty to all charges.
  Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :
VEHICLES INVOLVED
- Vehicle A:
DEPUTY DETAILS
- Full Name: George Fern
  Badge Number: 12161
  Callsign: 11-R-18
INCIDENT DETAILS
- Date of Arrest: 2023-08-16
  Deputies Involved: Greg Devine-Scott Enis
  
  Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
  The suspect was seen leaving Bayview at a high rate of speed and was pulled over. After getting his ID and running it in the MDC it came out as suspended and the suspect admitted to having been in DOC the day before. The suspect was taken into custody on scene and searched. After the search, a .50 with a silencer was found in his bike. He admitted to owning it and was charged accordingly.
EVIDENCE DETAILS
- Exhibit A:
ARRESTING DEPUTY SIGNATURE
- Detailed Reasoning: The highlighted portion is quoting statements made by the defendant outside the court and while not under oath constituting it as hearsay and inadmissible.

Exhibit #03: Witness Statement Greg Devine, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Requested Evidence to Suppress: Highlighted areas due to hearsay.
Deputy Sheriff III Greg Devine Witness Statement
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Case Number: Unknown
  Incident Date: 16/August/2023
Witness Information
- Name: Greg Devine
  Date of Birth: [01/JAN/2000]
  Phone Number: not disclosed
  Occupation: Deputy Sheriff III, LSSD
Witness Statement
- This case happened some time ago and I have not been able to locate footage from the day. I do remember the key facts of the matter clearly though. On the day I was patrolling with Deputy Enis and Deputy Fern was on duty as well.
  
  We were near Bayview when Fern advised he was conducting a 10-55 and requested additionals as there was many onlookers present. Fern mentioned that Mr Marks had a suspended licence and thus he was going to be arresting him for driving/riding the Gargoyle whilst having a suspended licence.
  
  As we were going to be impounding the Gargoyle per protocol we searched it. During this search we located a firearm with modifications. At that point both suspects were detained and mirandized whilst we attempted to confirm who had the weapon in their possession. I clearly remember asking Mr Marks whilst aware of his right to remain silent if he was the owner of the weapon. He said words to the effect of "of course it is are you dumb" (or similar). This was taken as a confession to the ownership/possession of the weapon. After Mr Marks was transported to DOC by Deputy Fern, Deputy Enis and I ended our watch.
Witness Affirmation
- I, Greg Devine, 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.))[/spoil]
  
  Signed,
  
  Greg Devine
  Deputy Sheriff III
  Los Santos Sheriff's Department
  
  Date: 08/Sep/2023
- Detailed Reasoning: The highlighted portion is quoting statements made by the defendant outside the court and while not under oath constituting it as hearsay and inadmissible.

Respectfully,

Defense Attorney | Rockford Law
(909) 2956979 — [email protected]

Post by **Kendall Groyce** » Tue Jan 09, 2024 12:25 am

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

Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,

The prosecution fails to see how the statement given by the defendant is hearsay. The prosecution asks the courts to look at the following statements that were made by the deputy in the arrest report:
the suspect admitted to having been in DOC the day before.

He admitted to owning it
These statements are admittances of guilt, not direct quotes from the defendant. I believe the defense is confused with the definition of hearsay. As this was a traffic stop, a custodial interrogation was initiated on the defendant. The deputy is simply explaining what he experienced and what was discussed by both parties and in no way is providing a direct statement on behalf of the defendant. We would also like to mention that the defendant had been Mirandized and informed of their right to remain silent prior to the defendant's admittance of the handgun being their own; this, in addition to pleading guilty to all charges prior to the defendants sentencing leads us to the following.

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A Motion for Summary was filed in the above case on the 8th of January, 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: Defendant's prior admission of guilt
  - Detailed Explanation: The evidence presented by the Los Santos Sheriff's Department clearly paints a picture of the defendant, with a passenger, driving a gargoyle motorcycle at speeds above posted limits near Bayview. Once pulled over, the defendant and passenger were properly identified and the defendant was found to be operating the vehicle with a suspended license. Once taken into custody with Miranda Rights being read on scene, the deputies then conducted a search of the defendant and his vehicle as they intended to impound the vehicle. A .50 pistol with a silencer was found on the gargoyle as a result of the search. The defendant admitted to law enforcement officials that it was his pistol and not the passenger's. Since the defendant was read their Miranda Rights on the scene when being taken into custody by Deputy Sheriff III Greg Devine, and proper search procedure was performed on both the defendant and the motorcycle, there's really no question or doubt that the defendant is guilty. Evermore so since this defendant admitted to being guilty of the charges on the scene prior to the start of his sentencing.
Respectfully,

Senior Prosecuting Attorney
Public Relations Representative
Training and Hiring Staff
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 489-9881 — [email protected]

Post by **Jay Wellberg** » Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:15 pm

Rockford Law
State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks

Honorable Judge Daniels,

Pleading guilty to the sheriff department means absolutely nothing, if it had any value, the courts would not have received and activated this case.

The definition of hearsay, "A statement made out of this court offered in court to prove the truth of the matter asserted." The deputies are claiming the defendant made a statement, they are saying he admitted to something, but there is no bodycam or dash cam to support these claims, the defendant did not make any admissions in court, which constitutes hearsay.

Respectfully,

Defense Attorney | Rockford Law
(909) 2956979 — [email protected]

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Sat Jan 13, 2024 12:38 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A decision was reached in the above case on the 12th day of January, 2024.

In the matter of State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks, the defense has filed a Motion to Suppress, targeting specific statements within Exhibit #01 and Exhibit #03. The defense argues that the statements in Exhibit #01 are hearsay, and they emphasize the absence of supporting visual evidence. However, the prosecution counters this by highlighting that the statements were made while the defendant was Mirandized, informed of the right to remain silent, and the right to an attorney during questioning. It is noted that the defendant offered the admission voluntarily during this process.

Upon reviewing Exhibit #01 and considering the circumstances surrounding the statements, the court finds that the statements made by the defendant during the custodial interrogation, after being properly Mirandized, are admissible. The court recognizes that the defendant was fully aware of his rights and chose to make the admission voluntarily.

Turning to Exhibit #03, the defense argues for the suppression of statements made by a witness, Greg Devine, citing that this is classified as hearsay as well.. The court has determined that the witnesses lack of recall renders the statements unreliable as evidence. Notably, neither the defense nor the prosecution explicitly labeled the evidence as unreliable.

However, in evaluating Exhibit #03, the court independently determines that the witness's statements are unreliable due to memory lapses. The court grants the Motion to Suppress for Exhibit #03, emphasizing its own finding regarding the unreliability of the evidence based on the witness's inability to remember key details.

Turning to the Motion for Summary Judgment, the court recognizes the fundamental disagreement between the parties regarding the facts of the case. In light of this dispute, the court denies the motion, emphasizing the necessity for a comprehensive examination of the evidence and the credibility of the statements made by the parties.

In summary, the court denies the Motion to Suppress for Exhibit #01, considering the statements made by the defendant during a Mirandized custodial interrogation as admissible. However, the court grants the Motion to Suppress for Exhibit #03, recognizing the unreliability of the witness's statements due to memory lapses. The court also denies the Motion for Summary Judgment due to the fundamental disagreement between the parties about the facts of the case.

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

Post by **Hope Kant** » Mon Jan 22, 2024 5:09 pm

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

Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,

This is a notice to the courts that the Primary Prosecutor on the case has an approved LOA from the 15th of January to the 23rd of January. When she returns from her LOA, the Prosecution is fine moving forward. We thank the courts for their patience during this time.

Respectfully,

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

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Sat Jan 27, 2024 3:06 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on the 27th day of January, 2024.

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]

Post by **Al Triton** » Sun Jan 28, 2024 2:54 am

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

Honorable Judge and pertaining parties,

This is to serve as a Notice of Recusal. The Prosecuting Attorney representing the State of San Andreas in the underlying case has tendered their resignation.

A new Prosecuting Attorney will be taking responsibility for Primary Counsel within seven days.

We would like to thank the court and the defense for their patience at this time.

Very Respectfully,
Al Triton
Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 318-8168 — [email protected]

Post by **Hudson McNamara** » Sun Jan 28, 2024 9:16 am

San Andreas Judicial Branch

"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

To whom it may concern,

I will be assuming primary counsel representing the State of San Andreas in this case after Counselor Groyce filed her resignation. I would like to request the court 7 days for myself to fully familiarize myself further with the case.

Respectfully,

Hudson McNamara
Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 327-8882 — [email protected]

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Tue Feb 06, 2024 12:00 am

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

Counselors,

I wanted to inform that court that the proceedings for this case are temporarily on hold. The presiding judge is currently on a leave of absence, and at this time, I am unaware of the duration of the leave. I assure you that as soon as the return date is determined, I will promptly update the docket and communicate the new timeline. Your understanding during this period is greatly appreciated, and I will do my best to keep you informed of any developments. Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

Respectfully,

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

Post by **John Texas** » Tue Feb 06, 2024 8:46 am

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. Leo Marks

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 6th of February, 2024.

I, John Texas, Deputy Attorney General 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, replacing Prosecutor McNamara, and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.

John Texas
Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 348-8450 — [email protected]

Post by **Jamie Wheeler** » Fri Feb 09, 2024 8:08 pm

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. Defendant

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 9th Of February, 2024.

I, Jamie Wheeler, 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.

Junior Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 440-4177 — [email protected]

Post by **Jay Wellberg** » Tue Feb 13, 2024 9:57 pm

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. Leo Marks

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 13 of February , 2024.

I, Jay Wellberg, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Leo Marks in the underlying case.

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

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 2956979 — [email protected]

Post by **Colt Daniels** » Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:03 am

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

NOTICE OF RECUSAL

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A Notice of Recusal was entered in the above case on the 14th of February, 2024.

I, Colt Daniels, the Presiding Judge on this case, will be recusing myself from the underlying case. Within the coming days I will transfer all documentation pertaining this case to a new Judge who will be presiding from here forward.

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

Post by **Roy Judge** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:42 am

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

NOTICE OF REASSIGNMENT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A Notice of Reassignment was entered in the above case on 19th of February, 2024.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks is hereby reassigned to Superior Court Judge, Roy Duke-Judge.

I will be familiarizing myself with this case and will issue next proceedings within 48 hours of this notice. Thank you all for your patience in the interim.

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 578-1859 — [email protected]

Post by **Roy Judge** » Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:57 am

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on the 19th day of February, 2024.

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 Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 578-1859 — [email protected]

Post by **Roy Judge** » Thu Feb 22, 2024 2:25 pm

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A trial date was set on the above case on 22nd of February, 2024.

In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 7:30 PM on Sunday 25th of February, 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, this is of course dependant on running time of the prior trial in the day as I'm aware counsel is on both cases. If complications occur that must result in a cancelation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 578-1859 — [email protected]

Post by **Roy Judge** » Sun Feb 25, 2024 9:20 pm

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. Leo Marks
#24-CM-0001

A decision was reached in the above case on the 25th day of February, 2024.

The court ruled that in the above case there was no physical evidence to support the charges of WM02 and WM03. The key piece of evidence, the weapon with it's modifications, was not presented in photographic format nor was there a serial number with which the firearm could be identified. The witness statements were unreliable as admitted by the sheriff's who provided them, this paired with the lack of any physical evidence casted reasonable doubt on the guilt of the defendant. This court does not make habit of handing down guilty verdicts based on statements alone, no matter how reliable or trusted the source of those statements are.

Regarding VM01, the defence made no effort to refute the facts of Exhibit #1 in relation to the vehicular charge, and therefore this court has no reasonable doubt the defendant was guilty of operating a vehicle without a valid license.

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

On the count of VM01 - Operating a Vehicle without a Valid License, I find the defendant, Leo Marks, guilty.
On the count of WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm, I find the defendant, Leo Marks, not guilty.
On the count of WM03 - Possession of Weapon Modifications, I find the defendant, Leo Marks, not guilty.

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 578-1859 — [email protected]

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards