Page 1 of 1
#24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:35 pm
by Leo Marks
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.
))
Re: State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:46 pm
by Robert Winejudge
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]
Re: State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2023 8:21 pm
by Jay Wellberg
Re: State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sun Oct 01, 2023 8:52 pm
by Kendall Groyce
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]
Re: State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2023 8:00 pm
by Hudson McNamara
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2024 3:42 am
by 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. 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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Thu Jan 04, 2024 3:44 am
by 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. 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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:00 am
by Kendall Groyce
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
- Exhibit #2: Witness Statement of Scott Pierce, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
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
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Fri Jan 05, 2024 1:37 pm
by Jay Wellberg
Rockford Law
State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
|
MOTION TO SUPPRESS
- Exhibit #03: Witness Statement Greg Devine, Los Santos Sheriff's Department
Requested Evidence to Suppress: Highlighted areas due to hearsay.
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2024 12:25 am
by Kendall Groyce
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:15 pm
by Jay Wellberg
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2024 12:38 am
by 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. 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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2024 5:09 pm
by Hope Kant
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2024 3:06 am
by 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. 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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2024 2:54 am
by Al Triton
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sun Jan 28, 2024 9:16 am
by Hudson McNamara
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2024 12:00 am
by Colt Daniels
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Tue Feb 06, 2024 8:46 am
by John Texas
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Fri Feb 09, 2024 8:08 pm
by Jamie Wheeler
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2024 9:57 pm
by Jay Wellberg
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Wed Feb 14, 2024 3:03 am
by Colt Daniels
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:42 am
by Roy Judge
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:57 am
by Roy Judge
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2024 2:25 pm
by Roy Judge
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]
Re: #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2024 9:20 pm
by Roy Judge
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]