#24-CM-0004, State of San Andreas v. Martin James

[Martin James]

Defendant Name: Martin James
Defendant Phone: 2286946
Defendant Address: n/a
(( Defendant Discord: pegasus_ ))
Requested Attorney: n/a

Charging Department: LSSD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 09/SEP/2023
Charge(s):

• Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle

Narrative:
I have been wrongfully accused and wish to dispute these charges.

---

I, , 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. ))

[Colt Daniels]

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. Martin James

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on 10th of September, 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.



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

[Jacob Schmidtt]

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. Martin James

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 19 of September, 2023.

I, Jacob Schmidtt, Public Defender with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Martin James in the underlying case.

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


Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 309-8976 — [email protected]

[Mary Burrows]

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. Martin James

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

I, Mary Burrows, Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Martin James in the underlying case.

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


Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 339-5979 — [email protected]

[Mary Burrows]

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

---

• Included Parties,
  
  The defense would like to inform the docket that the LSPD was not the charging department, the correct department is the LSSD.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  Notary Clerk
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 339-5979 — [email protected]

[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. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

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

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Martin James is hereby activated by this Court under #24-CM-0004.

At this time the Defendant has adequate representation, however, a State Prosecutor has not been assigned to this case. At this time the court will delay the Order for Discovery until adequate representation has been assigned and they inform the court they are ready to proceed.

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]

[David Vespucci]

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. Martin James
A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 4th day of January, 2024.

I, David Coast, a Junior Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Martin James in the underlying case.

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

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 593-1338— [email protected]

[Hope Kant]

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

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  This is to serve as a formal notice to all parties. The Prosecution department is working to assign someone to the case at the moment. With the 9 active cases I am currently assigned to 7 of them, but working to delegate more. As we are gaining more Prosecutors, we ask for the courts forgiveness and patience. We give the assurance to the courts that we will not delay unnecessarily and work to rectify the matter quickly.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Attorney General
  Director of Public Notary
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 321-2132 — [email protected]

[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. Martin James

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 4th of January, 2024.

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.



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

[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. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A court order was entered in the above case on the 7th of January, 2024.

The case of #24-CM-0004, State of San Andreas v. Martin James 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]

[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. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 8th 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: LSSD Arrest Report 9/SEP/2023

  

  ARREST REPORT
  

  MUGSHOT

  SUSPECT 1 DETAILS

  • 
    
    
    Full Name: Martin James
    Telephone Number: 2286946
    Licenses Revoked: Yes
    • Driver
    • Trucker
    
    Charges:
    • VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle
    
    
    Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :

  
  
  VEHICLES INVOLVED

  • Vehicle A:

  
  
  DEPUTY DETAILS

  • Full Name: Autumn Campbell
    Badge Number: 9344
    Callsign: 3-X-27

  
  
  INCIDENT DETAILS

  • Date of Arrest: 2023-09-09
    Deputies Involved: Sheriff Wallace
    
    Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
    • Sheriff Wallace cause Mr James driving at 220Km/H in the city. He placed reckless operation on him, and I transported him to Mission Row.

  
  EVIDENCE DETAILS

  • Exhibit A:

  
  
  ARRESTING DEPUTY SIGNATURE
  
  

  ---

  
  Exhibit #2: Undersheriff Wallace Witness Statement

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Case Number: [Case Number]
    Incident Date: [09/SEP/2023]

  Witness Information

  • Name: [John Wallace]
    Date of Birth: [12/NOV/1990]
    Phone Number: [-]
    Occupation: [Undersheriff]

  Witness Statement

  • [Mister James was spotted by myself on Senora Freeway, just before the offramp to DOC, while observing traffic headed southbound and monitoring speeds. Mister James' sped past me at 204 km/h as seen on the dashcam footage I will attach. I immediately gave chase and turned my lights and sirens on, yet Mr. James continued to speed up to around 220 km/h and continued towards Los Santos. Just as we hit the city, he took an offramp and continued his high-speed drive onto another highway where he eventually stopped in the middle of the highway, in the center lane, to shout at me asking whether I was chasing him. I then told him to pull over to the side which he did. Upon walking up to his vehicle, I asked for his drivers' license which he provided, when asked why he was speeding around, he replied that he had to hurry home.
    
    I weighed the options here, his excessive speed was nothing short of reckless, exceeding the allowed speed by 80+ km/h is extremely dangerous, as traffic around him does not expect that speed. He brought his vehicle to a complete standstill in the middle of a inner city highway, complete full stop in the center lane. The dangers of that alone are numerous, any vehicle coming on to the highway or traveling along at save speeds would not expect such an action, let alone the time needed to react to it without putting others in danger.
    
    As I understood that he had important matters to tend to, I elected to charge him with only VM03 and not issue an additional citation for the speed on top of that. I did not want to charge him with VF04, even though his actions would have justified it, because I wanted him to take this a learning and not a harsh punishment.]
    
    Attached you will find my bodycam recording:
    
    INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #3

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, [John Wallace], 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,
    
    
    [John Wallace]
    [Undersheriff]
    [Los Santos County Sheriff's Department]
    
    Date: [14/SEP/2023]

  
  Exhibit #3: Bodycam Evidence

  RP Proof

  (( ))

  
  
  

---

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

[Mary Burrows]

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

---

MOTION TO SUPPRESS

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A Motion to Suppress was filed in the above case on the 11th of January, 2024.

The defense would like to suppress the highlighted parts of the exhibit.

Exhibit #2: Undersheriff Wallace Witness Statement

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information

• Case Number: [Case Number]
  Incident Date: [09/SEP/2023]

Witness Information

• Name: [John Wallace]
  Date of Birth: [12/NOV/1990]
  Phone Number: [-]
  Occupation: [Undersheriff]

Witness Statement

• [Mister James was spotted by myself on Senora Freeway, just before the offramp to DOC, while observing traffic headed southbound and monitoring speeds. Mister James' sped past me at 204 km/h as seen on the dashcam footage I will attach. I immediately gave chase and turned my lights and sirens on, yet Mr. James continued to speed up to around 220 km/h and continued towards Los Santos. Just as we hit the city, he took an offramp and continued his high-speed drive onto another highway where he eventually stopped in the middle of the highway, in the center lane, to shout at me asking whether I was chasing him. I then told him to pull over to the side which he did. Upon walking up to his vehicle, I asked for his drivers' license which he provided, when asked why he was speeding around, he replied that he had to hurry home.
  
  I weighed the options here, his excessive speed was nothing short of reckless, exceeding the allowed speed by 80+ km/h is extremely dangerous, as traffic around him does not expect that speed. He brought his vehicle to a complete standstill in the middle of a inner city highway, complete full stop in the center lane. The dangers of that alone are numerous, any vehicle coming on to the highway or traveling along at save speeds would not expect such an action, let alone the time needed to react to it without putting others in danger.
  
  As I understood that he had important matters to tend to, I elected to charge him with only VM03 and not issue an additional citation for the speed on top of that. I did not want to charge him with VF04, even though his actions would have justified it, because I wanted him to take this a learning and not a harsh punishment.]
  
  Attached you will find my bodycam recording:

The defense would like to suppress the highlighted text due to hearsay. NONE of these claims are supported by the bodycam footage provided in Exhibit #3. As in the footage the it does not show Undersheriff Wallace clocking the defendant at 220 km/h. It only shows Undersheriff Wallace's cruiser going 220 km/h to try and catch up to the defendant who was clocked going 204 km/h.

The defense would like to make mention that the cruiser was at a still 0 km/h when the defendant was clocked at 204 km/h. It will take a long amount of time to catch up to a car going 204 km/h from a still 0 km/h. We believe that just because the police cruiser was going 220 km/h to catch up to the defendant does not mean that the defendant was going 220 km/h making the highlighted portion having no evidence backing it up.

The defense would also like to bring up

I elected to charge him with only VM03 and not issue an additional citation for the speed on top of that.

This claim is false. When looking at the defendants record he was indeed issued an additional citation for VC03 - Speeding of the 3rd Degree. This makes the quoted part an Inconsistent Statement as the Sheriff did indeed issue a citation in accordance to the VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle.

Due to this the highlighted portions of the witness statement the defense believes it should be suppressed.


Public Defense Attorney
Notary Clerk
Training and Hiring Staff
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 339-5979 — [email protected]

[Mary Burrows]

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. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 15th of January, 2024.

Defendant, Martin James, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Discovery, and presents the following as evidence;

• Exhibit #1: MDC Printout of the charges placed onto Martin James
  Spoiler

  

---

Honorable Judge Daniels and Included Parties

Along with the motion for discovery the defense would like acknowledge a violation of the Lesser Offense Doctrine. The defendant was charged with both VC03 - Speeding 3rd Degree and VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle. The Defense would like to direct the attention of the docket to #23-CM-0009, State of San Andreas v. Aya Kasumi. The Doctrine States

Under this doctrine, the prosecution/law enforcement officer may charge the more serious offense primarily and the lesser charge subsidiarily as the greater charge implies the lesser charge. If the prosecution/law enforcement officer is able to prove the lesser charge but not the greater charge, the defendant shall be found guilty of only the lesser charge, however, if the prosecution is able to prove the lesser and the greater charge, the defendant shall only be found guilty of the greater charge. In either scenario, only one of the specified charges shall remain, should the defendant be found guilty of either such charge.

We the defense believe that since the defendant was charged with VC03 - Speeding 3rd Degree and VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle it shows that the Deputy had a clear violation of the Lesser Offense Doctrine and should be taken into consideration when moving through with this case.



Public Defense Attorney
Notary Clerk
Training and Hiring Staff
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 339-5979 — [email protected]

[Mary Burrows]

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

---

MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A Motion for Involuntary Dismissal was filed in the above case on the 15th of January, 2024.

• Reason: Charges placed were in violation of the Lesser Offense Doctrine
  Detailed Explanation: The Prosecution does not have enough evidence to separate the two charges on the defendant and therefore the case should be dismissed, as the second part of the above motion of discovery explains.

Public Defense Attorney
Notary Clerk
Training and Hiring Staff
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 339-5979 — [email protected]

[Kendall Groyce]

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

---

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A Motion for Continuance was filed in the above case on the 15th of January, 2024.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Continuance, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Reasoning: Primary counsel on LOA
  • Detailed Explanation: Honorable Judge Daniels, the prosecution believes this case is not as open and shut as the defense is making it out to be. As such we are requesting additional time allotted on this case to review the information the defense has presented, and the prosecution will gladly give a response to newly filed motions when back from the accepted leave of absence.

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

[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. Martin James
#24-CM-0004

A decision was reached in the above case on the 18th day of January, 2024.

I will be granting the Motion for Continuance filed by the prosecution. Once the leave of absence has expired and you have submitted responses to the pending motions I will make a ruling on them.



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

[Al Triton]

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]

[Al Triton]

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. Martin James

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 28/JAN/2024.

I, Al Triton, 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.


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

[Al Triton]

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

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  As noted by the defense, the defendant was charged with both VC03 - Speeding 3rd Degree and VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle. Since the defense brought forth the Lesser Offense Doctrine, we would like to point out the last part of it.
  Lesser Offense Doctorine

  #23-CM-0009, State of San Andreas v. Aya Kasumi. The Doctrine States

  Under this doctrine, the prosecution/law enforcement officer may charge the more serious offense primarily and the lesser charge subsidiarily as the greater charge implies the lesser charge. If the prosecution/law enforcement officer is able to prove the lesser charge but not the greater charge, the defendant shall be found guilty of only the lesser charge, however, if the prosecution is able to prove the lesser and the greater charge, the defendant shall only be found guilty of the greater charge. In either scenario, only one of the specified charges shall remain, should the defendant be found guilty of either such charge.

  If the prosecution/law enforcement officer is able to prove the lesser charge but not the greater charge, the defendant shall be found guilty of only the lesser charge, however, if the prosecution is able to prove the lesser and the greater charge, the defendant shall only be found guilty of the greater charge. In either scenario, only one of the specified charges shall remain, should the defendant be found guilty of either such charge.
  
  The Motion for Involuntary Dismissal avoids following the precedence of the Lesser Offense Doctrine, which allows for the prosecution to prove the charges, whether it be the lesser or greater rather than dismissing both.
  
  The prosecution believes without reasonable doubt through bodycam footage in Exhibit #3 that Martin James was operating a vehicle at 204km/h thus fulfilling the VC03 - Speeding 3rd Degree charge.
  
  Secondly, for the VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle charge, in Exhibit #3 Martin James maintained excessive speeds throughout a distance of over four kilometers, starting near DOC and going past MD via the inner city highway. For Undersheriff Wallace to travel 220kh/m to catch up with Martin James, it would take over 60 seconds to travel four kilometers at 220kh/m compared to the almost 120 seconds to do it at a legal speed, which Undersheriff Wallace would've caught up much sooner than inside the city limits. When Undersheriff Wallace did finally catch up to Martin James, Martin James performed an unnecessary emergency stop in the middle of the highway rather than pulling off to the side of the road for an emergency vehicle with lights and sirens on, one he suspected to be pursuing after him, as noted by the bodycam footage thus displaying an Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle. Additionally, to note, this charge was not only fitting for speeding over a distance but also for the emergency breaking in the middle of a highway.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Al Triton
  Prosecuting Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 318-8168 — [email protected]

[David Vespucci]

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. Martin James

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 28/JAN/2024.

I, David Coast, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Martin James in the underlying case.

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

Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 593-1338— [email protected]

[Julien Rocklopher]

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. Martin James

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 28/JAN/2024

I, Julien Rocklopher, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Martin James in the underlying case.

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



Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 442-8161 — [email protected]

[David Vespucci]

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

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  The defense wishes to bring to the court's attention the principle of double jeopardy in the case of State of San Andreas v. Martin James. The prosecution has charged Mr. James with both 3rd Degree Speeding and Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle. We argue that this constitutes a violation of the protection against double jeopardy, as Mr. James would essentially be punished twice for the same offense.
  
  It is a widely accepted principle that speeding excessively, particularly exceeding 80 km/h over the speed limit, can be grounds for a reckless driving charge. However, Mr. James was not caught speeding at such a excessive rate. The evidence presented, including Exhibit #3, indicates that he maintained high speeds on the highway, but never exceeded 80 km/h above the speed limit.
  
  We also would like to bring in precedence from case #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich

  Exhibit #4 was requesting a specific portion of the statement to be suppressed, this was was partially granted allowing the words "they were clearly speeding." to be inadmissible as it is considered speculation due to no actually speed being confirmed by a radar instrument.

  Similarly, in the present case, the prosecution's assertion of reckless driving based solely on high speed lacks concrete evidence and relies on speculation as no actual speed was confirmed by a radar instrument above 204 km/h, meaning he did not go 80km/h over the speed limit.
  
  Given these circumstances, the defense argues that charging Mr. James with both 3rd Degree Speeding and Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle amounts to double jeopardy. He should not be punished twice for the same conduct, especially when the evidence does not support the charge of VM03.
  
  In light of the above arguments and legal precedent, the defense requests that the court consider the principle of double jeopardy and the lesser offense doctrine when taking the motion for involuntary dismissal into account.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 593-1338— [email protected]

[Al Triton]

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

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  The prosecution would like to reiterate, that by coming to a complete sudden stop in the middle of the highway within city limits once noticing a law enforcement vehicle approaching at a high rate of speed rather than pulling off to the side of the road puts not only the defendant, Martin James at risk but also Undersheriff Wallace and every passing motorists for the chance of serious or fatal injuries as well as the potential for hundreds of thousands of dollars of damage from any potential accidents likely to result from such a dangerous situation. Martin James even took the time to shout out to ask if he was being pursued rather than placing himself in a safer position. This shows a clear disregard for his own safety and for others while operating a road vehicle.
  
  Secondly, to disregard the VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle due to a speed requirement is not in accordance with the State of San Andreas Penal Code stating:

  Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle.

  By enforcing a speed requirement to such standards, an individual could simply maintain a speed a few numbers below the limit to avoid the charge. Should two individuals be charged differently if one exceeds 80 over the limit for ten seconds and the other only 60 over the limit for sixty seconds? One does have a much higher rate of speed but traverses a much shorter distance while the other puts others at risk for a period of time longer.
  
  Lastly, by setting a precedence of speeding citations not being able to accompany to VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle charges when the Reckless Operation entails more than just speeding, the door opens to challenging speed camera citations due to "greater charges" being present. Did Undersheriff Wallace not clock the vehicles speed in the same fashion that a speed camera would? Would law enforcement officers then be required to remove speeding citations from speed cameras on individuals they charge with VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle? I believe such would be entirely unreasonable.
  
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Al Triton
  Prosecuting Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 318-8168 — [email protected]

[David Vespucci]

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

---

• Honorable Judge Daniels and pertaining parties,
  
  I would like to bring up precedence from case #23-CM-0086, State of San Andreas v. Bongo Haze,
  
  Bongo Haze
  
  In this case we can clearly see according to former judge Hugh Allgood,

  The difference between a discretionary 3rd degree speeding citation and a reckless operation charge is 1 km/hr, by definition, as there is no 4th degree speeding citation for speeds in excess of 80 km/hr. Law enforcement officers have the right to use this discretion in their duties, and as such the choice of going with a speeding citation or a misdemeanor charge of reckless operation would be the choice of the officer for a speed of exactly 80 km/h over the posted speed limit.

  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 593-1338— [email protected]

[Colt Daniels]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #24-CM-0004, State of San Andreas v. Martin James
"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]