#24-CM-0007, State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons

[Tyler Pedolski]

Defendant Name: Tyler Pedolski
Defendant Phone: 208-3336
Defendant Address: Apartment 28, 4 integrity way apartments
(( Defendant Discord: a1ex1201 ))
Requested Attorney: N/A

Charging Department: LSSD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 17/09/2023 22:00
Charge(s):

• VF01 - Evading
• VM07 - Hit and run

Narrative:
I wish to appeal these charges as they were wrongfully placed on me.

---

I, Tyler Pedolski, 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. ))

[Judith Mason]

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. Tyler Pedolski

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 23rd day 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.



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

[Jay Wellberg]

Rockford Law Re: State of San Andreas v. Tyler Pedolski

---

• To whom it may concern,,
  
  I, Jay Wellberg of Rockford Law, will be representing the defendant Tyler Pedolski 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]

[Hope Kant]

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. Tyler Pedolski

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 10/OCT/2023.

I, Hope Kant, Attorney General of 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.



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

[Tyler Pedolski]

To whoever this may affect, my name recently changed to Tyler Masons, hopefully this won't affect anything.

[Bret Hyland]

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. Tyler Masons (formerly Pedolski)
#24-CM-0007

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on 3rd of Feburary, 2024.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons (formerly Pedolski) is hereby activated by this Court under #24-CM-0007.

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.


Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
San Andreas Government

[Bret Hyland]

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. Danny Mason
#24-CM-0007

A court order was entered in the above case on 5th Day of February, 2024.

The case of #24-CM-0007, State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons 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.


Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
[email protected]

---

[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. Tyler Masons

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 6th of February, 2023.

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 and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


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

[Rowin Lawson]

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. Tyler Masons

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

I, Rowin Lawson , 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.


Rowin Lawson
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 304-6031 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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

---

COURT STATEMENT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tyler Mason
#24-CM-0007

Welcome to the file Attorneys, we await the prosecutions completion of the discovery and look forward to its review.

In the event that the Defense has been unable to reach their client, I will consider a motion for Voluntary dismissal, in the event the defendant is not reachable, during this phase of the case as well. Otherwise we await the conclusion of the discovery period.



Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
[email protected]

---

[John Texas]

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. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 12th of February, 2023.

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

• Exhibit #1: Tyler Pedolski Arrest Report - 17/SEP/2023

  

  ARREST REPORT
  

  MUGSHOT

  SUSPECT 1 DETAILS

  • 
    
    
    Full Name: Tyler Pedolski
    Telephone Number: 2083336
    Licenses Revoked: Yes
    • Driver
    
    Charges:
    • VF01 - Evading an Officer
    • VM07 - Hit and Run
    
    How did the suspect plea to the above charges?
    Suspect pleaded not guilty to all charges.
    Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :

  
  
  VEHICLES INVOLVED

  • Vehicle A: Black and White Jugular | LP RATS | RO : Tyler Pedolski

  
  
  DEPUTY DETAILS

  • Full Name: Fillmoore Grayson
    Badge Number: 8712
    Callsign: OMEGA-5-1

  
  
  INCIDENT DETAILS

  • Date of Arrest: 2023-09-17
    Deputies Involved: Elian Ramos | Huw Parry | Messiah Young
    
    Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
    • On September 17, 2023, while conducting duties in relation to a shooting, I was struck by a black and white jugular that was operating at a high rate of speed. Master Deputy Ramos made contact with the driver, instructing them to pull to the side of the road to conduct a crash investigation. The driver, wearing a mask at the time of the encounter, refused and proceeded to leave the scene. Other deputies attempted a pursuit on the vehicle, however it successfully evaded deputies.
      
      Following the pursuit, we observed the subject parked in Bayview and made contact with them. The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft, however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.
      
      Reviewing camera footage, it is discovered that the subject had tattoos consistent with the tattoos on the driver that fled from the scene of the vehicle incident.
      
      Based on totality of circumstances the subject was arrested for hit and run and evading.

  
  EVIDENCE DETAILS

  • Exhibit A: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #4
    Exhibit B: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #6
    Exhibit C: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #5
    Photo of the evidence in the locker (if applicable)

    
  Exhibit #2: Master Deputy Elian Ramos' statement

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Case Number: [Case Number]
    Incident Date: [2023-09-17]

  Witness Information

  • Name: [Elian Ramos]
    Date of Birth: [25/MAR/1995]
    Phone Number: ]3602403]
    Occupation: [Specialist Operator & Master Deputy of LSSD]

  Witness Statement

  • [Myself, Corporal Parry and Staff Sergeant Greyson were operating under a Delta callsign, we were in the process of arresting a 1x William Mahanas at the tolls at Cassidy Bridge Southbound. During this arrest, I, myself was searching the suspects bike (enduro) at which point a vehicle could be seen speeding up at quite fast acceleration towards us and Staff Sergeant Greyson who from what I can see attempted to run out of the way of the oncoming vehicle but alas it was to no avail as the vehicle also attempted to swerve either to miss the staff sergeant or to purposely run him over, of which I cannot comment on.
    
    I immediately pull towards the vehicle who had initially stopped, still on the civilian bike. I begin conversating with him saying for him to just pull over to the side so we can just make everything is in order, these things can happen. I did not make any comment about him being under arrest. I simply asked him to pull over as I will need to ID him and speak to him in regards to what just happen.
    
    To the best of my recollection the driver of the vehicle (jugular, black and grey with terroil written on the side) was in a green sleeveless tshirt with a clown mask. He begins to plead it was not his fault he was going 150 km/h. Upon when I asked him to pull over so we can go over it he replied with "Why should I stop" before evading our detention request.
    
    He was able to get away as at the time we were low on units, Deputy Ania who was also on scene to asisst with transport as my unit was in a kamacho as we do not transport due to no windows/protocols. Deputy Ania was treating the injured staff sergeant while corporal Parry was still at road side.
    
    After getting suspect W.Mahanas (primary suspect) to DOC, The staff sergeant treated, we found the same vehicle at Bayview where registered owner Tyler Pedolski was closeby. I began speaking to him, letting him know the vehicle was just involved in a hit and run on a government employee and that he would be detained at this time. He was compliant so I did not place him in cuffs, primarily. I began speaking with him of which he relayed that his vehicle was stolen and he just found it at the side of a road somewhere. He may of mentioned a road name but I do not call the given road name.
    
    Their was no 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen with his model or plate. During the detainment, Tyler Pedolski had the same forearm tatoo of a knife/machete on the right forearm of which I noticed when I spoke to the suspect the first time to tell him to puill over via the non tinted windshield. Vocally sounded very similar too. I relayed this to the units on scene.
    
    Staff Sergeant asked me to add charges and arrest him, I put Mr Pedolski under arrest however I relayed to the Staff Sergeant I was not comfortable placing the charge due to the fact we did not have PID. Staff Sergeant made the supervisory call that we had enough evidences to apply arrest and charges.
    
    I believe also CCTV at tolls booth were checked. I attempted to check the payment method of the tollbooth at the time but records did not come through yet ((Nobody would take my ALT RP request to check payment method/owner of payment method to further confirm suspect))

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, [Elian Ramos], 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,
    
    
    [Elian Ramos]
    [Specialist Operator & Master Deputy]
    [LSSD]
    
    Date: [23/SEP/2023]

  
  
  Exhibit #3: Staff Sergeant Fillmoore Grayson's Statement

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Case Number: [Case Number]
    Incident Date: [Sept 17, 2023

  Witness Information

  • Name: [Fillmoore Grayson]
    Date of Birth: [05/MAY/1996]
    Phone Number: [293-9445]
    Occupation: Deputy

  Witness Statement

  • On September 17, 2023, while conducting duties in relation to a shooting, I was struck by a black and white jugular that was operating at a high rate of speed. Master Deputy Ramos made contact with the driver, instructing them to pull to the side of the road to conduct a crash investigation. The driver, wearing a mask at the time of the encounter, refused and proceeded to leave the scene. Other deputies attempted a pursuit on the vehicle, however it successfully evaded deputies.
    
    Following the pursuit, we observed the subject parked in Bayview and made contact with them. The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft, however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.
    
    Reviewing camera footage, it is discovered that the subject had tattoos consistent with the tattoos on the driver that fled from the scene of the vehicle incident.
    
    Based on totality of circumstances the subject was arrested for hit and run and evading.
    
    Evidence collected associated with the incident are all attached to the arrest report.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Fillmoore Grayson, 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,
    
    
    Fillmoore Grayson
    Staff Sergeant
    Los Santos Sheriff's Department
    
    Date: 26/SEP/2023

  
  
  Exhibit #4: Bodycam Footage

  ((RP Proof))

  

  
  **CLICK**
  Exhibit #5: Photos of the Vehicle's Interior

  
  
  
  Exhibit #6: Photo of the Defendant's Tattoo

  
  
  

---

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

[John Texas]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Prosecution Division
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• Honorable Judge Hyland,
  
  The prosecution would like to note that Mr. Masons' Defense Counsel has since resigned from Rockford Law and is currently pending induction into the Judicial Branch.
  
  As such, we would like to request a check-in with the Defendant by whoever takes his case to confirm if they still intend on pursuing this case.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  John Texas
  Deputy Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 348-8450 — [email protected]

  ---

[Bret Hyland]

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. Tyler Mason
#24-CM-0007

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

Thank you prosecution, I will inform the public defense division to reach out, they will have 7 days to get in contact with the defendant, failure to do so, and we will discuss a conclusion to this file as I will not have one draw on due to an inconvenience.


Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
([email protected]

[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. Tyler Masons

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, Tyler Masons 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]

[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. Tyler Masons

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

I, David Coast, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Tyler Masons 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) 593-1338— [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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. Tyler Mason
#24-CM-0007

A decision was reached in the above case on the 13th day of February, 2024.

Good day to you Defense, I am happy to see we now have representation for the defendant, the prosecution has completed their discovery period and provided information.

Defense you will have 7 days to present any motions, and to ensure your client is with in reach for communication. Should you choose to not file any motions we will progress the file along, naturally you have the option to waive a motion and we can move forward as soon as your ready.


Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
([email protected]

[David Vespucci]

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. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

A Motion to Suppress was filed in the above case on the 13th of February, 2024.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #1 be suppressed due to Speculation, These sections provided are coming from speculation showed by the precedence later referred in this motion.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #1 be suppressed due to Relevance, We see the statement "however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen." This statement lacks relevance to the charges of hit and run and evading. The absence of such reports does not have any tendency to make a fact that is important to the case more or less probable.

Exhibit #1: Tyler Pedolski Arrest Report - 17/SEP/2023

ARREST REPORT

MUGSHOT

SUSPECT 1 DETAILS

• 
  
  
  Full Name: Tyler Pedolski
  Telephone Number: 2083336
  Licenses Revoked: Yes
  • Driver
  
  Charges:
  • VF01 - Evading an Officer
  • VM07 - Hit and Run
  
  How did the suspect plea to the above charges?
  Suspect pleaded not guilty to all charges.
  Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :

VEHICLES INVOLVED

• Vehicle A: Black and White Jugular | LP RATS | RO : Tyler Pedolski

DEPUTY DETAILS

• Full Name: Fillmoore Grayson
  Badge Number: 8712
  Callsign: OMEGA-5-1

INCIDENT DETAILS

• Date of Arrest: 2023-09-17
  Deputies Involved: Elian Ramos | Huw Parry | Messiah Young
  
  Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
  • On September 17, 2023, while conducting duties in relation to a shooting, I was struck by a black and white jugular that was operating at a high rate of speed. Master Deputy Ramos made contact with the driver, instructing them to pull to the side of the road to conduct a crash investigation. The driver, wearing a mask at the time of the encounter, refused and proceeded to leave the scene. Other deputies attempted a pursuit on the vehicle, however it successfully evaded deputies.
    
    Following the pursuit, we observed the subject parked in Bayview and made contact with them. The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft, however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.
    
    Reviewing camera footage, it is discovered that the subject had tattoos consistent with the tattoos on the driver that fled from the scene of the vehicle incident.
    
    Based on totality of circumstances the subject was arrested for hit and run and evading.

EVIDENCE DETAILS

• Exhibit A: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #4
  Exhibit B: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #6
  Exhibit C: INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT #5
  Photo of the evidence in the locker (if applicable)

  

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #2 be suppressed due to Hearsay, These sections provided are coming from this statement recounts an out-of-court statement made by the suspect before they have been mirandized.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #2 be suppressed due to Relevance, These sections are recounting a previous arrest and have no relevance to this case at all. We also see statements regarding the transfer of this previous arrest which are also completely irrelevant. We also the witness speak on CCTV footage that aren't in evidence and how the officer did not want to place the charges at hand, this is also just irrelevant to the case, We also see the statement "Their was no 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen with his model or plate" This statement lacks relevance to the charges of hit and run and evading. The absence of such reports does not have any tendency to make a fact that is important to the case more or less probable.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #2 be suppressed due to Speculation, these sections rely on speculation such as "at which point a vehicle could be seen speeding up at quite fast acceleration" this is not confirmed by a speed instrument supported by the precedent of #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.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #2 be suppressed due to Opinion Testimony, these sections are regarding the suspect's demeanor, including their compliance and lack of resistance, constitutes impermissible opinion testimony. Ramos stated, "He was compliant so I did not place him in cuffs, primarily." While opinions based on a witness's perception are generally admissible, in this case, Ramos's opinion is not helpful for a clear understanding of the testimony and should be excluded."

Exhibit #2: Master Deputy Elian Ramos' statement

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

Case Information

• Case Number: [Case Number]
  Incident Date: [2023-09-17]

Witness Information

• Name: [Elian Ramos]
  Date of Birth: [25/MAR/1995]
  Phone Number: ]3602403]
  Occupation: [Specialist Operator & Master Deputy of LSSD]

Witness Statement

• [Myself, Corporal Parry and Staff Sergeant Greyson were operating under a Delta callsign, we were in the process of arresting a 1x William Mahanas at the tolls at Cassidy Bridge Southbound. During this arrest, I, myself was searching the suspects bike (enduro) at which point a vehicle could be seen speeding up at quite fast acceleration towards us and Staff Sergeant Greyson who from what I can see attempted to run out of the way of the oncoming vehicle but alas it was to no avail as the vehicle also attempted to swerve either to miss the staff sergeant or to purposely run him over, of which I cannot comment on.
  
  I immediately pull towards the vehicle who had initially stopped, still on the civilian bike. I begin conversating with him saying for him to just pull over to the side so we can just make everything is in order, these things can happen. I did not make any comment about him being under arrest. I simply asked him to pull over as I will need to ID him and speak to him in regards to what just happen.
  
  To the best of my recollection the driver of the vehicle (jugular, black and grey with terroil written on the side) was in a green sleeveless tshirt with a clown mask. He begins to plead it was not his fault he was going 150 km/h. Upon when I asked him to pull over so we can go over it he replied with "Why should I stop" before evading our detention request.
  
  He was able to get away as at the time we were low on units, Deputy Ania who was also on scene to asisst with transport as my unit was in a kamacho as we do not transport due to no windows/protocols. Deputy Ania was treating the injured staff sergeant while corporal Parry was still at road side.
  
  After getting suspect W.Mahanas (primary suspect) to DOC, The staff sergeant treated, we found the same vehicle at Bayview where registered owner Tyler Pedolski was closeby. I began speaking to him, letting him know the vehicle was just involved in a hit and run on a government employee and that he would be detained at this time. He was compliant so I did not place him in cuffs, primarily. I began speaking with him of which he relayed that his vehicle was stolen and he just found it at the side of a road somewhere. He may of mentioned a road name but I do not call the given road name.
  
  Their was no 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen with his model or plate. During the detainment, Tyler Pedolski had the same forearm tatoo of a knife/machete on the right forearm of which I noticed when I spoke to the suspect the first time to tell him to puill over via the non tinted windshield. Vocally sounded very similar too. I relayed this to the units on scene.
  
  Staff Sergeant asked me to add charges and arrest him, I put Mr Pedolski under arrest however I relayed to the Staff Sergeant I was not comfortable placing the charge due to the fact we did not have PID. Staff Sergeant made the supervisory call that we had enough evidences to apply arrest and charges.
  
  I believe also CCTV at tolls booth were checked. I attempted to check the payment method of the tollbooth at the time but records did not come through yet ((Nobody would take my ALT RP request to check payment method/owner of payment method to further confirm suspect))

Witness Affirmation

• I, [Elian Ramos], 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,
  
  
  [Elian Ramos]
  [Specialist Operator & Master Deputy]
  [LSSD]
  
  Date: [23/SEP/2023]

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #3 be suppressed due to Hearsay, These sections provided are coming from this statement recounts an out-of-court statement made by the suspect before they have been mirandized.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #3 be suppressed due to Speculation, these sections rely on speculation such as "that was operating at a high rate of speed" this is not confirmed by a speed instrument.

We request the Highlighted sections in Exhibit #3 be suppressed due to Relevance, We see the statement "however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen." This statement lacks relevance to the charges of hit and run and evading. The absence of such reports does not have any tendency to make a fact that is important to the case more or less probable.

Exhibit #3: Staff Sergeant Fillmoore Grayson's Statement

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

Case Information

• Case Number: [Case Number]
  Incident Date: [Sept 17, 2023

Witness Information

• Name: [Fillmoore Grayson]
  Date of Birth: [05/MAY/1996]
  Phone Number: [293-9445]
  Occupation: Deputy

Witness Statement

• On September 17, 2023, while conducting duties in relation to a shooting, I was struck by a black and white jugular that was operating at a high rate of speed. Master Deputy Ramos made contact with the driver, instructing them to pull to the side of the road to conduct a crash investigation. The driver, wearing a mask at the time of the encounter, refused and proceeded to leave the scene. Other deputies attempted a pursuit on the vehicle, however it successfully evaded deputies.
  
  Following the pursuit, we observed the subject parked in Bayview and made contact with them.The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft, however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.
  
  Reviewing camera footage, it is discovered that the subject had tattoos consistent with the tattoos on the driver that fled from the scene of the vehicle incident.
  
  Based on totality of circumstances the subject was arrested for hit and run and evading.
  
  Evidence collected associated with the incident are all attached to the arrest report.

Witness Affirmation

• I, Fillmoore Grayson, 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,
  
  
  Fillmoore Grayson
  Staff Sergeant
  Los Santos Sheriff's Department
  
  Date: 26/SEP/2023

We wish the court grants this motion to suppress based on the facts provided.


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

[John Texas]

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

---

Motion to Suppress Rebuttal

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

• Exhibit #1
  • The defense marked two statements for suppression the first one was Deputy Fillmore Grayson's statement "that was operating at a high rate of speed". In this scenario the Deputy is only claiming that the vehicle that struck him was moving quickly and is a direct observation using his senses and is admissible and covered under opinion testimony.
    
    Previous precedence in #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich established that the sentence ''they were clearly speeding.'' was speculative in nature due to the lack of radar instrument confirmation. However, in this case, the speed of the vehicle is of no significant relevance to the charges at hand nor is the Deputy attempting to factually state that the vehicle was speeding illegally, he is merely offering his testimony based on his observations and senses that the vehicle seemed to be traveling at a high rate of speed. Additionally, in a later statement the defendant did admit to speeding, confirming the deputy's suspicion. (Exhibit #2: ''He begins to plead it was not his fault he was going 150 km/h.'')
    
    The second statement requested to be suppressed was "however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.".
    
    Evidence is deemed relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact that is important to the case more or less probable than the fact would be without the evidence. In this instance, not only are arrest reports covered under official records by public employees as a record of an act or event, precedence which was equally upheld in #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich, but is also entirely relevant as the Defense has not suppressed the statement ''The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft''. As such, observations by Deputies into whether a BOLO or signs of tampering exist are entirely relevant.
• Exhibit #2

  • He begins to plead it was not his fault he was going 150 km/h. Upon when I asked him to pull over so we can go over it he replied with "Why should I stop" before evading our detention request.

    
    
    We have no issues with suppression of the direct quote ''Why should I stop''. However, the rest of the statement is covered under hearsay exception (b) ''Excited utterance is a statement that describes or explains an event perceived by the declarant, made shortly after a startling event, while the declarant is still under the stress of excitement caused by the event.'' and hearsay exception (c) ''State of mind refers to a statement that shows the declarant's then-existing state of mind, emotion, or physical condition.''
    
    These were statements provided voluntarily to a Deputy conducting a traffic stop after the incident in question. [Public Service Announcement] The Rule of Miranda in The State of San Andreas sets the standard for when miranda rights are required to be read. Specifically, ''Miranda Rights are not required when an officer is asking investigative questions during a traffic stop or when you voluntarily and consensually speak with police.''.
  • Regarding all the green highlighted portions of the statement being suppressed due to relevance.
    
    The prosecution has no problems with suppressing the highlighted portions with the exception of ''Their was no 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen with his model or plate.'' as this is confirmed in the arrest report in Exhibit #1 ''however there was no supporting evidence for that claim. We found no BOLO, or signs of tampering consistent with the vehicle being stolen.'' Additionally, the statement in question is entirely relevant as the Defense has not suppressed the statement ''The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft''. As such, observations by Deputies regarding the lack of 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen is very relevant.
  • Regarding all the blue highlighted portions of the statement being suppressed due to speculation.
    
    Both statements rely on Deputy observation through there senses, which is covered extensively under opinion testimony. In so far as suppression due to speculation is concerned, the Deputy in question had directly observed the actions in question. An objection or suppression due to speculation can only be requested when a witness testifies about any matter of which they have no personal knowledge and have not directly observed. This is not applicable to Deputy Ramos who was present that day and directly observed the incident in question.
    
    The prosecution is ok with a partial suppression of the first blue highlighted statement ''either to miss the staff sergeant or to purposely run him over, of which I cannot comment on.''
  • Regarding the red highlighted portions of the statement being suppressed due to opinion testimony.
    
    Once again, the Deputy's observations are covered under opinion testimony exception (a) ''testimony is rationally based on the perception of the witness (five senses)''. In this instance, the lack of physical force towards the Deputy and the lack of verbal resistance are actions that were sensorily perceived by the deputy and recorded in his written testimony and are admissible.
• Exhibit #3
  • Regarding the blue highlighted portion of the statement being suppressed due to speculation.
    
    Previous precedence in #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich established that the sentence ''they were clearly speeding.'' was speculative in nature due to the lack of radar instrument confirmation. However, in this case, the speed of the vehicle is of no significant relevance to the charges at hand nor is the Deputy attempting to factually state that the vehicle was speeding illegally, he is merely offering his testimony based on his observations and senses that the vehicle seemed to be traveling at a high rate of speed. Additionally, in a later statement the defendant did admit to speeding, confirming the deputy's suspicion. (Exhibit #2: ''He begins to plead it was not his fault he was going 150 km/h.'')
  • Regarding the yellow highlighted portion of the statement being suppressed due to hearsay.
    
    Hearsay evidence is evidence of a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at trial and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated. Testimony not offered to prove the truth of the matter stated is, by definition, not hearsay. In this case, the Defendant was charged with VF01 - Evading an Officer and VM07 - Hit and Run. The statement ''The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft'' is not being used to prove whether the Defendant committed the hit and run or evaded an Officer. Instead, it is a supplemental statement that has already been recorded under Exhibit #1 as an official record by a public employee, another exception to hearsay.
  • Regarding the green highlighted portions of the statement being suppressed due to relevance.
    
    Evidence is deemed relevant if it has any tendency to make a fact that is important to the case more or less probable than the fact would be without the evidence. In this instance, not only are arrest reports covered under official records by public employees as a record of an act or event, precedence which was equally upheld in #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich, but is also entirely relevant as the Defense has not suppressed the statement ''The subject stated they were a victim of auto theft'' in Exhibit #1. As such, observations by Deputies into whether a BOLO or signs of tampering exist are entirely relevant.

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

Rowin Lawson
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 304-6031 — [email protected]

[John Texas]

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

---

MOTION TO AMEND

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

A Motion to Amend was filed in the above case on the 17th of February, 2024.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Amend, the original charges with the underlined amended charges.

• Original Charges
  • VF01 - Evading an Officer
  • VM02 - Hit and Run

• Amended Charges
  • VF01 - Evading an Officer
  • VF02 - Felony Hit and Run

• Detailed Explanation: As defined in the State of San Andreas Penal Code, the charge of VM02 - Hit and Run is defined as "Causing an accident that resulted in property damage, then failing to attempt exchanging identifying details with the involved parties by fleeing from it," whereas the charge of VF02 - Felony hit and Run is defined as "Causing an accident that resulted in bodily injury or death, then any of: (a) Failing to remain on-scene with the victim and rendering aid where possible; (b) Failing to notify both law enforcement and medical emergency services; (c) Failing to remain for questioning by a law enforcement officer unless one fails to respond within 20 minutes."
  
  It is clear that, through the defendant's actions, whether accidental or deliberate, a deputy was struck by the defendant in their vehicle and required medical attention. By driving away from the deputy attempting to engage with the defendant, thereby committing another felony offence, the defendant failed to fulfil any of the subsections of VF02. In this case, the wording in the State of San Andreas Penal Code leaves no room for interpretation, hence the Prosecution is filing this Motion to Amend.

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

Rowin Lawson
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 304-6031 — [email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

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

Motion to Suppress

Exhibit #1 - Speculation - Dismissed

• In the instance of speculation pertaining to the vehicles speed, the officers experience and training would allow him to tell if the vehicle was operating at a high rate of speed, as no speed was stated, or charged against the defendant I see no reason that this can not remain in the docket as it is the officers opinion that the defendant was traveling at a high rate of speed.

Exhibit #1 - Relevance - Dismissed

• In the instance of Relevance pertaining a bolo, or emergency call pertaining to the Defendants vehicle being stolen, the court finds this to be relevant to the docket as such it shall remain intact.

Exhibit #2 - Hearsay - Partial

• As there is no remarks preventing the suppression of the "Why should I stop" this will be suppressed.
• The remainder of the officers statement will remain intact as noted by the prosecution the announcement [Public Service Announcement] The Rule of Miranda in The State of San Andreas clearly outlines "Miranda Rights are not required when an officer is asking investigative questions during a traffic stop or when you voluntarily and consensually speak with police." As such the statement is found to be provided to the officers without cohesion, or force, but was voluntarily provided. As such it shall remain intact.

Exhibit #2 - Relevance - Partial

• After taking into consideration the request for suppression and the sections outlined, and with significant review of both the defense and the prosecutions request, the court has decided that the first portion highlighted in the green will have the name of the detainee "Whilliam Mahanas" suppressed. The remainder of the first portion shall remain as the court finds it to be relevant as it establishes location and potential witnesses.
• The second portion "He was able to get away as at the time we were low on units" until "After getting suspect W.Mahanas (primary suspect) to DOC," will be suppressed as the court finds no relevance to the arrest or case in this section.
• "Their was no 911 calls or vehicles reported stolen with his model or plate" shall remain intact as previously determined in exhibit 1.
• The remainder of the highlighted section will be suppressed as neither the court nor prosecution present any opposition.

Exhibit #2 - Speculation - Partial

• Previously ruled upon, I find the information pertaining to the rate of travel to be statement of opinion, thus shall remain.
• With no objection from the prosecution, we will suppress the following statement in exhibit #2 . " attempted to swerve either to miss the staff sergeant or to purposely run him over, of which I cannot comment on.

Exhibit #2 - Opinion Testimony - Dismissed

• I find the statement to be valid in the relevance to this case as it shows a calm demeanor for the defendant rather than a hostile one. The officer completing this statement can not be considered an expert witness but rather a Lay witness, where in he is able to provide his opinion so long as they are rationally based on their own perception. This statement clarifies later and previous portions of the statement, and shows relevance to the case.

Exhibit #3 - Hearsay - Dismissed

• Information was volunteered to officers, and was attached to an official record by a member of law enforcement. This will remain intact.

Exhibit #3 - Speculation - Dismissed

• Shall remain intact for same reason as previous ruling on the same statement.

Exhibit #3 - Relevance - Dismissed

• Previously ruled upon, same verdict applies.

From


Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
[email protected]

[Bret Hyland]

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. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

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

Motion to Amend

The court will allow the motion to amend.

As was ruled in 23-AP-0012 State of San Andreas v. Shawn Morningstar "As this appeal was made by the defense, this Court will exercise unlimited review on this matter as double jeopardy is not at play (an appeal by the defense is a waiver of double jeopardy)."

The court recognizes the 5th Amendment and shall take it under heavy considerations during the trial when issuing its verdict.

From

Superior Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
[email protected]

[David Vespucci]

San Andreas Judicial Branch "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• To whom it may concern,
  
  We, the defense, have no more motions moving forward and are ready to progress.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Public Defense Attorney
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 593-1338— [email protected]

[John Texas]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Prosecution Division
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

• Honorable Judge Hyland,
  
  The prosecution would like to request a quick check-in with the Defendant to ensure they are present and actively involved in their case before proceeding.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  John Texas
  Deputy Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 348-8450 — [email protected]

  ---

[Tyler Pedolski]

I am present and following the case, please proceed.

[Bret Hyland]

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

---

NOTICE OF SCHEDULING

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons
#24-CM-0007

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 20th 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 Judge Bret Hyland
San Andreas Judicial Branch
[email protected]