Eclipse Government

Posted: **12 Mar 2024, 15:27**

Defendant Name: Joey Vespucci
Defendant Phone: 3291349
Defendant Address: N/A
(( Defendant Discord: .ctrl ))
Requested Attorney: Private with Wood Law

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 07/MAR/2024 18:17
Charge(s):

Vandalism of a Gov
Face Concealment B
Resisting arrest

Narrative:
I would like to appeal my charges

I, Joey Vespucci, 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. ))

Posted: **13 Mar 2024, 00:55**

Notification Of Counsel
State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

To whom it may concern,

I, David Coast, an Associate with Wood Law, will be representing the Defendant, Joey Vespucci in the underlying case.

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

Respectfully,

David Coast
Associate
Bar Certified Attorney
☏ 593-1338

Posted: **16 Mar 2024, 18:09**

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. Joey Vespucci

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 16th day of March, 2024.

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) 257-9183 — [email protected]

Posted: **18 Jun 2024, 20:08**

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. Joey Vespucci

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 18/JUN/2024.

I, Terence Williams, a Prosecuting Attorney 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.

Terence Williams
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **18 Jun 2024, 20:15**

Notification Of Counsel
State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

To whom it may concern,

I, Jay Wellberg, a Defense Attorney with Wood Law, will be representing the Defendant, Joey Vespucci in the underlying case.

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

Respectfully,

Defense Attorney
Wood Law
(909) 2956979

Posted: **28 Aug 2024, 12:29**

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. Joey Vespucci

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 28th of August, 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 - Joey Vespucci, 07/MAR/2024
Los Santos Police Department
ARREST REPORT
"TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"

MUGSHOT
- SUSPECT DETAILS
  
  Full Name: Joey Vespucci
  Phone Number: 3291349
  Licenses Suspended: No
  Officers Involved:
  
  Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
  
  Police Officer I Felix Solomons
  
  Charges:
  
  GM04 - Resisting Arrest
  
  GM19 - Face Concealment (b)
  
  GM08 - Vandalism of a Gov. Employee
  
  INCIDENT NARRATIVE
  
  Incident Date: 07/MAR/2024
  
  Explain what happened, sufficient detail must be given to justify the placed charges, videos could be provided.
  
  Suspect was requested to unmask himself at the Shadows HQ due to an investigation. He refused and was told to place his hands up. At this point, he again refused and ran into the actual property, locking the door behind. He eventually came outside and was placed under arrest.
  
  In the police cruiser, he kicked the window several times, eventually breaking it.
  
  Officer Solomons took the suspect to DOC.
  
  EVIDENCE DETAILS
  
  Document the possessions confiscated from the arrested suspect.
  Possessions are to be documented individually, examples of documented illegal possessions are "Pistol .50" or "12 grams of Cocaine". Legal possessions that can be categorized may be grouped, eg. "Clothing" to describe all clothing items. Body camera footage/pictures may be attached as an evidence exhibit.
  
  Where possible, the serial number of each firearm seized as evidence should be noted.
  
  Illegal Possessions:
  
  Legal Possessions:
  Exhibit A: 4xClothing
  Exhibit B: 1xRadio
  
  Photograph of Possessions (MANDATORY)

Exhibit #2: Witness Statement - Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 7/MAR/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Mikael Cowell
  Date of Birth: 23/AUG/1995
  Phone Number: 5824080
  Occupation: Gang Detective, LSPD
Witness Statement
- During the evening of the 7/MAR/2024, Joey Vespucci was involved in a gang relate investigation taking place at the parking lot next to their property.
  
  He was ordered to remove his facial concealment, which he replied with a refusal. As I then told him to put his hands up so I can cuff him, he again refused and ran into the property, formerly known as the Shadows HQ.
  
  The suspect exited the property after a rough 5 minutes. When he left the property, it was noted that he no longer had a mask on his face, nor did he have any items in his pockets. After conducting the search, he was placed into a police cruiser. During this time, he kicked the window of the cruiser several times, causing collateral damage.
  
  GM04 - Resisting Arrest - Suspect was told to put his hands up so that handcuffs could be applied to him. He refused this and ran from the officers on foot, entering the former Shadows HQ, locking the doors behind.
  GM19 - Face Concealment (b) - Wearing a mask during the commission of the crime.
  GM08 - Vandalism of a Gov. Employee - Causing collateral damage to LSPD equipment. (left rear window of a police cruiser).
Witness Affirmation
- I, Mikael Cowell, 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,
  
  Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
  Gang and Narcotics Division
  Los Santos Police Department
  Date: 15/03/2024 UTC
Exhibit #3: Witness Statement - Police Officer I Felix Solomons
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 07/MAR/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Felix Solomons
  Date of Birth: 20/JUL/1990
  Phone Number: 231-1549
  Occupation: Police Officer I, Los Santos Police Department
Witness Statement
- I, Felix Solomons, will hereby provide a witness statement about the arrest of Joey Vespucci on 07/MAR/2024 to the best of my knowledge.
  
  I was patrolling around the Vinewood area, when I received a backup request via dispatch at a property near the BurgerShot area (Bay City Avenue). I quickly responded to the call, as did many other units. Upon arrival, having parked my cruiser, I noticed multiple detectives and officers around the property with guns withdrawn. I understood from officers on scene that someone (Joey Vespucci) had fleed from law enforcement officers into the property and locked the door. The LEOs on scene were getting ready to breach into the property to get to the suspect. It was at that time I decided to enforce scene management to ensure a safe and clear traffic flow near the scene. Having completed the scene management, Joey Vespucci already came out of the property willingly - he was placed under arrest and to the back of my cruiser. I stayed near my cruiser until the situation was cleared, ordering bystanders affiliated with Joey Vespucci to stay clear of the scene as they continuously attempted to stand in the middle of the road to chat with Joey and disrupt the duties of PD. Joey Vespucci, whilst in the back of my vehicle, was constantly shouting and screaming. At one point in time, Joey Vespucci started to aggressively knock/bang on the back window of my cruiser. Unfortunately, I do not know what was the reasoning behind that. I believe it was because one of his peers was also getting arrested on the scene for disorderly conduct (If I remember that charge correctly). He got more and more aggressive with his banging that eventually the window of my cruiser shattered. Once the scene was concluded, Detective Cowell asked for my assistance to transport Joey to DOC, which I happily complied to.
  Unfortunately, I was only on scene to witness the damaging of my police cruiser, which is why the vandalism charge was placed on Joey. For the remainder of charges, Face Concealment GM19 and Resisting arrest GM04, I wasn't on scene to witness. I was only provided information that Joey Vespucci had ran away into their property from police while wearing a mask.
  
  ((Proof of bodycamera RP: ))
Witness Affirmation
- I, Felix Solomons, 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,
  
  Felix Solomons
  Police Officer I
  Los Santos Police Department
  
  Date: 17/MAR/2024

Terence Williams
Acting Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **28 Aug 2024, 12:48**

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. Joey Vespucci

A Motion to Amend was filed in the above case on the 28th of August, 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
- GM04 - Resisting Arrest
- GM19 - Face Concealment (b)
- GM08 - Vandalism of a Government Employee

Amended Charges
- GM10 - Failure to Comply / Identify
- GF16 - Tampering with Evidence
- GM08 - Vandalism of a Government Employee

Detailed Explanation: The Prosecution believes the charges are better suited for the actions of the defendant, due to their initial refusal to identify during the investigation and subsequently hiding evidence, i.e. their mask, by running inside while masked and exiting unmasked or with it on their person.

Terence Williams
Acting Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **01 Oct 2024, 03:45**

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

Counsel,

Thank you for your motion. The courts await the assignment of a defense attorney in order to rule on the motion. We require a response from the defense on the proposed motion to amend. Then the courts will proceed with our ruling.

Please note that if the motion to amend is accepted by the courts, the case will no longer be available for a bench trial.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **04 Oct 2024, 12:03**

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. Joey Vespucci

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

I, Paige Enora, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant(s), Joey Vespucci 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) 369-9671 — [email protected]

Posted: **11 Oct 2024, 21:22**

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

Parties,

This is to serve as a notice to the defense that the courts are awaiting a response from yourselves in regards to the prosecutions Motion to Amend. If the defense fails to respond in 72 hours, the court will consider the motion without hearing from the defense.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **25 Nov 2024, 13:26**

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

Prosecution and defense counsel,

This is to serve as a notice to all parties that the previous defense attorney went inactive within the branch. Due to this extenuating circumstance, a new public defender will be issued. When the public defender has been assigned the defense will respond to the prosecutions earlier Motion to Amend. The court will then make the determination based off both responses.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Justice
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **05 Feb 2025, 23:56**

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. Joey Vespucci

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 5th of February, 2025.

I, Jaz Owens, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Joey Vespucci 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
📞429-1517 — 📧 [email protected]

Posted: **06 Feb 2025, 23:42**

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

Honorable Judge Kant and opposing counsel,

Thank you for your patience with the assignment of a public defender.

The defense formally objects to the introduction of 'GF16 - Tampering with Evidence', as the prosecution has moved to dismiss 'GM19 - Face Concealment (b)'. Given the fact that the alleged evidence in question, the mask, is no longer tied to a criminal act, the defense respectfully requests that the court rejects the inclusion of this charge against the defendant.

I believe it is wholly reasonable to conclude that a person cannot tamper with evidence when the charge that determines it as evidence has been dropped by the prosecution. Shortly put, the mask is no longer evidence of a crime.

Other than 'GF16 - Tampering with Evidence', the defense has no objection to amending the charges, but I'd like to note that the defendant would still like to continue the case and contest the charges placed upon him, regardless of whether these are amended or not.

Please allow a generous time-frame for the defense to review the evidence provided by the prosecution and to submit any motions.

Regards,

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧 [email protected]

Posted: **10 Feb 2025, 18:42**

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

Honorable Judge Kant and opposing counsel,

The Defense has submitted the aforementioned Bench Trial Timeslot Application. 🧷LINK HERE.

Regards,

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧 [email protected]

Posted: **10 Feb 2025, 22:06**

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

Honorable Judge Kant and pertaining parties,

The reason for dropping one charge and amending for another was listed in the motion. As per the precedent set in the case of #24-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Leo Marks, evidence is required to be documented to be used in proving charges. While the Prosecution may have dropped the charge of GM19 for the viability of getting a conviction on the charge, arguments can still be made against the defendant regarding their actions. In this situation, the charge of GM19 might have been dismissed, but the mask is still tied to an alleged crime, that being GF16 - Tampering with Evidence. As such, we retain our stance for our Motion to Amend and ask that this case be moved to a felony trial.

Regards,

Terence Williams
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **10 Feb 2025, 22:12**

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

Honorable Judge Kant and opposing counsel,

After review, the Defense agrees with the opposing counsel.

The Defendant, Joey Vespucci, by and through the undersigned attorney have no further quarrels with the amendment of the charges. However, we would still like this to remain as a bench trial, as outlined in Felony Bench Trials. This case is not complex, has little evidence to review, thus a felony bench trial would be more applicable to expedite the resolution and verdict of the case.

Regards,

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧 [email protected]

Posted: **16 Feb 2025, 19:21**

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

Prosecution and defense counsel,

The court recognizes the prosecution Motion to Amend Charges. However the question remains as to why a 3 exhibit case needs to be moved to a felony trial. Could the prosecution provide the court with a greater reasoning? The court will give the prosecution 3 days to respond.

Respectfully,

Associate Justice
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **16 Feb 2025, 20:32**

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

Honorable Judge Kant,

While felony charges can now be brought to a bench trial, there are no guidelines as to which types of felonies can or should potentially be tried in a bench trial setting. While the court may see the Prosecution's case as just a "3 exhibit case", it is not the amount of exhibits that determines the validity of the Prosecution's case, but the contents and the arguments that follow. The Prosecution will be arguing a case against a convicted terrorist and known member of the terrorist organization known as "The Shadows", and will be presenting arguments for the alleged charges that are not fit to be discussed in a simple setting as that of a bench trial.

Regards,

Terence Williams
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **16 Feb 2025, 20:33**

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. Joey Vespucci

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 16th of February, 2025.

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

Exhibit #4: Document - Property and Housing Bureau inquiry
Jaz Owens wrote: ↑07 Feb 2025, 13:09

Your Information

Name: Jaz Owens
Contact Information (Optional): 429-1517
Have you Dealt with PHB in the Past?: I have not.

Details

Description: I am writing to ascertain some information in regards to a property. Is the parking lot shown in image 2 deemed by the Property & Housing Bureau as an inseparable part of 76 Bay City Avenue, declaring it as private property, and owned by the owner of the property?

I think it's very reasonable to believe that the parking lot is owned by the owner of 76 Bay City Avenue, due to it's close proximity and small space, alongside the fact that it has been seized by law enforcement, indicating that it was previously privately owned, and is now state owned. I understand that this could also be owned collectively by the owners of the buildings on that road.

I'm not familiar with any parking space attached to private property that is considered to be public property.

If you could reply expressly stating whether it is or is not considered to be private property, that would be fantastic.

Attachments (Optional):

(1) 76 Bay City Avenue, the building
The Property, previously owned by Elvi Chapel. This has now been seized by law enforcement

(2) The Parking lot attached to the property (1/3).

(3) The Parking lot attached to the property (2/3).

(4) The Parking lot attached to the property (3/3).
Clear signage that the Los Santos Police Department have seized the property, suggesting it was previously privately owned.

Signature

Signature:
Date: 07/02/2025
Julia Whitehorse wrote: ↑08 Feb 2025, 21:40

San Andreas State Government
Property and Housing Bureau
Re: [Inquiry] Jaz Owens

Jaz Owens,

Property boundaries and ownership are assessed on a case-by-case basis. In this particular situation, the parking lot in question is part of an alleyway shared by multiple properties and is not considered an inseparable part of 76 Bay City Avenue. Therefore, it is not privately owned by the owner of that property.

We would like also to mention that the property is owned by San Andreas State Government.
Picture of the Alleyway
Thank you

Sincerely,

Julia "Chedhamenou" Whitehorse
Director of Administration Bureau
Executive Assistant to the Board of Governors
San Andreas State Government
[email protected]

Terence Williams
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
234-9321 — [email protected]

Posted: **17 Feb 2025, 21:30**

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

All parties,

The Defense would like to provide it's final comment regarding the classification of this trial.

The defense respectfully requests the court to see this as a felony bench trial, as this trial is a simple 4 exhibit case (with the latest exhibit posted), all of which are reports or witness statements. In addition, the defense has no quarrels with the events that occurred, only the interpretation of the evidence and the application of the law.

In the spirit of efficiency, and in line with the sixth amendment right of my client, the defense believes a felony bench trial would be the best fit. We see anything other than this as a hindrance to this ancient trial and a violation of the defendants fundamental constitutional rights. Additionally, I'm sure both parties would like to see this trial closed as soon as possible.

My client's alleged affiliation with a terrorist group is irrelevant to the charges placed upon him, and even if this was relevant, it poses no significant shift in the severity of the charges, nor does it bring any further complex evidence that needs to be so intricately examined that the entire trial needs to shift to another classification.

The defense sees no reasonable point as to why this should be seen as a felony case, as opposed to a felony bench trial, and moving this to another trial format would be nothing but an unnecessary hindrance. The defense also requests that, should the prosecution believe this is no longer suitable for a felony bench trial, the opposition should submit a motion to change venue.

Regards,

Junior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧 [email protected]

Posted: **26 Feb 2025, 01:13**

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

Prosecution and defense counsel,

The court notes that the prosecution has submitted 4 exhibits in total:
- 1 Arrest Report
- 2 Witness Statements
- 1 Set of Emails
While the exhibits are somewhat lengthy at times, the court notes the number of exhibits to be minimal. We appreciate the prosecutions right to thoroughly examine evidence, however we do not feel in this specific case that a bench trial would prohibit that ability.

That being said, defense please make your defendant aware they may schedule their availability. Prosecution please plan for a bench trial. If a prosecutor does not show, the judge will move forward with the given evidence, and will take the lack of a prosecutor into consideration.

Respectfully,

Associate Justice
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **02 Mar 2025, 19:43**

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

Honorable Judge Kant and pertaining parties,

The Prosecution would like to request confirmation from the court that the defendant, Joey Casper (previously Joey Vespucci and Joey Bridges), is affiliated with the known terrorist organization known as "The Shadows".

Respectfully,

Larin Tai
Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
244-5389 — [email protected]

Posted: **06 Mar 2025, 04:21**

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

Prosecution and defense counsel,

The court confirms that at the time of the arrest the defendant was considered an affiliated member of the criminal organization known as "The Shadows". Please note this is an official confirmation for only the time surrounding the arrest mentioned in evidence. Thank you to both parties for you patience and cooperation in this matter.

Respectfully,

Associate Justice
Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

Posted: **16 Apr 2025, 04:17**

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

Parties,

This is to serve as a FIRST notice to the defendant that bench trials are currently scheduled on multiple days throughout the week. Please notify the court if these times do not work for you. The expectation of the court is that each defendant file a notice for availability in the next 7 days. Date, times, and formatting shown here. The courts will only provide the defendant three notices prior to involuntarily dismissing the case in favor of prosecution due to lack of response from the defendant.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 304-2935 — [email protected]

Posted: **01 May 2025, 05:30**

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

Parties,

This is to serve as a SECOND notice to the defendant that bench trials are currently scheduled on multiple days throughout the week. Please notify the court if these times do not work for you. The expectation of the court is that each defendant file a notice for availability in the next 7 days. Date, times, and formatting shown here. The courts will only provide the defendant three notices prior to involuntarily dismissing the case in favor of prosecution due to lack of response from the defendant.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 304-2935 — [email protected]

Eclipse Government

#25-BT-0014 State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

#25-BT-0014 State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci

Re: #25-BT-0014 State of San Andreas v. Joey Vespucci