#24-CM-0054, State of San Andreas v. Roberto Sanchez

[Roberto Sanchez]

Defendant Name: Roberto Sanchez
Defendant Phone: 367-5299
Defendant Address: No Fixed Abode
(( Defendant Discord: @mrsilky ))
Requested Attorney: N/A

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 05/APR/2024 - 22:15
Charge(s):

• Reckless Operation
• Class 1 Firearm
• Illegal Modifications

Narrative:
I believe the charges to be incorrect and the search of my property to be unlawful.

I plead no contest to speeding, this I was at fault for, however the level at which the officer claims I was speeding I contest - but to say my driving was reckless is an outright lie and false justification for an arrest. Looking at the penal code, I argue my actions were not "Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle" as other than the speed, I was in control of the vehicle and was yielding to intersections whilst maintaining my lane.

I argue the search of my vehicle to be unlawful as I should never have been detained/arrested as my actions did not justify such response and the charges on what was found within should be dropped.

---

I, Roberto Sanchez, 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. Roberto Sanchez

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 15th day of April, 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]

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

NOTICE OF ACTIVATION, DISCOVERY & TRIAL SCHEDULING
MISDEMEANOR BENCH TRIAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Roberto Sanchez
#24-CM-0054

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on 14th of August, 2024.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Roberto Sanchez is hereby activated by this Court under #24-CM-0054.

Pursuant to the Defendant's request for a Bench Trial schedule, this case is hereby activated.

At this time, the Prosecution is ordered to provide the Arrest Report and/or any supporting documents to be utilized by the Court during the Bench Trial, and conduct the necessary efforts to ensure the presence of a State Representative (Legal Affairs Delegate, Arresting Officer, Prosecutor).

Furthermore, the Defendant is advised -but not required- to reach out to a Defense Attorney in order to prepare their defense during the proceedings that will be taking place on the scheduled date.

The Bench Trial will be conducted on August 17th, 8:00 PM.

So ordered,

Superior Court Justice
Director of the San Andreas Bar Association
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Terence Williams]

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. Roberto Sanchez
#24-CM-0054

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 15th 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 - Roberto Sanchez, 05/APR/2024

  

  

  Los Santos Police Department ARREST REPORT "TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"

  
  

  ---

  MUGSHOT

  • SUSPECT DETAILS
    • 
      Full Name: Roberto Sanchez
      Phone Number: 3675299
      Licenses Suspended: Yes
      Officers Involved:
      • Police Officer III Olatunji Osas
      • Deputy Chief Elizabeth Sanchez
      Charges:
      • WM03 - Criminal Use of Weapon Modifications
      • WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
      • VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle
    INCIDENT NARRATIVE
    • Incident Date: 05/APR/2024
      
      Explain what happened, sufficient detail must be given to justify the placed charges, videos could be provided.
      • Was conducting a speed trap where I clocked Roberto going 192 km/h. I followed him with lights and sirens until he pulled over. I told him he was going to be arrested for reckless operation as he went over 2,5 times the speed limit through a crowded area of the city. This is no longer considered negligent or covered by the 3rd degree speeding. He was going 112 km/h OVER the speed limit.
        
        He wanted a supervisor present so I asked and Deputy Chief Sanchez showed up. She agreed with my ruling on the subject. When his vehicle was impounded we found a Pistol .50 and a silencer in the trunk. The two officers who searched the car impounded the vehicle too.
        
        Roberto wanted a defense attorney so we asked for one and they came to Mission Row. After he was transported and processed after his friend tried to cause mayhem and set him free.
    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:
        Exhibit A: 1x Pistol .50 *69 bullets*
        1x Suppressor
        1x Fingerprint tape, taken print from gun by Detective.
        
        
        Legal Possessions:
        Exhibit A: 1x Lottery ticket
        2x GPS
        1x Tie
        1x Chain
        1x Knife
        1x Mask
        1x Consaw
        1x Lugwrench
        1x Radio
        1x Gloves
        
        
        Photograph of Possessions (MANDATORY)

        

  

• Exhibit #2: Witness Statement - Deputy Chief of Police Elizabeth Sanchez

  

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

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 05/APR/2024

  Witness Information

  • Name: Elizabeth Sanchez
    Date of Birth: 19/AUG/1998
    Phone Number: 428-5041
    Occupation: Deputy Chief, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • Questions:
    
    Q: Results of the fingerprints noted in the arrest report.
    A: I requested that we check for prints on the gun for further evidence to help with this case, low and behold the prints came back to the suspect who was confused about the weapon being in his car.
    
    Q: A written statement explaining the situation in detail.
    A: Officer Osas requested a supervisor to his backup, I arrived and the suspect was irate about being detained "unlawfully". I requested to see the bodycam footage and the suspect was seen excessively speeding on one of the busiest roads in the city, San Adreas Avenue. I went through the possible citations / charges that could be argued and Reckless operation felt like the most appropriate due to the location and speeds.
    
    VC03 - Speeding 3rd Degree = Operating a vehicle at speeds exceeding speed limits by 41 - 80 km/h on public roads.
    
    The suspect would have to be traveling below 160 to receive this citation, he was going 192 km/h.
    
    VC08 - Negligent Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle = Failing to use reasonable care while operating a vehicle, which could lead to personal injuries and damages to one or more vehicles.
    
    and lastly, VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle, the charge we opted for = Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle.
    
    The suspect intestinally chose to put lives at risk by travelling such speeds on one of the busiest roads in the city
    
    Q: All bodycam footage relating to the situation, and any footage that specifically catches the speed that the suspect was driving at.
    A: I was only acting as scene supervisor as requested by the suspect therefore Osas has the bodycam of the crime.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Elizabeth Sanchez, 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,
    
    
    Elizabeth Sanchez
    Deputy Chief
    Los Santos Police Department
    
    Date: 07/APR/2024

  

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

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

ISSUANCE OF VERDICT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Roberto Sanchez
#24-CM-0054

A decision was reached in the above case on the 17th of August, 2024.

The case in question pertained to a traffic stop that allegedly took place on the 5th of April, 2024, initiated due to allegations of excessive speed. This stop led to a search of the defendant's vehicle, which resulted in the discovery and confiscation of several illegal items located within the trunk of the vehicle by the Sheriff's deputies.

The defendant has contested the proceedings, asserting that he did not operate his vehicle in a manner that could be deemed reckless. The defendant acknowledged fault for speeding but disputed the officer's claim regarding the extent of the speed. He contended that his driving did not constitute reckless operation as defined by the penal code. The defendant maintained that, apart from the excessive speed, he had been in control of the vehicle, yielding at intersections and maintaining his lane.
Furthermore, the defendant argued that the search of his vehicle was unlawful, as he should not have been detained or arrested based on his actions. He claimed that the search was unjustified and that the subsequent charges related to the items found within the vehicle should be dismissed.

During the trial, the Prosecution argued that the defendant drove at speeds of 192km/h in a street with a limit of 85km/h, thus prompting the traffic stop and the subsequent arrest. The Prosecution argued that, albeit no bodycamera or speedcam being present, the defendant did not stop or yield while driving.

The defense argued that the alleged bodycamera footage had not been introduced into discovery, and thus the Prosecution's case should be rendered moot.

It was established by the Court that the search -which was the main point being contented-, was illegal due to the prosecution not establishing beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's reckless operation of a vehicle -which subsequently led to its impound and search-.

The prosecution affirmed multiple times that the charge of reckless operation of a road vehicle was based, primarily, on the defendant’s failure to yield or stop at intersections. The defendant argued that they drove eastbound from Burgershot to the parking garage -approximately 2 blocks- before stopping their vehicle. Given the lack of bodycamera footage, this particular situation is of great importance to determine not whether the suspect was speeding, but rather, operating their vehicle recklessly and in disregard of life and property. The Court believes that it is undisputed that the defendant was driving above the speed limit, which again is not contested. However, the Court can't conclude that a reasonable risk was created through the actions of the defendant in the alleged reckless operation of a vehicle, particularly given that the defendant had the right of way and was not required to yield at the specific intersections that they drove through, and thus, making the prosecution's primary argument for the charge to fall apart. The Court emphasizes that the defendant clarified that they drove from Burgershot to the Parking Garage nearby, specifically, two blocks apart. This situation was undisputed, and thus allowed the Court to conclude that the defendant had been driving eastbound through two blocks, circumstance in which he had the right of way and was not required to yield -albeit driving in excessive speeds-.

Given that the search resulted from the vehicle's impound, which resulted again from the application of the misdemeanor, the Court had no option other than to rule it illegal.

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

• On the count of VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle, I find the defendant, Roberto Sanchez, not guilty.
• On the count of WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm, I find the defendant, Roberto Sanchez, not guilty.
• On the count of WM03 - Criminal Use of Weapon Modifications, not guilty.

So ordered,

Associate Justice
Supreme Court of San Andreas
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]