Eclipse Government

Defendant Name: Carl Valentine
Defendant Phone: 123-4567
(( Defendant Discord:carlvespucci ))
(( Defendant Timezone: Eastern ))
Type of Representation (Pick one): Public Defender

Charging Department: No idea

Date & Time of Incident(s): 10/JAN/2025 ##:##
Charge(s):

• 11/01/2025 00:37:52 SF01 - Domestic Terrorism (Felony $15000)
  11/01/2025 00:37:52 SF04 - Kidnapping of a Gov. Employee (Felony $15000)
  11/01/2025 00:37:52 Accessory to GF11 - Grand Theft Auto of a Gov. Employee (Felony $5625)
  11/01/2025 00:37:52 GF05 - Extortion of a Gov. Employee (Felony $3000)
  11/01/2025 00:37:52 GF21 - Prison Break (Felony $5000)
  11/01/2025 00:37:52 NM03 - Unlawful Assembly (Misdemeanor $1000)

Narrative:
I was wrongfully charged for the crimes listed above.

---

I, Carl, Valentine, 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. ))

---

---

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

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

---

• Sincerely,
  
  Jay Wellberg
  Assured Services
  Attorney, Assured Law
  Bluff Tower, 72 Bay City Avenue

---

---

I, Quentin Delaventura Esq., a Defense Attorney with the Private Law Firm, Assured Law, will be representing the Defendant, Carl Valentine, formerly known to the State as Carl Vespucci until the 13th day of January, 2025, in the underlying case.

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

---

• Best regards,
  
  Quentin Delaventura Esq.
  "Your Voice, My Win"
  (702) 395-6394
  [email protected]
  
  Assured Services
  Attorney at Law, Assured Law
  Bluff Tower, 72 Bay City Avenue

---

---

The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the court system runs on a first-come, first-served basis and will only activate cases out of order for special circumstances.

During this time, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense, otherwise, a court-appointed attorney will be assigned to the case upon its activation.

The defendant is further encouraged to speak with an authorized individual at Rockford Hills City Hall, Mission Row Police Station, or Paleto Bay Sheriff's Office for official clarification on the specific charges received and their respective date and times, as once the case has been activated, any omitted charges will be considered abandoned and unable to be disputed within this case.


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

---

---

The case of State of San Andreas v. Carl Valentineis hereby activated and opened by this Court.

Be advised that the bench-trial court system runs on a weekly time-slot system. The prosecution and defense are hereby ordered to provide their evidence to the Court via Motion for Discovery within the next 30 days or file a Motion for Continuance.

If at any point in time the defendant or prosecution wishes set precedence or desire a formal criminal trial, they are welcome to file a Motion for a Change in Venue.


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

---

---

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Change of Venue, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Requested Venue: Normal Trial
  • Detailed Explanation: With the number of charges being contested and the potential lengthy amount of evidence that will be presented, the defense believes that this trial should be done the regular way, via a normal trial. We ask that if this motion is granted that the case remains activate and moves forward as it was planned to avoid any unnecessary delays.

Jay Wellberg
Assured Services
Attorney, Assured Law
Bluff Tower, 72 Bay City Avenue

---

• Honorable Judge Yukimura and pertaining parties,
  
  The Prosecution has no objection to the above motion.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

---

---

The court will be granting the defenses request to hear this as a Formal Criminal Trial. We are rescinding the order for discovery due to the transition of this case from bench trial to formal criminal trial. As such both parties will be notified when they are ordered to provide any evidence to the court via a new Order for Discovery and set timeline for progress. The court thanks all parties for their patience in this matter.

Respectfully,


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

---

---

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Joinder, requesting this and the following list of cases be joined together for collective prosecution.

• • Case information
    #25-BT-0039, State of San Andreas v. David Vespucci
    case number and name
    
    David Deltoid
    defendant
    
    David Deltoid (self-representation)
    defense attorney
  
  
  • Case information
    #25-BT-0040, State of San Andreas v. Nathaniel Luceran
    case number and name
    
    Nathaniel Luceran
    defendant
    
    Luna McMillan, Vanguard Law
    defense attorney
  
  
  • Case information
    #25-BT-0048, State of San Andreas v. Cortez Rivera
    case number and name
    
    Cortez Rivera
    defendant
    
    Public Defender
    defense attorney
  
  
  • Case information
    State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
    case number and name
    
    Alistair Vespucci
    defendant
    
    Quentin Delaventura, Assured Law
    defense attorney

• Detailed Explanation: The four (4) listed cases are all the result of the same investigation into the August 18th prison break of Sophia Falcone, as is the defendant's. All five (5) defendants are alleged to have been part of the planning and execution of the prison break, all of them receiving many, and in some cases all, of the same charges as the other defendants. Consolidating these cases will minimize the duplication of efforts by prosecutors, witnesses, and resources, and thereby reduce judicial resources on trying five (5) near-identical cases, while also promoting judicial efficiency, consistency, and fairness. Due to the nature of the crimes, being interconnected and committed in concert, makes it logical to address their actions collectively. Trying the cases separately could potentially lead to inconsistent verdicts, thereby undermining the principles of fairness, for example, by allowing one defendant's testimony or evidence to influence the outcome of another. Joining the trials could prevent the defendants from presenting conflicting defenses that could be unfairly advantaged. Moreover, the defendants' coordinated actions and shared responsibilities in committing the alleged crimes make trying the cases separately redundant and potentially prejudicial to the other cases. Trying the cases together promotes the interests of justice with an equitable resolution for all parties involved.

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

---

Honorable Judge and pertaining parties,

• The Defense strongly objects to the Prosecution’s Motion for Joinder.
  
  First and foremost, there are 5 defendants involved in these cases, each of them submitted separate appeals to this Court, requesting that their cases be considered individually. Assured Law is representing only 2 of these defendants and the remaining 3 are represented by different attorneys. It would be fundamentally unfair to merge these cases when the defendants have clearly asserted their right to be tried separately and fairly.
  
  Each defense will inevitably pursue distinct trial strategies, and merging these cases would create a clear conflict of interest, potentially forcing some defendants to adopt antagonistic defenses. That risk alone undermines the core principle of a fair trial.
  
  Additionally merging the cases would create undue prejudice. Evidence presented against one defendant may improperly influence the court's perception of the others, particularly where roles or levels of involvement differ. Our clients have a constitutional right to be judged only on the evidence presented against them, not by association or implication.
  
  The Prosecution argues that the merge is for efficiency, but efficiency cannot override constitutional protections. Our clients are entitled to a fair trial one that is free from the confusion, complexity, and prejudice that comes with lumping together five co-defendants in a single proceeding, and the prosecution should have no right in whether or not the cases should be tried together or separately
  
  Trying our clients separately is not inefficient but it is necessary to ensure justice is served correctly.

Jay Wellberg
Assured Services
Attorney, Assured Law
Bluff Tower, 72 Bay City Avenue

---

---

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

• Reasoning: Dropping charges
  • Detailed Explanation: Following an internal review, the Prosecution, through instruction from the Los Santos Sheriff's Department, is dropping all charges against the defendant as contested in this criminal case.

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

---

---

The prosecution Motion for Voluntary Dismissal is hereby granted. The disputed charge(s) of SF01 - Domestic Terrorism, SF04 - Kidnapping of a Gov. Employee, Accessory to GF11 - Grand Theft Auto of a Gov. Employee, GF05 - Extortion of a Gov. Employee, GF21 - Prison Break, and NM03 - Unlawful Assembly will be removed from the record of the defendant. Thank you to both parties, this case is hereby dismissed.

The defendant should make their way to City Hall at their earliest convenience to have the change to their record noted as well as the payment of $137,025 returned to them for fines, time, and other expenses/inconveniences incurred from the contested charges.

Respectfully,


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