Eclipse Government

Defendant Name: Oliver Crok
Defendant Phone: 440-5072
(( Defendant Discord: tyler1ii ))
(( Defendant Timezone: GMT+3))
Type of Representation (Pick one): Public Defender

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 27/APR/2025 18:47
Charge(s):

• WF06 - Unlicensed transfer of firearms, ammunition and body armor
• WM05 - Possession of Body Armor as a Felon

Narrative:
Mr Crok wishes to dispute his charges.

---

I, 27/APR/2025, 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. ))

---

---

The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the bench trial court system operates off a time-slot scheduling system. Please look out for notifications from either the courts or your attorney in regards to scheduling your bench trial.

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

---

---

The case of State of San Andreas v. Oliver Crok is 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 State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Change of Venue, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Requested Venue: Formal trial
  • Detailed Explanation: The Prosecution believes this case has the potential to set a precedent during trial arguments. As such, we wish to have this case heard in a formal trial to allow for complete analysis and comprehensive review of arguments.

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

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  Thank you prosecution for your submission to the court. Defense, would you like to provide a response prior to the judge making a ruling? You will be given 14 days due to the LOA of the Chief Public defender, after which the court will be forced to make a decision.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Associate Justice
  Branch Administrator
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  505-9925 — [email protected]

---

---

As the prosecution has not provided reasoning for precedence being set in the case and the defense has not provided a response, the case will remain a bench trial. The prosecution will be allotted 7 additional days to provide discovery before the courts look into dismissing the case in favor of the defense.


So Ordered,


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

---

• Honorable Judge Kant and pertaining parties,
  
  As the Prosecution filed the previous Motion for Change of Venue before the current requirements were put in place and was not afforded an opportunity to provide further reasoning behind the motion before the court came to the above decision, I would like to present it now.
  
  The Prosecution is seeking to establish a precedent regarding the Lesser Included Offense Doctrine by arguing the relation between possessing something and selling/transferring something, as is specific to this case.
  
  I hope this satisfies the requirements for a formal trial, and I respectfully request that the court reconsider its decision.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  While we appreciate the request and response from the prosecution, the court would like to note both the internal and external notice that was released to all individuals within the State of San Andreas that detailed the new requirements for a Motion for a Change in Venue. [PRESS RELEASE #43] Major Criminal Court Changes was published on the 26th of April, 2025. The motion from the prosecution was submitted on the 16th of May, 2025. That being said, we ask that when making statements on the public docket we remain accurate.
  
  Prosecution, we will be affording you this opportunity to state your peace. However, this will be the final time the court allows the prosecution to amend or change their motion for a change in venue due to a lack of understanding or knowledge of the current court practices.
  
  Defense, you now have 14 days to respond, due to the current LOA of the Chief Public Defender, or the court will be forced to consider the motion as it stands.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Associate Justice
  Branch Administrator
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  505-9925 — [email protected]

---

---

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

• Reasoning: Communication issues
  • Detailed Explanation: I have reached out to the defendant regarding this motion on the 23rd. Unfortunately I have not been able to reach the defendant. We will continue to reach out throughout the next three (3) days, which is why we request an additional three days to get a response.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

---

---

The Court formally recognises the Motion for Continuance filed by the Defense on the 28th of July, 2025. Given the recognised LOA from the Prosecution, as well as the relatively short timeframe for the continuance, the Court will be accepting the motion.

So Ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
274-6959 — [email protected]

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  We appreciate the work of both parties thus far. Defense, could you please provide a status on the activity of the defendant in regards to the case? The motion for continuance has expired. We would like to either push forward or put our resources to better use. Thank you to all parties.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Branch Administrator
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  505-9925 — [email protected]

---

• Honorable Judge Horton and Pertaining Parties,
  
  The defendant has failed to respond or read any emails. The defense division will leave this decision to the defendant, as we would not like to go against the code of ethics.
  
  Very Respectfully,
  
  
  Chief Public Defender
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 313 — [email protected]

---

---

Due to a lack of response from the defendant in the above case, the case will now be accepting the plea of guilty from the defendant. The defendant was given time to interact with their attorney in order to make their wishes known. As little to no contact has been made with the courts or their attorney, this case will now be archived and the charges will remain on the record of the defendant.

Respectfully,


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