Eclipse Government

Defendant Name: Lilliana Hirano
Defendant Phone: 485-7557
(( Defendant Discord: .kempi ))
(( Defendant Timezone: UTC +1 ))
Type of Representation (Pick one): Self-Representation

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 18/MAR/2026 03:30
Charge(s):

• SF07 - Bank Robbery
• GM04 - Resisting Arrest
• VF01 - Evading an Officer

Narrative:
I wish to appeal the charges above

---

I, Lilliana Hirano, 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 Bench Trial system runs off of defendant responsiveness. If defendants are interacting with the court or their attorney, a Notice to Schedule will be posted with all parties being able note their availability. A Judge will then pick the most suitable time for trial. Once a trial has been scheduled, the court will consider most submissions to be final.

Prior to scheduling, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense. 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.

Respectfully,


Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 - [email protected]

---

---

The case of State of San Andreas v. Lilliana Hirano is hereby activated and opened by this Court.

The Superior Court Bench Trial system runs off of defendant responsiveness. If defendants are interacting with the court or their attorney, a Notice to Schedule will be posted with all parties being able note their availability. A Judge will then pick the most suitable time for trial. Once a trial has been scheduled, the court will consider most submissions to be final.

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 defense or prosecution wishes set precedence or desire a formal criminal trial, they are welcome to file a Motion for a Change in Venue

Respectfully,


Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 - [email protected]

---

---

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

• Reasoning: Lack of evidence
  • Detailed Explanation: It has now been over thirty ( 30 ) days since the case was activated and the prosecution and/or arresting department have both failed to either present any evidence or request a continuance for the case.

Lilliana Howell
Self-Representing

---

---

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

  

  

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

  
  

  ---

  • ARREST DETAILS
    • Arresting Officer: Police Officer III+1 Cody James
      Callsign: 4-D-11
      
      Date of Arrest: 18/MAR/2026
      Officers Involved:
      • Police Officer II Chris Malosh
      • Police Officer III+1 Cody James
      • Police Officer III Anthony Mercer
      Narrative: Explain what happened in detail, provide sufficient detail to justify the charges. Video and image evidence can be provided. Specifically state why each charge listed was placed.
      
      Officer Cody James responded to a pursuit from the East Joshua Bank robbery involving a MonstroCiti matching a prior BOLO. The pursuit ended after the vehicle TC'd at the train tracks off Popular St., where a female suspect fled on foot under the Del Perro Fwy toward the canals and VC was lost. 11-DAVID, Officer Cody James and Officer Chris Malosh, scanned a plate on a blue Turismo Omaggio in the underground parking near Legion and located the female suspect standing outside of the vehicle that looked similar and the vehicle matched the registered owner of the pervious vehicle. Officers attempted to detain her as she tried getting into the vehicle to flee; she was tased and cuffed without further incident, and identified as Lilliana Hirano. During the arrest, a black Kamacho (later identified as Joe Ryan) arrived to pick her up. As Hirano attempted to get in, Officer James tased her again, at which point the Kamacho struck both Officer James and Hirano, causing injuries. Hirano was transported to Pillbox for treatment and then to DOC for processing.

  ---

  • MUGSHOT
    SUSPECT #1 DETAILS
    • 
      Full Name: Lilliana Hirano
      Phone Number: 4857557
      License(s) Suspended: Driver Trucker Firearms Pilot
      Charge(s):
      • GM04 - Resisting Arrest
      • SF07 - Bank Robbery
      • VF01 - Evading an Officer
      Evidence: Include a photo of the evidence items; it is optional to document the items in writing when including a photo. Always provide the serial number of any seized firearm. Mark where the possessions were stored.
      
      Evidence Description and/or Photo

      Exhibit A:
      Evidence Location: Mission Row Station Vinewood Police Headquarters Department of Corrections

  

• Exhibit #2 Officer Mercer Witness statement

  img]https://i.ibb.co/MkKtJ6y7/T0-Uj-Uj-H.png[/img]

  

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

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 18/MAR/2026

  Witness Information

  • Name: Anthony Mercer
    Date of Birth: 01/MAY/2001
    Phone Number: N/A
    Occupation: Police Officer III, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • I responded to a pager request, from what my body camera footage shows, we were chasing a evading Monstrosity fleeing from a bank robbery, Where it stalled and the female person inside fled, they were tazed and cuffed but was accidently uncuffed before they took off running on foot, having believed they took drugs, they were able to outrun law enforcement.
    
    Bodycam Evidence

    ((Bodycam RP))

    

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, NAME_HERE, 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,
    
    
    Anthony Mercer
    Police Officer III
    Los Santos Police Department
    
    Date: 13/APR/2026

  

• Exhibit #3 Officer James Witness statment

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 18/MAR/2026

  Witness Information

  • Name: Cody James
    Date of Birth: 01/OCT/2000
    Phone Number: #312-6487
    Occupation: Police Officer III+1, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • I, Officer Cody James, was patrolling under my unit 4-D-11, along with my partner Officer Chris Malosh, my unit initially responded to an active pursuit originating from the East Joshua Bank robbery involving a blue MonstroCiti that was called out seen leaving from the bank. The vehicle matched a BOLO I had just posted an hour ago for Lilliana Hirano, (01:51 AM 18/MAR | Blue MonstroCiti | LP: EX7BXG09 | RO: Lilliana Hirano | Evading). During the pursuit, the vehicle TC’d in the La Mesa area, at which point a female suspect fled on foot and Officer Anthony Mercer was pursing her on foot, we were able to deploy a taser before she climbed up a ladder. She then continued fleeing, and officers attempted to pursue on foot; however, visual contact was lost shortly after.
    
    **BODYCAMFOOTAGE_18MAR_PART1**
    BOLO: 01:51 AM 18/MAR | Blue MonstroCiti | LP: EX7BXG09 | RO: Lilliana Hirano | Evading
    
    Approximately 15 minutes later, my unit was behind a blue Turismo Omaggio that pulled into the underground parking structure west of Legion Square. A plate scan confirmed the vehicle was registered to Lilliana Hirano, establishing a direct connection to the previously pursued vehicle registered owner. I observed a female suspect outside of the vehicle who appeared consistent with the individual who had fled earlier.
    As we attempted to detain her, she attempted to enter back into the Omaggio. I deployed my taser and began taking her into custody, at which point she was identified as Lilliana Hirano.
    During the arrest, a black Kamacho arrived on scene, later identified as being operated by Joe Ryan (refer to associated arrest report). The vehicle attempted to intervene in the arrest. As Hirano attempted to enter the Kamacho to evade, I deployed my taser again and she fell out of the Kamacho. The Kamacho then struck both myself and Hirano and, causing injuries, but before fleeing the scene I was able to take out a few tires and officers caught Joe Ryan. Hirano was transported to Pillbox MD for treatment and later processed at the DOC.
    
    **BODYCAMFOOTAGE_18MAR_PART2**
    **BODYCAMFOOTAGESCREENSHOT_18MAR**
    Turismo Omaggio - LP: VTAJQ067
    
    
    My bodycam footage has been provided, Additionally, as seen in my bodycam footage, the fleeing suspect from the earlier pursuit and Lilliana Hirano share the same identifying characteristics, including matching hair and visible arm tattoos.
    
    ((BODYCAM RP))
    ((BODYCAM RP))

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Cody James, 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,
    
    
    Cody James
    Police Officer III+1
    Los Santos Police Department
    Date: 17/APR/2026

  

Rowin Lawson
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
451-9939 - [email protected]

---

---

The Court recognizes the defense's motion for Involuntary Dismissal. After review, the prosecution submitted its evidence less than 48 hours past the deadline. None of the evidence provided is dated after the discovery deadline of the 17th of April. The defense cannot demonstrate any evidence they intend to submit that would be affected by this delay. Ultimately, although noted, this brief procedural delay does not prevent the Court or either side from proceeding with the case.

The motion for Involuntary Dismissal is denied.


So Ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

---

All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case. When the scheduling tool has been completed by either party, please post on the docket stating as such.

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.


Respectfully,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

---

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Compel Discovery, and requests as follows;

• Requested Discovery: Body camera footage from suspect processing at the Department of Corrections, Arresting Police Officers
  • Detailed Reasoning: Body-camera footage worn by the arresting officer Crish Malosh at the time of processing during DOC will show the Officer leaving pocket cash on the suspect's person before approaching two prisoners at the gate and informing them that the defendant was carrying a large sum of cash, encouraging them to steal it from the defendant. This action would directly cause the defendant to lose $47,357 of their cash during their time in the Department of Corrections.
    
    This evidence will be crucial for the defendant to argue that the courts should count this loss towards any reimbursements issued.

Lilliana Hirano
Self-Representing
N/A — [email protected]

---

---

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

• Reasoning: The defendant wants to request a public defender.
  • Detailed Explanation: The defendant wishes to invoke their 6th amendment right to to have the assistance of counsel for their defense, and as such will need time to reach out to or have a public defender assigned to the case

Lilliana Howell

---

---

Pertaining to the Motion for Continuance: The Court finds that a brief one-week continuance is warranted to permit the defendant adequate time to establish contact with the Public Defender’s Office, particularly in light of the fact that discovery has already been made available.

Accordingly, a Motion for a Continuance is granted for one week.

The Court further directs that the defendant or the Public Defender’s Office provide detailed notice to the Court should any extraordinary circumstances arise that would necessitate additional delay.

A decision on the Motion to Compel Discovery shall be issued shortly.


So Ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

---

Pertaining to the Motion to Compel Discovery:

The Court has reviewed the charges, the defendant’s statement, and the evidence presented. The Court finds that the requested body camera evidence does not pertain to the charges contested before the Court. The alleged actions of the officer, as well as the defendant’s alleged financial loss, bear no direct relation to the matters contested on this docket.

Accordingly, the Motion to Compel Discovery is denied in its entirety.

The Court advises that the defendant consult with counsel regarding potential contact with the Internal Affairs Division of the appropriate department and/or the Office of the Attorney General.


So Ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

• Defendant and defense counsel,
  
  Has the defendant been able to contact the Public Defender's Office? If necessary, the Court may grant the defendant an extension.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Magistrate Judge
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  298-3863 - [email protected]

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  Chief Public Defender Hugh Allgood will be back on the 11th from an LOA and available after that date. The court will extend the continuance through the 18th of May, 2026, so the defendant may seek appropriate counsel.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Magistrate Judge
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  298-3863 - [email protected]

---

---

I, Hugh R. Allgood, a Chief Public Defender of the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Lilliana Hirano, in the underlying case.

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


Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
235-6076 - [email protected]

---

---

All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case. When the scheduling tool has been completed by either party, please post on the docket stating as such.

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.


Respectfully,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

• Honorable Judge Patrone and pertaining parties,
  
  Defense has filed their availability.
  
  
  Chief Public Defender
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  235-6076 - [email protected]

---

---

In accordance with the availability reported by parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 20:00 (Following #26-BT-0029) on 24th day of May, 2026 at Rockford Hills City Hall, Carcer Way, Metro Los Santos, SA.

Both parties are ordered to be present in the Judges Chambers no later than 15 minutes prior to the above listed date for pretrial arrangements. If complications occur that must result in a delay or cancellation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.


So ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  To improve availability for everyone, the trial will be rescheduled to the 25th of May at 7PM following #26-BT-0029.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Magistrate Judge
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  298-3863 - [email protected]

---

---

---

---

The facts of the case are as follows:

• There was a pursuit of a Monstrociti registered to the defendant in the proximity of a bank robbery.
• An occupant was seen leaving the vehicle and apprehended but was lost, following a foot pursuit.
• The defendant was seen next to a Turismo Omaggio registered to them.
• The defendant ran when confronted by police to a Kamacho but was tazed and apprehended.

---

---

The prosecution argues that the evidence establishes the vehicle’s direct involvement in the bank robbery. The Prosecution asserts that both the defendant and the vehicle matched the descriptions provided during the bank robbery, the subsequent evasion, and the resisting arrest incident. They use this to argue for a continuous timeline based on vehicle registration, broadcasted alerts, physical appearance, distinctive tattoos, and hairstyle, all corroborated by body camera footage demonstrating the defendant's active involvement in all charged offenses.

The defense argues that the prosecution's case relies on multiple instances of doubt that fail to satisfy the burden of proof. The defense argues that the evidence establishes only the vehicle's proximity to the robbery, leaving the allegation of participation unsubstantiated. Furthermore, the defense asserts that law enforcement failed to conduct a proper investigation into the robbery and evasion charges, relying instead on a chain of unconnected events. Because these occurrences cannot be definitively linked, the defense maintains that substantial reasonable doubt exists.

---

---

After review, the court finds that, while a vehicle belonging to the defendant was initially pursued following a bank robbery near East Joshua bank, the prosecution cannot establish any evidentiary ties connecting the vehicle or the defendant to a charge of Bank Robbery. While a vehicle registered to the defendant was pursued near the instance of a bank robbery, the record lacks any physical evidence, including, but not limited to, cash, fingerprints, or CCTV footage, connecting the defendant or their vehicle to the offense. A timeline reliant solely on geographic proximity is insufficient to meet the basic standard of proof for a serious felony charge.

During the time the female being pursued by police ultimately left the vehicle and fled on foot, only partial parts of their tattoos were visible. This leaves the Court with only a common heart tattoo and haircut visible in the initial incident compared to later footage of the defendant. Such generic physical characteristics fail to definitively establish identity. Furthermore, the evidence demonstrates that the individual observed fleeing the pursuit did not match the defendant’s clothing, and the prosecution provided no fingerprints or prior documentation of the defendant's tattoos to bridge this evidentiary gap.

When the defendant was finally confronted in the underground parking lot near Legion Square, she was clearly aware of the officers' intent to arrest her before attempting to enter a vehicle to leave the area.

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

• On the count of SF07 - Bank Robbery, I find the defendant, Lilliana Hirano, not guilty.
• On the count of VF01 - Evading an Officer, I find the defendant, Lilliana Hirano, not guilty.
• On the count of GM04 - Resisting Arrest, I find the defendant, Lilliana Hirano, guilty.

The defendant has made their way to City Hall at their earliest convenience to have the change to their record noted as well as the payment of $49000 returned to them for fines, time, and other expenses/inconveniences incurred from the contested charges.

So Ordered,

Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]