State V Alcaraz et al. (HUT) - Needs Judge / August 7th 12am EDT

187 R. O'Cop

Ash Lǐ You've been added to the investigation.

187 R. O'Cop

Notice to the Court

Below, the State presents recommended sentencing for the HUT Charges the defendants are facing:

- Enrique Alcaraz:
Accomplice to Manufacturing of Weaponry (HUT) - $500,000 | 8 years & 6 years Parole
Weapon Trafficking (HUT) - $250,000 | 5 years & 4 years Parole

- Rex Presley:
Accomplice to Manufacturing of Weaponry (HUT) - $500,000 | 8 years & 6 years Parole
Weapon Trafficking (HUT) - $250,000 | 5 years & 4 years Parole

- Collin Mc'Fuqo:
Accomplice to Manufacturing of Weaponry (HUT) - $500,000 | 8 years & 6 years Parole
Weapon Trafficking (HUT) - $200,000 | 4 years & 3 years Parole
Drug Trafficking (HUT) - $700,000 | 10 years & 8 years Parole

Kye Evans

Requesting access

187 R. O'Cop

Kye Evans already been added. <3

187 R. O'Cop

Motion to Amend Charges

The State (SAPR) hereby motions for the inclusion of the charge "Criminal Possession of a class 2 firearm" in the list of non-HUT charges for the defendant Collin Mc'Fuqo.

respectfully submitted,
Annabelle Celestine, representing San Andreas Park Rangers

187 R. O'Cop

@Kye Evans @Ash Lǐ

Below are the contents of the Evidence Locker for investigation 7498:

Collin's arrest:
https://i.ibb.co/fYPfgPVY/Five-M-GTAProcess-R4-Adx-WO0-AD.png

Rex arrest:
https://i.ibb.co/GvmLwbdH/Five-M-GTAProcess-Dc4-RCBx-Jr-K.png
https://i.ibb.co/j90q82V6/Five-M-GTAProcess-um-YSi-Dh-ORf.png

Raid 1:
https://i.ibb.co/hRpHNSJS/Five-M-GTAProcess-BSx-TVc-Rzf-P.png

Raid 2:
https://i.ibb.co/MktrZ8Lt/Five-M-GTAProcess-h-VFue71p-Uv.png

Raid 3:
https://i.ibb.co/S4N2Dsqk/Five-M-GTAProcess-2kmoq-Og-Fri.png
https://i.ibb.co/G39qCFTX/Five-M-GTAProcess-NCdu-Iv5ww-Q.png

Raid 4:
https://i.ibb.co/tPYCtQ6d/Five-M-GTAProcess-7d-CNSt-YFTd.png

Raid 5:
https://i.ibb.co/m53922jp/Five-M-GTAProcess-Ev-N4c-A5-JIL.png

Raid 6:
https://i.ibb.co/d4Yy5CYp/Five-M-GTAProcess-movjgy-Jzlx.png

Raid 7:
https://i.ibb.co/jd9HPcb/Five-M-GTAProcess-d88-NHJa9im.png

Raid 8:
https://i.ibb.co/1JJs9jgh/Five-M-GTAProcess-iha-Si7u-IVK.png

The rest:
https://i.ibb.co/9khcdmJ1/Five-M-GTAProcess-d-MLZwb1zsf.png
https://i.ibb.co/vvY6h7sV/Five-M-GTAProcess-JNZa4-C7ix-S.png
https://i.ibb.co/FLRy8YPK/Five-M-GTAProcess-A6dvve-ING5.png

[deleted]

We have availability on July 31 at 11pm ET. Discovery will close 24 hours prior to trial.

Ignacio Lopez

This is Enrique using a phone I found in his me of my dumpster runs, entering a motion on my behalf at the direction of Judge Moore and Justice Lars

Motioning for review of probable cause as the narrative that the prosecution paints to develop their PC in my apprehension does not align with the actual facts as happened, which I can easily explain in a PC review.

The additional reasoning for this review is I will be unable to meet the scheduled time for the case, as unforeseen outside issues that can be explained in another format, will be reversing my hours of availability so as to not prolong what I can prove alone, let alone with a competent lawyer like Ash, I humbly request the hearing.

I might not be a hot shot lawyer like Mr Pepstein, or a rich businessman like Mr Banner, but I believe the DOJ would not allow its services of even justice to be unevenly distributed to its fair citizens.

187 R. O'Cop

Ignacio Lopez

State's Rebuttal to Probable Cause hearing request

The prosecution provides direct evidence and testimony of Mr Enrique being present and fleeing from the original scene of arrest. Mr Enrique did not wear a face-covering, as seen in the evidence photos taken by the Rangers (recognized by multiple LEOs on scene), alongside using a personal motorbike (registered to Mr Enrique) to flee from the scene. — fact verifiable through LEO testimony.

We believe at this point Probable Cause have been sufficiently met, even with Mr Enrique successfully fleeing the original scene.

If there are additional issues the defense or defendant would like to point towards regarding the testimony or evidence, the court case itself sounds like a perfect opportunity to do so, and we encourage it.

However...

If the defendant wishes to simply contest the Probable Cause of the arrest and does not wish to be present for the court case itself, as no motion for continuance was called, the State could see the usefulness in such a hearing.

PS:
The State urges the Defendant to use their very highly available lawyer to make motions moving forward. You have a legal counsel Mr Enrique, and for the sake of proper representation we would prefer that your requests would go through them.

respectfully submitted,
Annabelle Celestine, representing the State (SAPR)

Ignacio Lopez

187 R. O'Cop rebuttal to the prosecutions argument. If the hearing IS heard, the facts of the case would be brought to light that proper identification on your initial scene was never obtained

As for my very capable representation, I also agree. But she is also very over burdened with practically half the cases on this docket, including her own HUT level charge which seems to be significantly easier to obtained than cops obtaining actual PC.

With my prior experience in Federal Law Enfocement, I believe I might be able to articulate motions in a way you can keep up with. And if it eases the load for my very capable representation then even better.

Best wishes to you on your first HUT prosecution tho. I’m sure you’ll have plenty on your plate before the next week is up

Ash Lǐ

@[unknown group] In the absence of any judge taking this in a timely manner to actually hear what Mr. Alcaraz has to say, this case needs to be rescheduled. As Mr. Alcaraz said 2 days ago on the day of scheduling, his schedule has changed significantly at short notice, and he cannot make the current time. If Mr. Alcaraz cannot have a hearing for his own part of this pre-trial, it is imperative that he is present at the full trial. Severing is not an option either, barring a probable cause hearing.

Ash Lǐ

@[unknown group]

Teomi Tiffin

@[unknown group] @Theodore Lars

We need a decision on this. Based on what I'm looking at for scheduling, I doubt we will be able to get all 8 people involved scheduled on the same time.

@Ignacio Lopez did you put your updated times in the scheduling? If not, please do this asap so we can try to find a time.

Ignacio Lopez

Teomi Tiffin Yes Sir, I did.

Theodore Lars

Probable Cause hearing denied, this needs to go to court. If the defense plans to testify is he available at ANY time near the time of arrest?

If he is no longer available at the time of arrest for court, I will have a discussion with each counselor.

Teomi Tiffin

Time they were sent up was 5am eastern. The investigation was made at 3:26am.

Around this time based on scheduling, most can not make it. It seems Enrique's availability shifted from Early AU to Later AU/EU.

Enrique new time does not match up with most of the other 7 people that put their times in. Even if we put in a new schedule, this will most likely continue to be the case.

If Enrique want to say something on the stand, I highly suggest trying to get a deposition because we should not be rescheduling with 7 of the 8 people can make 11pm eastern, but 1 can't.

@Theodore Lars @Ash Lǐ @Ignacio Lopez

Theodore Lars

So Enrique is not available from 1 to 5 am which would be the span of time of the arrest, was that also around the initial criminal activity?

« Previous Page Next Page »