Username: sleighwhite
Select the type of case you wish to file with the court:
CRIMINAL APPEAL
Defendant:
Nathan Williams (breezer17)
I. Statement of Claim
This case will encapsulate three different arrests. We're entering one appeal per the advisement of the Judges and in an effort to keep the docket clean and organized.
Case A
On July 25, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident and was served an unrelated arrest warrant (Evidence Exhibit A1).
Regarding said warrant, the Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense claims that Mr. Williams had no idea that his license was suspended. There is no way for civilians to be able to find the number of points on their license, and Mr. Williams, having had several interactions with the police was never made aware. Officers allowed him to gain over three times the legal threshold of points before writing a warrant for his arrest in this matter.
2. The Defense claims that there is a conspiracy to target Mr. Williams by specific officers and as such, the warrant should be dismissed entirely as it is motivated by ulterior motives.
3. After his arrest on this occasion, it appears his license was not confiscated from him based on the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2) which seems to stand that there is no real interest in educating Mr. WIlliams about this charge or deterring him from committing future license-related charges.
Regarding the incident that lead to Mr. Williams's arrest on July 25, 2023, the Defense claims the following:
1. Per the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2), it appears no Narcotics nor any Class 2 weapons were confiscated. As such, we feel that those charges (Possession of a Class 2 Weapon x2 and Possession of Narcotics x10) should be dismissed unless relevant evidence is presented.
2. Additionally, per the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2) the Defense claims that further harassment and targeting is proven by Officer Black stabbing Mr. Williams in order to apprehend him. The Defense finds that this use of lethal force does not meet the thresholds needed by Tennessee vs. Garner and thus ask that all charges from the incident be dismissed.
Case B
On July 26, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident. The Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense finds no evidence of Assault and Battery (PP) mentioned in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1), and thus asks that it be dismissed.
2. The Defense finds no evidence in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1) to how many and which officers were physically harmed, and thus requests that the 3 Aggravated Assault and Battery (PP) charges to be dismissed as well.
3. The Defense sees no mention to stolen property in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1) nor anything mentioned in confiscated property. Defense requests this charge be dismissed as well.
2. The Defense would like to point out that in this incident (B) that would have taken place not even 24 hours after the one above (A), Mr. Williams was charged with a driving offense and was not charged with "Driving with a Suspended License."
Case C
On August 3, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident and was served an unrelated arrest warrant (Evidence Exhibit C1).
Regarding said warrant, the Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense claims that there is a conspiracy amongst certain officers to target Mr. Williams and as such, the warrant should be dismissed entirely as it is motivated by ulterior motives.
2. In the incident report (Evidence Exhibit C2) the Officer mentions that Mr. Williams was made aware of the "No Loitering Signs" in the area; however, he was charged with "Trespassing on Government Property." It appears that Mr. Williams was not guilty of "trespassing" and instead should have been charged with "Loitering" but was given the Felony charge with the higher time and fine in an effort to further target him.
3. The Defense claims that because Mr. Williams's driver's license was not confiscated during the prior arrest (A) and he was not charged in the subsequent arrest (B) and because he had taken a test with the Los Santos Department of Motor Vehicles to have any points removed from his license, he was under the impression that he was still able to drive as normal.
Regarding the incident that lead to Mr. Williams's arrest on August 3, 2023, the Defense claims the following:
1. Mr. Williams was charged with Criminal Threat (PP) for allegedly making a comment about "wanting to kidnap Assistant Chief Roscoe," an officer that was not even on duty at the time, per the Incident Report (Evidence Exhibit C3). The Defense claims that not only did Mr. Williams not make that threat, but that even he did, the charge doesn't fit. The charge reads, "Intentionally puts another in the belief of physical harm or offensive contact." But the threat was allegedly a comment made over radio, so not something that would have intentionally been heard by officers, and made against someone not even there when the threat was alleged to have been made. The Defense there was no way for Mr. Williams to intentionally put Officer Roscoe in the belief of harm or offensive contact when he was nowhere in the vicinity.
II. Charge(s)
Charges broken down by Case
Case A
Driving with a Suspended License x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x2
Possession of a Class 2 Weapon x2
Possession of Narcotics x10
Case B
Aggravated Assault & Battery (PP) x3
Assault & Battery (PP) x1
Trafficking of a Class 2 Weapon x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x1
Possession of Stolen Property x1
Case C
Disregarding a Lawful Command x1
Trespassing on Government Property x1
Misuse of Mobile Hotline x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x1
Possession of Class 2 Weapon x1
Driving with a Suspended License x1
Criminal Threat (PP) x1
Evading a Peace Officer x1
III. Representative
Devyn Little (sleighwhite)
Nia Liviaus (selliee)
IV. Officers Involved
Case A
Maverick Black (
Holden Steele
Riley Steele
Alexandr Nolan
Roger Fitzgerald
Bucky Langston
Jeffrie Gogginschmiel
Case B
Billie Santana
Louie Herrett
Sam Winger
Atlas West
Nora Cipriano
Tommy Phoenix
Case C
Oscar Deacon
Alexandr Nolan
Billie Santana
Peter Wrangler
Tommy Phoenix
Curtis Roscoe
V. Evidence
Exhbits
A1 - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZNJu3J0_ZoC5RpbSYqyQB-3VgrSDEHVM1eLcjp_ZQhc/edit
A2 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136699755951554732/1136713728704921700/image.png
B1 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136686727050825879/1136696937307971584/image.png
C1 - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tzDO9WCKyIbIPzX2Ni8XnmxujjpUJFLtIv3m3ebMm28/edit
C2 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136713058098626570/1136718707142439082/image.png
*C3 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136713058098626570/1138915253187522711/Screen_Shot_2023-08-09_at_2.22.29_PM.png
* Note: The proper incident report was not provided by officers at the time of arrest, so this is the description provided to Attorney Devyn Little by Officer Nolan instead.
VI. Actions Taken
Case A
230 months | $7,000
Case B
358 months | $12,610
Case C
127 months | $4,160
Total
715 months | $23,770
VII. Witnesses
The Defense is not calling any witnesses at this time; however, we reserve the right to add witnesses in the future until the Discovery period has ended.
Select the type of case you wish to file with the court:
CRIMINAL APPEAL
Defendant:
Nathan Williams (breezer17)
I. Statement of Claim
This case will encapsulate three different arrests. We're entering one appeal per the advisement of the Judges and in an effort to keep the docket clean and organized.
Case A
On July 25, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident and was served an unrelated arrest warrant (Evidence Exhibit A1).
Regarding said warrant, the Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense claims that Mr. Williams had no idea that his license was suspended. There is no way for civilians to be able to find the number of points on their license, and Mr. Williams, having had several interactions with the police was never made aware. Officers allowed him to gain over three times the legal threshold of points before writing a warrant for his arrest in this matter.
2. The Defense claims that there is a conspiracy to target Mr. Williams by specific officers and as such, the warrant should be dismissed entirely as it is motivated by ulterior motives.
3. After his arrest on this occasion, it appears his license was not confiscated from him based on the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2) which seems to stand that there is no real interest in educating Mr. WIlliams about this charge or deterring him from committing future license-related charges.
Regarding the incident that lead to Mr. Williams's arrest on July 25, 2023, the Defense claims the following:
1. Per the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2), it appears no Narcotics nor any Class 2 weapons were confiscated. As such, we feel that those charges (Possession of a Class 2 Weapon x2 and Possession of Narcotics x10) should be dismissed unless relevant evidence is presented.
2. Additionally, per the incident report (Evidence Exhibit A2) the Defense claims that further harassment and targeting is proven by Officer Black stabbing Mr. Williams in order to apprehend him. The Defense finds that this use of lethal force does not meet the thresholds needed by Tennessee vs. Garner and thus ask that all charges from the incident be dismissed.
Case B
On July 26, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident. The Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense finds no evidence of Assault and Battery (PP) mentioned in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1), and thus asks that it be dismissed.
2. The Defense finds no evidence in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1) to how many and which officers were physically harmed, and thus requests that the 3 Aggravated Assault and Battery (PP) charges to be dismissed as well.
3. The Defense sees no mention to stolen property in the incident report (Evidence Exhibit B1) nor anything mentioned in confiscated property. Defense requests this charge be dismissed as well.
2. The Defense would like to point out that in this incident (B) that would have taken place not even 24 hours after the one above (A), Mr. Williams was charged with a driving offense and was not charged with "Driving with a Suspended License."
Case C
On August 3, 2023, the Defendant, Mr. Nathan Williams, was taken into custody due to an incident and was served an unrelated arrest warrant (Evidence Exhibit C1).
Regarding said warrant, the Defense claims the following:
1. The Defense claims that there is a conspiracy amongst certain officers to target Mr. Williams and as such, the warrant should be dismissed entirely as it is motivated by ulterior motives.
2. In the incident report (Evidence Exhibit C2) the Officer mentions that Mr. Williams was made aware of the "No Loitering Signs" in the area; however, he was charged with "Trespassing on Government Property." It appears that Mr. Williams was not guilty of "trespassing" and instead should have been charged with "Loitering" but was given the Felony charge with the higher time and fine in an effort to further target him.
3. The Defense claims that because Mr. Williams's driver's license was not confiscated during the prior arrest (A) and he was not charged in the subsequent arrest (B) and because he had taken a test with the Los Santos Department of Motor Vehicles to have any points removed from his license, he was under the impression that he was still able to drive as normal.
Regarding the incident that lead to Mr. Williams's arrest on August 3, 2023, the Defense claims the following:
1. Mr. Williams was charged with Criminal Threat (PP) for allegedly making a comment about "wanting to kidnap Assistant Chief Roscoe," an officer that was not even on duty at the time, per the Incident Report (Evidence Exhibit C3). The Defense claims that not only did Mr. Williams not make that threat, but that even he did, the charge doesn't fit. The charge reads, "Intentionally puts another in the belief of physical harm or offensive contact." But the threat was allegedly a comment made over radio, so not something that would have intentionally been heard by officers, and made against someone not even there when the threat was alleged to have been made. The Defense there was no way for Mr. Williams to intentionally put Officer Roscoe in the belief of harm or offensive contact when he was nowhere in the vicinity.
II. Charge(s)
Charges broken down by Case
Case A
Driving with a Suspended License x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x2
Possession of a Class 2 Weapon x2
Possession of Narcotics x10
Case B
Aggravated Assault & Battery (PP) x3
Assault & Battery (PP) x1
Trafficking of a Class 2 Weapon x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x1
Possession of Stolen Property x1
Case C
Disregarding a Lawful Command x1
Trespassing on Government Property x1
Misuse of Mobile Hotline x1
Felony Evading a Peace Officer x1
Possession of Class 2 Weapon x1
Driving with a Suspended License x1
Criminal Threat (PP) x1
Evading a Peace Officer x1
III. Representative
Devyn Little (sleighwhite)
Nia Liviaus (selliee)
IV. Officers Involved
Case A
Maverick Black (
Holden Steele
Riley Steele
Alexandr Nolan
Roger Fitzgerald
Bucky Langston
Jeffrie Gogginschmiel
Case B
Billie Santana
Louie Herrett
Sam Winger
Atlas West
Nora Cipriano
Tommy Phoenix
Case C
Oscar Deacon
Alexandr Nolan
Billie Santana
Peter Wrangler
Tommy Phoenix
Curtis Roscoe
V. Evidence
Exhbits
A1 - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZNJu3J0_ZoC5RpbSYqyQB-3VgrSDEHVM1eLcjp_ZQhc/edit
A2 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136699755951554732/1136713728704921700/image.png
B1 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136686727050825879/1136696937307971584/image.png
C1 - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tzDO9WCKyIbIPzX2Ni8XnmxujjpUJFLtIv3m3ebMm28/edit
C2 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136713058098626570/1136718707142439082/image.png
*C3 - https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1136713058098626570/1138915253187522711/Screen_Shot_2023-08-09_at_2.22.29_PM.png
* Note: The proper incident report was not provided by officers at the time of arrest, so this is the description provided to Attorney Devyn Little by Officer Nolan instead.
VI. Actions Taken
Case A
230 months | $7,000
Case B
358 months | $12,610
Case C
127 months | $4,160
Total
715 months | $23,770
VII. Witnesses
The Defense is not calling any witnesses at this time; however, we reserve the right to add witnesses in the future until the Discovery period has ended.
