Just last Friday, I did the post pictured above. If you haven't already, read that for background and context for this post.
This Monday, local attorney Michael Acosta filed a supplemental motion to dismiss in his 2020 case for alleged drug charges. Acosta is pro per which means he is representing himself. The 995 motion was continued to 6/23 to allow Deputy District Attorney Ian Harris to file a response. Acosta also filed a motion to compel discovery and a request for judicial notice. You can read the Judicial.notice and compare it with my coverage from court records on the other people who were arrested with Acosta and his co-defendant, Sarah Carroll by the HCDTF.
Carroll lives with Acosta and is in a relationship with him. Obviously, I was not at the ex parte hearing. What I do know is that Carroll has contacted me on behalf of Acosta and has never said anything negative about him. If you read my blog regularly, I would suggest you read the posts I did on former HCSO Matt Tomlin and come to your own conclusions. I am out in the community a lot, I have my own experience with Tomlin and what I think of him. Tomlin resigned from HCSO and works for St. Bernard's.
Mr. Harris inherited this case from former Deputy DA Jane Mackie who is no longer employed with the Humboldt DA's office.
Unless Carroll testifies in court under oath that she told Tomlin what he claims, I have a hard time believing that statement. In Friday's post, Acosta has addressed this alleged conversation. I don't think these pages should be sealed. DA says one thing, Acosta another and so far Carroll has not joined in the 995 motion.
There is an assignment order from the Judicial Council of California in the case assigning Justice Stuart Pollak to this case.
Excerpts of Acosta's filings:
JCC order:
I did coverage from court hearings and records on each of the people arrested that Acosta refers to in this Judicial Notice. You can those posts via the search feature by entering the names of the people arrested in the original post about this HCDTF bust .
Previous posts:
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/05/missing-pages-conflicting-claims-tomlin.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/05/acosta-wants-all-charges-dismissed.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/05/michael-acosta-is-back-to-representing.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/04/humboldt-superior-court-rejects-michael.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/03/will-court-grant-michael-acosta.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2023/02/trial-confirmed-plea-yet-another-change.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/07/deal-or-no-deal.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/06/we-hadnt-received-offer-in-two-years.html?m=1
https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2022/06/trial-dates-confirmed-or-last-minute.html?m=1
(way too many previous posts in this 2020 case to link them all)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.