7 25 12 0204 62337 242 Pages 61901 26405 ROA From RMC To 2JDC CR12-1262-3049796 (Appeal From Municipal's Court) Digitized Ocr A9 Digitized

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Code 1180
FilED
2012 JUL 25 AMI!: 3,
ORIGtNAL
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE
ZACHARY COUGHLIN,
Appellant,
vs.
CITY OF RENO,
Respondent.
~ /
Case No. CA\l-lllo
Dept. No. La
APPEAL PROCEEDINGS FROM MUNICIPAL'S COURT
http://www.scribd.com/doc/166573818/CR12-1262-3049796-Appeal-From-
Municipal-s-Court-Copy
Note by Coughlin: the first 242 pages represents the ROA filed by the RMC in
the 2JDC on 7/25/12, Coughlin digitized filings where possible in this
repdocution
reproduction, though nothing has been made legible that was not previously
legible. Such digitization was done to reduce pdf file size.
The exact 242 page eFlex file is available for comparison here:
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
iO
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RENO
MUNICIPAL COURT
PO &':1900
Rcr.o,lwmOS
(115) ll4.12900

Document Code 1375
Reno Municipal Court
P.O. Box 1900
Reno, Nevada 89505
775 334-2290

ORIGINAL
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
ZACHARY BARKER COUGHLm,
Case No. ___________ _
Appellant,
Dept. No. _______ _
vs.
CITY OF RENO,
Respondent.
---------------------1
CERTIFIED COPY OF DOCKET
13 November 2011: Criminal Complaint issued upon the oath of Reno Police
Department Officer Carter.
Charge 1: Trespass, a violation ofR.M.C 08.10.010.
14 November 2011: Defendant appeared while in custody before Judge William Gardner
for arraignment. 1be defendant was represented by Keith Loomis Esq. and on behalf of the City
was Christopher Hazlett-Stevens. The defendant was advised of his Constitutional rights. The
Defendant entered a plea of Not Guilty and a trial date was set for December 13,2011. Lewis
Taitel Esq. was appointed to represent defendant. Defendant's request for release on O.R. was
denied.
15 November 2011: Cash bail in the amount of$310.00 wa.s posted and the defendant was
released from the Washoe County Jail.
Approved October 11, 2004
RMC33
--=[ I J=--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RENO
MtJ)llClPAL COlJllT
PO aox l900

(175) J3o/..l2900

23 November 20ll: Motion To Continue With Supporting Declaration flIed by
Deputy City Attorney Christopher Hazlett-Stevens.
28 November 2011: Order Continuing Trial signed by Judge William Gardner.
30 November 2011: Trial date of January 10,2012 set by the court. Legal Defender
Roberto Puentes was appointed as Attorney for defendant for new trial date.
14 December 2011: Motion To Proceed lnfonna Pauperis filed by defendant.
03 January 2012: Motion for New Trial Date filed by Legal Defender Roberto
Puentes.
04 January 2012: Motion for New Trial Date granted by Judge William Gardner.
18 January 2012: Motion For Withdrawal Of Attorney filed by Legal Defender
Roberto Puentes. A motion hearing was set for February 2,2012.
02 February 2012: Motion hearing held before Judge William Gardner. Present at
the hearing on behalf of the City was Deputy City Attorney Jill Drake, for the defense Roberto
Puentes and defendant Zachary Couglin. Motion To Withdraw was granted. Legal Defender
Keith Loomis was appointed to represent defendant.
Approved October 11,2004 RMC33
--=[ 2]=--

2
13 February 2012: Notice of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside, JCRCP 59,
3
JCRCP 60, Motion for Reconsideration: Motion for Recusal: Motion For Publication Of
4
5
Transcript at Public Expense. Petition for In Fonna Pauperis Status filed by defendant.
6
7
16 February 2012: Notice of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside, JCRCP 59,
8
JCRCP 60, Motion for Reconsideration: Motion for Recusal: Motion For Publication Of
9
Transcript at Public Expense. Petition for In Fonna Pauperis Status filed by defendant.
10
II
12
22 February 2012: Opposition to Defendant's Motion filed February 13,2012, filed
13
by Deputy City Attorney Jill Drake.
14
15
05 March 2012: Trial date set for April 10, 2012 by Court.
16
17
18
05 March 2012: Notice Of Appearace As Co-Counsel And Motion To Dismiss filed
19
defendant.
20
21
20 March 2012: Order #1 denying defendant's motion filed 13, February 2012 signed
by
22
Judge William Gardner.
23
24
25
21 March 2012: Order#2 denying defendant's motion filed 5, March 2012 signed by
26
Judge William Gardner.
27
28
RENO
MtINlCll'AL curRY
PO Box 1900
Reoo. !-IV 8\lSO:S
Approved October Ii. 2004 RMC33
(775) 314..22900
--=[ 3 ]=--
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"""
MUNI CIPAL (,Ou ltT
POBotc l900
R .... NV89S0S
am3JH19OCl

21 March 2012: Motion To Strike Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Complaint filed by
Deputy City Attorney Christopher Hazletl- Stevens.
10 April 2012: Defendant appeared for trial with counsel Keith Loomis, Judge William
Gardner presiding. Present on behalf of the City was Christopher Hazlett-Stevens. Several
pre-trial motions were heard. An Order Suspending Proceedings was signed. All
proceedings suspended until the question of competence is determined. Case Status Hearing
scheduled for 8, May 20 12.
08 May 2012: Case Status hearing held before Judge William Gardner. Present on
behalf of the City was Deputy City Attorney Christopher Hazlett-Stevens, for the defense
Keith Loomis and defendant Zachary Coughlin. Defendant was found to be competent.
Defendant's motion to remove Keith Loomis as counsel granted. Trial date set by the court
for June 18, 2012.
OS June 2012: Notice Of Appearance As Counsel ; Motion To Dismiss; Motion To
Suppress; Motion For A Continuance Of Trial And Transfer To Mental Health Court filed by
defendant.
18 June 2012: Defendant appeared for trial pro-per, Judge William Gardner presiding.
Present on behalf of the City was Christopher Hazlett-Stevens. Several pre-trial motions
were heard. Motion to Continue filed by defendant denied. Motion to Dismiss filed by
defendant denied. Motion to Suppress denied. Motion to Recuse denied. Motion to Transfer
to Mental Health Court denied. Case tried on its merits and the Defendant was found guilty of the
charge of Trespass, a violation of R.M.C 08.10.01 O.
Approved October 11. 2004 RMC33
--=[ 4 ]=--

The Defendant was sentenced as follows:
2
3
Trespass, a violation of RM.C 08.1 om D. : Time Served and a $310.00 fine.
4
26 June 2012: Motion for New Trial filed by defendant.
5
6
11 July 2012: Order Denying Motion For New Trial & For Other Relief signed by Judge
7
William Gardner.
8
9
18 July 2012: Notice Of Appeal filed by defendant.
IO
II
12
I3
14
25 July 2012: Notice 0 f Appeal, motion to Vacate and or Set Aside, JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60,
15
16
Motion for Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For Publication Of Transcript at
17
Public Expense, Petition for In Forma Pauperis Status filed by defendant.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Municipal Judge.

25
Department Two
26
27
28
RENO
MUNlClPAt.COURT
PO Bn>IIPOO
Reoo.NVII'.I505
Approved October 11. 2004 RMC33

--=[ 5]=--
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
O<ENO
MtJN)C(J>Al, COURT
PO Bo!( 1900
l\I!:I:IO,.N.... lMM
(77'}334.22900

CERTIFICATE OF TRANSMITTAL OF COMPLETE RECORD ON APPEAL
I, Cassandra Jackson, Court Administrator of the Reno Municipal Court, do hereby
certity that the attached documents include full, true and correct copies of all papers relating
to Case Number 11 CR 2640521, including a Certified Copy of Docket, Plaintiff's exhibits 1-
3. Further, said documents have been transmitted to and filed with the clerk of the Washoe
County District Court. Transcript to follow.
Court Administrator
SUBSCRIBED AND BEFORE ME
this day of--"'J=:.....!LO().:..!\'f+-______ , 2012.

\ k Wa L(
NOr Y PUBLIC
STATE OF NEVADA - COUNTY OF WASHOE
Approved October 11. 2004
LISA WAGNER
-.y Public St8Ie 01 Nowada

--=[ 6 ]=--
RMC33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RENO
MlINfCIPALCOURf

Itmo, NV 89SOS

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), 1 hereby certify that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal
Court and that on this date I deposited for mailing at Reno, Nevada a true copy of the
foregoing document addressed to:
CHRISTOPHER HAZLETT -STEVENS
DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY
P.O. BOX 1900
RENO, NEVADA 89505
and
ZACHARY COUGHLIN
P.O. Box 3961
RENO, NV 89505
DATED this t316
day OfJU."'I
Approved October 11, 2004
LISA WAGNER
Judicial Assistant
Department Two
--=[ 7 ]=--
,2012.
RMC33
ij
7
n

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
AFFIRMATION
Pursuant to NRS 2398.030
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the preceding document, __ _
ern:., 1/ tRJ.lP4D5
!J filed in case number: ______ . _____________ _
10
12
14
IH
21
;>4
21i
111
Document does nol contain Ihe social security number of any person
OR ,
D Document contains the social security number of a person as required by:
o A specific state or federal law, to wit:
(State specific state or federal law)
\
or
o For the administration of a public program
or-
o For an application for a federal or state grant
-or-
O Confidential Family Court Information Sheet
(NRS 125.130, NRS 125.230 and NRS 1258.055)
Dale:
(AUO/ lIey tor)
AIIr,rmtflCJfI
I.lur:flln/Jfu 1-5. ,?on6

IN TIm MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF RENO'
CITY OF RENO,
S:PAFI.ATE DISPOSITION
CRlMINAL COMPLAINT
(GENERAL)
V(lQj ';:il/G.it I q
___ _
DOB 'I JUDGE __
ttl I&.It- Sr. I ._1
/J J 17S'
1, hr4"tP hereby complain aDd say !hat
i4J.N
,
4. hascommittedthecrimeof '7)JS/Usr
- ____________ to wit:
That said defendant on or about Nov 13
StateofNevada,l. Ave# eac. ' :Yf. TH-tF
AI7 IJ ,_ }
-ntf;= f&f'f'!J t;l/ILg.:-i::.
20.lL. in the Ci!)' of Reno,
Del tAlkS fOtW(J d1I
0,..1 II-I-II.
__ All of wbich is in violation of NRS _____ as adopted by section
1.04.015 of the Reno Municipal Code.
All of which is in violation of 8' 10' Q / ()
Code.
of the Reno Municipal
J therefore request that said Defendant be dealt with according to law.
. I hm:by declare upon infonnation and belief under penal!)' of peljury pursuant to NRS
171.)02. that the foregoing is true and correct to the be&t of my I .
(Dared)'
)100
IN THE emICIPAL COURT OF THE CI. OF RENO
ONE SOUTH SIERRA STREET, RENO, NY 89505
Mailing: P.O. Box 1900, Reno, NY 89505 PHONE (775)3342290
V8.
DEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY
Court Case#: 11 CR 26405 21
Agency#: RPD 1122185
DOB: 09/2711976
Accident#: Booking#: 19876
Status: OPEN
ENGLISH
Attorney: TAITEI. LEWIS
1111312011 FORMAL COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE COURT
11I14/l011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: LEW TAITEL; 475 S. ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUiTE lA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PHONE (775) 322.2272
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONT ACfING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HEISHE
WILL HAVE ALL OF THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HlMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON 11flS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED TIIAT TIlE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION AND
MAYBE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODAY'S DATE. IN THE EVENT THAT THIS ORDER EXPIRES,
THE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
[F THE DEFENDANT liAS WITNESSES THAT HFJSHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HlSIHER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HIS/HER
ATTORNEY.
1111412011 THE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED HlSIHER RIGHTS BY THE JUDGE AND INDICATED THAT
HFJSHE UNDERSTOOD THEM COMPLETELY.
Offense Dl: 1111312011
Arrest Dt: 1111312011
Plea: 1111412011 NOT GUiLTY
)EFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
Alon<y#: 1122185
____________ Print Date: 1111412011
)eCendant Initial.:
Jail Days: 0
Suspended Days: 0
COURT CASE #: 11 CR 26405 21
Data Dale: 11/1412011
Page I of2

Complete t:
FAILURE TO COMPLY WIlli THE CONDITIONS OF BAIL AS DESCRlBED IN THIS ORDER WILL RESULT IN 1HE ISSUANCE OF A
FAILURE TO COMPLY WARRANT OR IMMEDIATE ARREST AND INCARCERATION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AND/OR BAIL
REVOCATION. FOR FURTHER TION, CONTACT THE SENTENCE COMPLIANCE WINDOW LOCATED ON THE FIRST
FLOOR OF THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE SOlTnf SIERRA ST, RENO, NV (715) 334-2290.
THE DEFENDANr SHALL APPEAR AS ORDERED FOR ALL REVIEWS AND SHALL COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE
BAlLIFFSIMARSHALS AND ALL COURT STAFF.
THE DEFENDANT SHALL ATTEND ALL REVIEWS, COURT APPEARANCES AND COURT -ORDERED PROGRAMS ON TIME AND
ALCOHOL AND DRUG FREE.
THE DEFENDANT SHALL KNOW HISIHER COURT DATE AND MAINTAIN CONTACT W1TI1 HIS/HER ATTORNEY.
PRIOR TO CHANGING HIS/HER ADDRESS OR PHONE NUMBER, THE DEFENDANT SHALL NOTlFIY THE COURT OF SUCH
CHANGE.
OBEY ALL LAWS.
THE HONORABLE
JUDGE'S SIGNATURE:
A A J
DATE:
As a condition of release from custody (bail, bond or own recognizance) and pursuant to NRS 178.4 84, the defendant must sign this
document before being released from custody. By signing below, the defendant promises to appear at all times and places ordered by
the Court, by way cf this document. The defendant is ordered by the Court to appear in Court alcohol and drug free or will be subject
to arrest for contempt of court. Failure to appear in court will result in forfeiture of bail and a warrant will be issued for the defendanfs
arrest.
Any violation of this instant order may result in contempt proceedings and the filing ofadditional criminal charges. In accordance with
NRS 22.010, it is a misdemeanor for any person to fail, refuse or neglect to comply with the tenns of any order issued by the
. Municipal Court Judge. This order will remain in effect until the Court issues another order superseding it.
This order is to accompany a receipt of bail posted, which shall be used to satisfY any fine or cost imposed by the Court. Upon
adjudication of this case, any cash bail posted will be applied to outstanding fines and/or fees and ooy surety bonds will be exonerated
unless the judge orders otherwise.
Any law enforcement officer who has probable cause to believe that the defendant has violated any condition of this order is ordered to
arrest him/her.
UNDERSTAND AND PROMISE TO OBEY THIS ORDER. DEFENDANT: _____________ -::-______ Ii
DATE: ______ TIME: ____ _
I, THE SWORN INTPRETER HAVE FULLY INTERPRETED THIS ORDER TO THE
DEFENDANT: = DATE: ______ TIME: ____ _
RECEIVED BY DEPUTY: ___________________ ,DATE: ______ TIME: ____ _
ISSUED BY MARSHAL: DATE: TIME:
DEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER Aatneyll: 11-21185 COURT CASE II: II CR 26405 21
Derendant InitialS: Print nate: \1/1412011 Data Date: 11/1411011
Page 2 ofl
2
3
4
5
6
'I
8
9
10
11
12
\3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
:enoOryAttomey
P.O. Box 1900
1 NV89S0S

CERTIFICA TE OF SERVICE
I certify that I am an employee of the Reno City Attorney. Reno. Nevada, and that on the
day of November. 20 II, I deposited for mailing at Reno, Nevada, first class postage
(
prepaid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document addressed to:
Lewis Taitel, Esq.
475 S. Arlington Ave., Ste. lA
Reno, Nevada 89501
-5-

Legal Secretary, Criminal Division 4:;
Office of the Reno City Attorney

1 Case No. 11 CR 26405
2 Dept. No.2
3
4
5
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF RENO
6

7
8 nffi CITY OF RENO,
Plaintiff.
9
ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL
v.
10 ZACHARY COUGHLIN,
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendant.
______________________
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING. and there being no objection from Defense, the Motion to Continue
Trial filed by the City Attorney is granted.
It is so ORDERED.
Dol<d <hi, 28 d>, ",No_I>. 2011rl/;$

Department Two
IN THE .NICIPAL COURT OF THE Cre OF RENO
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEV
ONE SOUTH SIERRA STREET, RENO, NV 89505
Mailing: P.O. Box 1900, Reno, NY 89505 PHONE (775)334-2290 F (77!j3:3#-'18Z.4::'
va.
DEFENDANT: COUGHLm, ZACHARY
Court Case#: 11 CR 26405 21 DOB: 0912711976
Accident#:
Status: OPEN
Language: ENGLISH
Agency#: RI'D 11-22185 Booking#: 19876
Attorney: PUENTES, ROBERTO
11/1412011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: LEWTAITEL; 7 ~ S. ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE lA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PHONE (775) 322-2272
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HEISHE
REPRESENT HIMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION AND
MAYBE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. TIllS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODA Y'S DATE. IN THE EVENT THAT THIS ORDER EXPIRES,
TIlE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HElSHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HIS/HER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HIS/HER
ATTORNEY.
1111412011 THE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED HISIllER RIGHTS BY THE JUDGE AND INDICATED THAT
HFJSHE UNDERSTOOD THEM COMPLETELY.
1113012011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: ROBERTO PUENTES; 416 RIDGE STREET (p.O. BOX 2421) RENO, NEVADA
89505 PHONE (775) 786-7676
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HElSHE
REPRESENT HlMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLlCA TlON AND
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. TIllS ORDER WILL
TIlE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION FOR RECONSlDERA TION.
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HISIllER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HlSlllER
ATTORNEY.
JEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
AIIODCyII: 11-221B5 COURT CASE II: II CR 26405 2I
)efendant Initials:
__ _ ________ Print Date: 11130/2011
Data Dat.: 11/3011011
Pagelof3
1I1301l011
LEGA L D E ~ E N D E R RE.:.ii .eD: LEWIS TAITEL .. .
IT IS HEREBY ORDER.-RA T THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE RELlEV..-ROM HISlltER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE.
Offense Dt:
Arrest Dt
111l31l01\
11113120 I J
Plea: 1lI141l01l - NOT GUILTY
Next ProofD!:
BaJance:
Completed Dt:
Jail Days: 0
Suspended Days: 0
FAILURE TOCOMPl.Y Wml THECONDmONS OF BAil AS DESCRIBED IN THIS ORDER WILL RESUlT IN THE ISSUANCE OF A
FAILURE TO COMPLY WARRANT OR IMMEDJATE ARReST AND INCARCERATION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT ANDiORBAIL
REVOCATION. fOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT TIlE SENTENCE COMPLIANCE WINDOW LOCATED ON THE FIRST
FLOOR OfTH'E RENO MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE soum StERRA ST, RENO, NY (775) 334-2290.
THE DEFENDANT SHALL APPEAR. AS ORDERED FOR ALL REVIEWS AND SHALL COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE
BAlLIFFSlMARSHALS AND ALL COUR T STAFF.
TIlE DEFENDANT SHALL ATTEND ALL REVIEWS. COURT APPEARANCES AND COURT -ORDERED PROGRAMS ON TIMe AND
TIlE DEFENDANT SHALL KNOW HlSJlIER COURT DATE AND MAfNTAIN CONTACT wmllllSIHER A TTORNF.Y.
PRJOR TO CHANGING HJSlHr.R ADDRESS OR PHONE NUMBER. THE DEFENDANT SHALL NOn?IY TII COURT OF SUCH
CIIANGE.
OBEY ALL LAWS.
TilE HONORABLE
JUDGE'S SfGNATURE:_
TE:
DEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, 7.ACHARY BARKER
Defendant Inlliab:
Aac"eyN. II-HIBS
Print Date, 1113012011
COURT CASE #: II CR26405 21
nata Date: 11/30/2011
Page 1 of3
,
You are ordered by the Court to arrive ., .. Icohol fi"ee and m time for all Court hearin .. " Court related progams. Failure to
appear in Court will result in the issuan" a warrant for your arrest. Any violation order may result in contempt
proceedings aIXI the filing of additional criminal charges. In accordance with NRS 22.010, it is a misdemeanor for any person to fail,
refuse or neglecl to comply with the tenns of any order issued by the Municipal Court Judge. This order will remain in effect until the
Court issues another order superseding it. I
I UNDERSTAND AND PROMISE TO OBEY TlUS ORDER. DEFENDANT;6:: ]2 oJ
DATEF-- TIME: '
I, THE SWORN INTPRETER HAVE FULLY INTERPRETED TIllS ORDER TO THE
DEFENDANT: DATE: TIME: ____ _
RECEIVED BY DEPUTY: __________________ DATE:._---::::-___ TIME: ___ -,-_
ISSUED BY MARSHAL: -- DATE: TIME:
JEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
Ageney#: 11-22185 COURT CASE N: Il CR 2640/121
).rendant Inllials:
_ __________ Print Date: 11/300011
Data Date: 1113012011
Pag.30ra
.,. ".
'. ,. .
] .
:2, .:
d ,' "
4 '.
' . ,Y. " . _
.. ..
;
' . ;
" .' . ,-,

'. ;
. .
2011 DEC 14 AM B: 55
() "
! _ __ .,t..,..tr.
r
.
. ' .
':1 ." RENO MUNICIPAL

rt :; ;. CIIT' OF RENO
::fO: .: .. : . " .:. ';.
,
. '"

; . . ZACH" COUGHLIN .
", "
... . W ','
CR 26405 .21
JUDGE GARDNER
: '
," ', :1A
':
' ..
. ,
.'
';0-; . . .' 0. ... !j', ' ----.>;-'"
. ME-kid-: .
. J4:,; '.",.; .... .. ...... ,. C' "' ... : ,. " i . .. '. ' FINANcIAi. INQuiRY AND :' :'
,U,'; .. ' . . ' 1'"
: : l"jI'irb . ,: ..
:'; t;
. . ..
.' ...... .
' ..
... . : .
j )': . .
:0" , .. ' :
:24: ; .'
:2$ :.
:. 26' .
21 : . ,-

. ." '
. . '
_ .. _-
....... ' .

, .;..,
"
2011 DEC 14 Ali 8: 55
" j
:'.
;.2 : ' Uf-:
.... '.' --'c' _ H'
::5 .' . :J; . Co. . .. ..
5 . ..; . ...... ,. '. , .'
,'6
'1
;;i": . r tt. ... ..
: 2. powitj.tO':piYtho.1:OIIfIDd'Jceii':/:Jf.'Wj . .
HI::' ,.
n . :3. 1 : :
'12: ' .". .'
r) : . :it"
;: .
15 : .... , ...... .. ,..... ./", tf .. -.. ' .... :
., .: .. 'ii" : ... ..., ... _ .. ',' .. I .,... .. ... ' .. . '; '.'
16 .. , : .a;:LU"'!Il '''' liI .. Gi' ' ::"ie4i.kfft!: .", >:
.. OJ .. 1fitIoWWlfili!)1QIii(* ... " .' -- .. , .. , ... -. ... ,
ii .,
.
..
i9 :: .
.... . .
20 :. ,
':it: :
'::22 :, :
23 "
24
1$
U
'/.1
ij.
. .. .
... .. . , ......
. i't(j(q{iJ ..
. .... 0 .: .. , ..
. .... 1) ,. ,.
. tJ'. ..
..... . _
..
$ .. .<;
'. .. . .... ' . . " " ' ...
'.' ':: .. .. .......... ..
. . . '" .... '.' '.... ....... ,"

..
.
:7

, .
' 11):

, "' .
:.if :
',12-' :FllilJ.M!liil.I_iU_II!I.Id;)" &..r'i
:)3'
:.14:
:i-S .
:'16'
,:i'i '
''11: .'
i tt .'
. ,
:.20
::n:
.. .
,

.
2011 DEC 14 AM 8: 55'
;.
.", .,:'
; . ,'. .. ...
.: !
. ,
:; .
:: ;0,
.P'" ... ': .. '
. ::;v
;.. ., :p : :0 " r-d '
. "
:-.1- . .... .'
'. '
.. .
. .
. :, '. -. ..... '.' ... ; .. ... .
'0. vo't?
r. 1/;
INeE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CIT. RENO
COUNTY OF WASHOE. STATE OF NEVADA
CITY OF RENO (Plaintiff I Demandante) VS.
Zachary Barker Coughlin
NI .... (FlrII. Middlo, (Nambte Comp/elo)
;;;91;j;;h;;,.:' S:;.;;t;..::#c..:2:..-. _________ Dept. #1
Add' .... (1J/roocIoI!)
o
Cept. #2
OIly. stili. ZIP (CIUdiiI. E.IBiki. cod/iio An/iii)
OflPt. #3 0
Home PIlon. Hum .... (T.telOno Ctso)
Del'l. #4 o
MorlON / PETIC/ON A LA CORTE
F ,asr1E2
0
5
J
2012
Aerlffl.LlUL '

Deputy Clerk
Com .. ,.,.. I/le undersigned ."'1111 mI m ..... !he coorlCO granl "'" foUO'oI1tIG (eJ .US<:ri1O 80 Ie rom que /0 ,",,<Mill, _ oIotpodo):

J'1tM to Ny E<foI>,/on (fiX/o(lSfoopM8 p_JO"""..., &1/ (Con/llf/w It I:!N-w IIfttllgr>mooI DIIt. (NU .,., Fe"". Lec/uro do
, NoW Trill 0.,. (Nt-. F/lclll do.Mao) [JChang& of AlcltfllO/OOJ[JOIsmIu WIJIWi. (Dercllflrorriflll do

SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A'
NOTE by Coughlin , not ice t hat there i s not "Exhi bi t A" a t tached heret o in
ROA the RMC transmitted t o the 2JDC, owing t o t h e fact that t h i s Mot i o n
For New Trial Date was necessita t ed by RMC court appoint ed de f ender
Puentes ' professiona l misconduct a nd the attendant failure t o a ffo rd
Coughlin his right t o speedy t r i a l , pa rticularly where a continua n c e
was a lrea dy grant e d to the City on 11/3 0/ 11 for an arrest o f 11/13/ 11.
Whi l e the RMC r emoved the f ax head (whi c h i ndi cates ther e i s 3 pages t o
this f ax fili ng to the RMC by Puen tes) o n page 1 , the f ax cover sheet,
a nd comp l e t e l y r e moved page 3 (whic h would by the "Exh i b it A" r e f e r e nced
herein, the RMC f a iled t o exci se the f ax header on t hi s page. Can
you say s mo king gun?
AFFIRMATION / ATESTACION
I. (n""'lnM1M!) ftOII'''fo 1'VC!iHT8 j((. I herebY IDiemnly .Mm1 and docbro
\l\al .... . \......,,, ... 11\1. \4 bii 6 .. ( 01 my bev.I, .na m.a.1ii oQOd laIIh and me,oIy lOr delay. (Yo. po,
om media saIomnel/llnl 1Irmo yd.clbIO quo I ,."t/Q'H TO" /0 d. mS I, Cfodblfldall,
y _ .. do a. y no P'" """., mI co"",)
COURT USE ONLY I NO ESCRIBA NADA ABAJO
Co!l1lnuld Flom: ConUnued T"' _____ _
o ... IIM.D) 0 Dotondonl(Hand) 0 DIIJendanl'&AUjI 0 CIIy
Cf9r1< IlIGnlll/fo: ______________ _
____________________ __
ORDER/ORDEN
GOOO CASE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY ORDEReD Ihillho _00 bo:
(HMJiando Ats/. IOlon. .. OIIIenodo Is soIIc/tvd _)

DATEoTrlls'h".dayO! :J.-1,JJ1Iy .2 O{;;--
_ CO"" _""1_ e. __ /

CERTIFICAIE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that on January 17, 2012, I served a oopyof
the foregoing document(s) on Ihose pattlel> Identlfied below by:
X
addressed to:
Placing an original ot true copy thereof In a sealed envelope,
postage prepaid, placed for collection and mailing in the United
states Mail at Nevilda
Personal Delivery .
Telephonic Facsimile at the following numbers:
(949)567 7402
Federal or other overnight
RenoCarson Mell8ennor Service
Certified Mil" Return R!!9uested
Alln,; Jill Drake, Esq.
Reno City Attorney's Office
One E. First St . 31d Floor
P.O. Box 1900
Reno, NV 89505
Zachary Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E, Sill St., #2
Reno, NV 89601
334-4226;
,
NOTE, by Coughlin below is the text of the "Exhibit A" to Puentes' 1/19/12 Motion for New
Trial Date that the RMC excised from the ROA (should have been page 22 of 242 from the
7/25/12 ROA filed in the 2JDC by the RMC.
This matter is set for trial on January. 10, 2012, at 1:00 PM. The defendant moves for a
continuance of the trial date in this matter for issues related to discovery/further
investigation, including but limited to defense counsel having received a " CD from the
City Attorney's Office on December 20,2011, which contains a very large number of
documents and videos that need to be reviewed in anticipation of trial in this matter.
Deputy City Attorney Jill Drake has no objection to this motion. EXHIBIT A
of Roberto pu!tes Jr.
416 RIDGE STREET
RENO, NV 89501
Telephone (175)7667676
FAX (775)7815-8720
FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET
DATE:
ATTN.:
January 17, 2012
Department Two
FI.O. BOX 2421
RENO, NV89505
TO:
Hon. WIlliam Gardner, Dept #2. JDI Drake, Deputy City Attorney &
Motions
Roberto Puentes Jr., Esq.
FAX NO.: 334--3859 , 334-3859 & 334-4226
The following pages,L. Including this FAX page. are being telecopied
from the Law Offices of Roberto Puentos Jr .. Reno, Nevada. Please call
(775)786-7676 If you do not receive th8 number of pages noted above.
Message/ RE:
Motion to Wlthd/llwal
City of Reno va. Zachary Barker Coughlin Case No, 11 CR 26405
Too In/ormatlon 'n \1I1a FAX, and tl!a\ aeoampanylng Ihls page, Is aHomtly-cHenl prhlfl6god,
conndenlial and work prMlelled. 'fyou ,oco/va this In ert<lr, phoase call us t1ght away. We will pay your
tolopl1Ql1e expense or accept a coRoet caU.tf you a.a not \he Inlooded recipIent. please do nol read IhJs
malenal and be aware that any db ItlbuUon. dlsCl/ssllln or oopylno of litis malsrtalls 81!1c1\y prohibited.
1/ you have received thIs communlcaUon In error, ",oalill Immediately noUIy us by telephone and return (he
o.lglnal message to us at the above address lila U.S. PoB/af SeNlce, .
Thank you.
IN THE M._ dCIPAL COURT OF THE CI.l.l' _F RENO
C(AHY OF WASHOE, STATE OF ADA
ONE SOUTH SIERRA STREET, RENO, NV 89505
Mailing: 1'.0. Box 1900, Reno, NV 89505 PHONE (775)334-2290 FAX (775)334-3824
YS.
DEFENDANT: COUGHLIN,
Ce iyClerk
Court Case#: 11 CR 26405 11 DaB: 0912711976
Acciden(#:
Status: OPEN
Language: ENGLISH
Agcncy#: RPD 11-22185
Booking#: 19876
Attorney: PUENTES, ROBERTO
rN-CUSTODY VlDEO
ARRAIGNMENTS
IUDGE GARDNER E Mon. Nov 14. 2011 &:30 am ARRAlGNMENT HF.ARrNG HELD
BENCHTItiAL JUDGE GARDNER C Til<. Dec 13, 8:00 lUI! CONn); UED BY REQUEST OF CITY
BENCHTRJAL JUDGE GARDNER B Tuc, Jan 10,2012 1:00 pm BY RF.QUEST OF DEFENSE
11/13/2011 FORMAL COMPLAINT F1U:D WITH THE COURT
1111412011. LEGAL DEFE:-tDER APPOINTED: LEWTAITEL; 475 S. ARLINGTON A VENUE, SmTE IA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PHOl>'E (775) 322-2272
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR A TTORNEY SO THAT liE/SHE
WILL HAVE ALL OF TilE NECESSARY Th'FORMATION FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOLVTED A LEGAL DEFEIVDER TO
REPRESENT IIlMtnER lJII ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER Ir-; THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY TIlE LEGAL DEFENDER_ THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODA Y'S DATE_ IN THE EVENT TlIA T THIS ORDER EXPIRES,
THE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FL"'ANC[AL INQUIRY APPLICA nON FOR RECONSIDERATION,
l!' THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HE/SHE WOULD LIKE TO HA VE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF H1SIllER CASE, TIlE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT IUSIHER
ATTORNEY.
1111412011 TIlE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED HISIHER RIGHTS BY TilE JUDGE AND INDICATED TIlAT
IIF..!SHE UNDERSTOOD THEM COMPLETELY.
1113012011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: ROBERTO PUENTES; 416 RIDGE STREET (p,0. BOX 2421) RENO, NEVADA
89505 PHONE (775) 786-7676
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HEISHE
WILL HAVE ALL OF THE NECESSARY [NFORMATIONFROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE,
IT IS HEREllY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOL"TED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HIM/HER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN TilE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT,
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THA T THE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A F[NANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICA nON AND
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRP..5ENTA nON BY TilE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
THE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDA TED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION "'OR RECONSIDERATION,
IF TIfE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WIT8ESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS TilE DEFENSE OF HIS/HER CASE, THE DEFEi'iDANT MUST CONTACT HIS/HER
ATTORNEY.
IEFENDANT: COUGHLIN. ZACHARY BARKR
Ie fend ant Initials:
Agency#: 11-22185
Print Dote: 1118120 I 2
COURT CASE N: 11 CR 26405 2[
Data Date: 1118120[2
Pogelof3
Next l'roofDt:

Cornrlcled Dl.
l' AfLlJl{E TO COMPI. Y WlTll THE CONDITIONS OF BAli. AS DESCRlBm IN n ilS ORDE)( wrLI. RESULT IN TilE ISSUANCE OF A
FAIUJRE TO COMPl.Y WARll.k"r OR IMMEDIATE ARRI-".ST AND f NCARCERAT10:-: FOR CON"TE:vtPT 01' COliin A:>: 1l/0R BAIL
REVOCATIOi" . FOR FURT! IEIl 1:\'l'ORMATION, CONTACT THE SE"'fENCE COMPLIANCE WII\'OOW LOCAll,O ON FI)(ST
1'1.0011. OF TIlE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE SOl<T1l SIERRA ST, RENO, NY (775) 1)42290.
I I IE DEFEXJ),WT 51 IALL APPEAR AS ORDERED FOR AI.L REVIEWS AND SHALl. COO/,ERATe: FULI.Y WITII THE
BAILlFFSIMAII.SfW.S ANn ALL COURT STAFF.
THE IlFFENI)ANT SHAI.L ATTEND ALL REVIEWS, COURT APPEARANCES AND COURTORDERED PROGRAMS ON TIME AKD
Al. CDIIOL ANIl DRUG fREE.
THE. IlEFENf)ANT SHAI.L KNOW fllS/HER COURT DATE AND MAINTAIN CONTACT WITlllllSlHF.R ATroRNEY.
, I'HIOR n) elM "GIN[; HISIJII.R ADDlIESS OR PHO]\;I'; TI IE DI'YEND""T SHAI.L NO liJW 1 J II: COURT OF SUCH
CHANGe.
THE Jl O-;ORAIlLE
Jt;\)GE'S SIGNA TlfRI!: _ _ . __ ___ ._ .. __ . ___ _
. . -
'tfl.:ndnnll nitiDls:
Print Dat e: 111812012 Da ta Dutc: 1/1 8/ 2012
Pagc2of3
=.=================
You art ordered by the Court to arrive drugtaleohal tree and on time for all Co UrI hearinean<l Cow1 reiated programs. Failure to
appw in COlL1 will resuit in the issun&f a warrant for you arrest. Any violation of instant order may resuit in contempt
proceedings and Ihe fil ing of nddition.Jl!rminnl charges. In accordance with NRS 22.01 0, it is a misdemeanor for any person to fail,
refuse or neglect to comply with the terms of nny order issued by the Municipal Court Judge. This order wiil remain in effect until the
Cow11ssues another order superseding it.

I UNDERSTAlI'D AND PROM1SJo: TO OBEY TIllS OllDER. \-0 S. <,f) - Q 5<
DATE: _ _ _ _ __ "rli>IE: _____ ""J
I, TilE SWORN INTPRETER IIAY" FULLY fNTERI'RETED TillS ORDER TO TilE
DF.FENDANT: DATE: ______ TrME: _ _ __ _
RECEIVED BY DEPUTY, __ ..,.""""::-:-:::-____ _ ________ DATE: Tl1IlE: _ _ __ _
ISSUED BY MARS"AL: DATE: I - : "1 - lcl- TIME: _
IEFENDANT, COUGHLIN. ZACHARY BARKER
lefendant Inltlats:
Agene),N. 11-21185
Prillt Vate: II1SnD]2
COURT CASE N: II CR 26405 21
Data Date: lI]8!20 12
Poge 3 of3
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
""'"

,.0 1bt1900

(701J])4-o22'IQ

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certifY that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
Reno, Nevada, and that on this date I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing document,
NOTICE OF SETTING on the party(ies) set forth below:
__ Placing said document in a sealed envelope placed fel" collecting and mailing
in the United States mail, at Reno, Nevada, postage prepaid, following ordinary
_X_
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Reno/Carson Messenger Service.
Federal Express or other overnight delivery.
Inner-offlcemail following ordinary business practices.
Personal Delivery at Reoo Municipal Court
Electronic mail to City Attorney
Electronic mail to Legal Defender
1422 E. 9
th
Street #2
Reno, NV 89501
DATED this 19th day of January 2012

r, lED
FEB a V'IlIl')

1 Case No. 11 CR 26405 21
Reno
By , ourt
2 Dept. No.2
eputyCferk
IN mE MUNICIPAL COURT OF mE CITY OF RENO
3
4
5
6
COUNTY OF WASHOE,STATEOF NEVADA

7 TIffi CITY OF RENO,
8
Plaintiff,
ORDER
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
v.
ZACHARYBARKERCOUGHLm,
Defendant
____________________
On February 2, 2012, this matter came before the Court for hearing on the Motion To
Withdraw filed by Defendant's counsel Roberto Puentes. Present at the hearing were Deputy City
Attorney Jill Drake, Roberto PUet1tes and Defendant Zachary Coughlin.
GOOD CAUSE APPEARlNO, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defense Counsel's
MOTION TO WITHDRAW is hereby GRANTED.
this matter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Keith Loomis is appointed to represent Defendant in
Dated this 2nd day of February, 2012.
ILLlAM L. GARDNER, JUDGE
Department Two
.....
......,..,.<XllOIT
PO.8al9(r;l
_>IV"'"
(XI2))J4.219I'J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certifY that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
Reno, Nevada, and that on this date I served a true and COlTeCt copy of the foregoing document,
ORDER on the party(ies) set forth below:
_x_
Placing said OOcument in a sealed envelope placed fIX collecting and mailing
business practices.
Facsimile F A X ~
Reno/Carson Me&!enger Service.
Inner-office mail following ordinary business practices.
Personal Delivery.
Electronic mail to City A ttome),
Electronic mail to Keith Loomis Esq.
Reno City Attorney's office
Keith Loomis Esq.
1422 E. rjll Street #2
Reno, NY 89501
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Document Code:
Zach Coughlin,Esq.
Nevada B:u- No: 9473
1422 E. 9th St., #2
tel: 775 229 6737
fax: 949 6677402
Reno, NV 89512
Co-counsel for Defendant Coughlin
LED

Municl Dept. 2
IN THE JUSTICE COURT OF RENO TOWNSHIP Deputy Clerk
IN AND FOR mE COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
STATE OF NEVADA;
Plaintiff.
)
)
) Case No: 11 CR 26405
)
12 VS.
) Dept No: Judge Gardner
)
13 ZACHARY COUGHLIN; )
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
)
Def endllnt. )

Notice of AlIpeaJ M<!tion to Vacate and or Set Aside . JCRCP 59. JCRCP 6O ... .Mmion fro:.
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motton For Publication Qf Transcript at PUbHc E!J!ense.
Petition for In Fonna Pauperis Status
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
FACTS
Bobby Puentes threw me under the bus, rather than reveal the fact that he had a conflict. He whined
about how the case was "h:u-d" rather than do some lawyering. The man doesn't know how to bum a .
cd. He attempted to shift the job ofbuming a cd for discovery onto me, yet he is the onetaking home
the money to do the job. Jill Drake talked in court about how Puentes is beloved by all throughout
the RJC, especially the prosecutors for the Reno City Attorney, as he is just a teddy bear 10
- 1 -
Notice of AppeaL Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration; MotiOIl for Recusal: Motion For Publication Of Transcript at Pub", Expense.
PectUon for In Fonna Pauperis Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

prosecutors like Drake (who reminded the undersigned that she was the #1 player on the Reno High
Girls Tennis Team in high school after the Hearing on February 2, 2012) ... Being a teddy bear is fine,
I guess, but not exactly the frrst thing I look for in defense counsel. Moral of the story, don't throw
client under the bus instead of disclosing impermissible conflict that your conflict checks should have
revealed prior to entering the sanctity of the attorney client relationship, something that should be
sacred, not just something Puentes enteres to get a paycheck and dumps once it becomes
inconvenient
Defendant/Appellant, Zach Coughlin, hereby files this Notice of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and
or Set Aside, JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60, Motion for Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For
Publication Of Transcript at Public Expense, Petition for In Fonna Pauperis Status.
FUl1her no one has explained Taitels mysterious ability to Withdraw as Counsel without
complying with RMC Rule 5 or explaining why he withdrew. Not sure there is an Order allowing
Taiters withdraw. Puentes Motion to Withdra argued:
"The instant matter was set for trial on January 10, 2012, However, a defense
motion to continue was filed on January 3,2012, not opposed, and g1anted. A new
trial date is pending. Under Supreme Court Rule 46, the attorney in an action may
be changed at any time before judgment upon the consent of the attorney,
approved by the client, or upon order of the court or judge thereof on the
application of the attorney or client SCR 46. Further, under NRPC 1, 16(b), a
lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if the same can be accomplished
without material adverse effect on the interests of the client; a client insists upon
taking action the lawyer considers repugnant, or with which the lawyer has
fundamental disagreement; the representation has been rendered unreasonably
difficult by the client; or other good cause for withdrawal exists. See NRPC 1,
16(b)(I), (4), (6), (7). The undersigned regretfully makes this motion as continued
representation of the defendant in this matter has been rendered unreasonably
difficult and the defendant will be better selVed by having an alternative legal
defender appointed to represent him."
Actually Puentes does not state with sufficient particularity why or how his withdraw "can
be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of the client". Indeed, having his
- 2 -
NQ.tlce of ApPf3' Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRCP 59 . .JCRCP 60. M.!ili.on f ...
Reconsideration; Motion for Recnsal; Motion For Publication Of Tnmscript at public Expense.
Petition for In Fonna Pauperis Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
?
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2?
28

DECLARATION OF ZAeH COUGLIN IN SUPPORT OF THE FOREGOING DOCUMENT
1. lois Declaration is made pursuant to the provisions of NRS 53.045, I am presently in the State of
Nevada and I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
2 Declarant is the Plaintiff in the above title action.
3. Declarant avers that the factual statements set for above in the foregoing document are, to the
best of his knowledge and understanding, accurate.
4. I, Zach Coughlin, am available to testify, if necessary, as to these matters. I declare under penalty
of peIjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 13th, 2012
151 Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin
PLAINTIFF
- 6 -
Notice of Appeal. Motion to Vacate ond or Set Aside. JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For Publication or Transcript at. Public Expense.
Petition Cor In Fonna PllUperis Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5)223 23 "E)*-CE
-, Zach Coughlin, declare:
2n 3e=ruar> 3th, !(!, -, Er. Zach Coughlin served the &oregoing Notice o& 6<<eal,
Eotion to *acate and or "et 6side, 0C)C5 $9, 0C)C5 %(, Eotion &or )econsideration8 Eotion &or
)ecusal => emailing and &a'ing and or <lacing in the mail a true co<> thereo& to:
0ill DraBe
Com<an>: )eno Cit> 6ttorne>As 2&&ice , Criminal Divison 6ddress: 5.2. Bo' 9(( )eno , N*
+9$($ 5hone Num=er: 77$,334,!($( 3a' num=er: 77$,334,!4!(
DraBe0Lreno.gov
D6.ED ./-" 3th da> o& 3e=ruar>
B7:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Zach Coughlin
De&endant
- 7 -
Notice of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside, JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60, Motion for
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For Pulication !f "ranscript at Pulic #$pense,
Petition for %n For&a Pauperis Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-nde' to E'hi=its
. E'hi=it : .?ent>,si' D!%; <age collection o& attorne> client corres<ondence =et?een Coughlin
and 5uentes in su<<ort o& the undersigned contnetions herein.
- 8 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EH/-B-.
EH/-B-.
- 9 -
continuance and my files

From: Zach Coughlin (zachcoughlin@hotmail.com)
Sent: Fri 12/09/11 1:11 AM
To: puenteslaw@aol.com

Dear Mr. Puentes,

I would like for you to subpoena both Officers present at the arrest of November 13, 2011 to testify at the trial. I would like for you to subpoena (by
subpoena duces tecum, I suppose) all recordings, dispatch reports, written documentation, reports in any way connected to, or other materials, whether
admissible or not, in any way connected to the arrest of November 13, 2011 or the charges against which I am defending in conjunction with your
representation. I wish for you to email me these materials to the extent possible, and where that is not possible, please mail them to me at my address
of record at www.nvbar.org, and found below at the end of this letter. Email is better for me than fax, as it is free whereas I have to pay for faxes by the
page, whether local or not. I prefer email too over having to take time out of what is an extremely busy and trying schedule of mine currently.

RPD Officer Carter made a statement at the scene of the arrest that Mr. Richard Hill paid him a lot of money and therefore he does what Mr. Hill says to
do and arrest who Mr. Hill says to arrest. This has been reported to several RPD Officers, including Sargent Tarter, who responded by retaliating against
me with several traffic citations and made incorrect assertions about whether one would be turning into oncoming one way traffic to get to Mr. Hills
652 Forest St. address from the intersection of Forest and St. Laurence in justifying his retalitatory citation (for which he apparently called in another
officer to write out, curiously). I DO NOT WANT YOU TO DISCUSS MY CASE WITH ANYONE OUTSIDE OF MY PRESENCE, INCLUDING VERBAL
AND OR WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. THIS INCLUDES ANY COMMUNICATIONS, VERBAL OR WRITTEN WITH THE RENO MUNICIPAL
COURT AND ANYONE IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT OR RENO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AS WELL AS
LEW TAITEL.

Please email or fax meacompletecopy of my file, including all pleadings, correspondences, and any other documentation or mediaat all connected with my case.
Please further discloseany conflicts of interest you might havein representing me. I did not agreeto acontinuance, and I believeit is my right as aclient to control
themeans and objectives of thelitigation and or defense, and that, to me, does not includewaiving my right to contest any motion for acontinuanceor making things
nice and easy for Richard G. Hill, Esq. Further, I would liketo know who agreed to thecontinuanceand why it is Mr. Taitel is no longer attorney of record (nothing
against you, pleasebelievethat).

Further, if Mr. Taitel is no longer attorney of record in this matter, pleaseexplain why, in detail, in writing. If he has withdrawn, and if you did so based on some
conflict of interest, how is it that that conflict of interest did not precludehim fromapparently agreeing to acontinuanceor failing to filean opposition or alerting me
to the situation at all? Pleasenotemy new address and contact information below. Additionally, pleaseindicate, in writing, theextent to which you havean
established procedureto check for conflicts prior to taking on cases and prior to obtaining confidential client files and information. Pleaseindicatein writing any
deviation fromsuch aprocedureor failing of your office's practices to prevent such prejudiceto my casein your taking on my representation. Pleasecopy meon any
and all correspondences and or documentation or discovery in any way related to this matter.

Sincerely,
/S/ ZACH COUGHLIN, SIGNED ELECTRONICALLY

Zach Coughlin
817 N. Virginia St. #2
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402

Sent: Fri 12/09/11 3:53 AM
1 attachment
12 8 11 fax to Puentes.pdf (63.6 KB)
Mr. Puentes, please find attached my signed written request for you to file certain motions. I want to
review the final drafts prior to your filing them and have tried hard to do most of the work for you.
Further, you might find the following documentary that someone posted on youtube.com helpful in
understanding this case:
http://www.youtube.com/user/25teddyjames?feature=watch

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
Tel: please only communicate in writing
Page 1of 26 Hotmail Print Message
2/2/2012 http://by148w.bay148.mail.live.com/mail/PrintMessages.aspx?cpids=cc595d46-b764-4d56-...
Fax: 949 667 7402

Dear Mr. Puentes,

I would also like for you to subpoena Dr. Matt Merliss, the owner of the property who was present at the scene of arrest. Further, I would like for you to
depose both RPD Officers (Carter and the female Officer). I would like a copy of the probable cause sheet and all witness statements and Officer's
Supplemental Declarations as soon as possible, please, in addition to all the other materials I set forth in my previous written correspondence to you.

I would like a Motion in Limine to be filed to exclude anything discovered upon the RPD illegal search of the property, including any videos by Richard
Hill or anyone else that the Reno City Attorney seeks to have admitted. I want a Motion to Dismiss filed seeking to dismiss this case based upon a
number of arguments, including the fact that any underlying Summary Eviction Order was void for lack of jurisdiction (please see my recent filing,
attached, in Reno Justice Court case rev2011-001708, in that this was noticed as a No Cause Eviction against a commercial lessee. As such, any
Summary Eviction Order is void for lack of jurisdiction given the express prohibition in both NRS 40.253 and the Nevada Supreme Court's explanation in
the Landlord Tenant Handbook found on the Supreme Court's website and elsewhere where it is made explicitly clear that landlord's may not use
Summary Eviction Proceedings to evict commercial lessees or tenants where non payment of rent is not alleged or where the Notice of Eviction or
Unlawful detainer is a No Cause notice, as was the case in Rev2011-001708. As such, no trespassing could have occurred.
Beyond that, I am requesting you file a Motion to Dismiss based upon the fact that any lockout occurring on November 1, 2011 necessarily occurred
too early and prior to any lawful notice or service of any Summary Eviction Order only signed on October 27
th
, 2011, especially where no personal
service of such an ordered was alleged or shown. I detailed this in the email pasted below.
Further, a Motion to Dismiss I request you file due to Casey Baker's November 11, 2011 letter to me wherein he sends me a bill for the full rental value
of the property where the commercial lease was located for the entire month of November 2011, a period after the alleged illegal lockout. As such, no
trespass could have occurred because such a bill for rent is tantamount to rescinding any void eviction order or otherwise indicative of an invitation,
entrapment, or assent to the addressee of such a letter or bill being able to go onto the property, allegedly. In his letter mailed to Coughlin of
November 10, 2011, Casey Baker, Esq wrote In addition to the sums identified by Dr. Merliss in his affidavit, your debt now also includes fees for
storage of your personal possessions left at the property, which accrue daily at the fair rental value of the property. Your debt further includes actual
costs for inventorying and moving your possessions from the property. See NRS 118A.460. Those sums will be provided to you once they have been
fixed. Enclosed you will also find a notice of entry of the court's order awarding costs and attorney's fees against you. The court's award of cost in the
amount of $421.75, and attorney's fees in the amount of $1,500.00, has now been reduced to judgment. You are responsible for those sums. Further, as
you know, in his Memorandum of Costs and Disbursements filed on October 27,2011, Dr. Merliss actually sought $607.24 in costs and $17,938.75 in
attorney's fees against you. We believe you are responsible for those amounts, plus any and all fees and costs that have accrued, and continue to
accrue, since Letter to Zachary Coughlin Re: Verification of Debt November 10, 2011 Page 20f2 that date, in the matters currently pending before the
courts as an item of damages. Dr. Merliss win seek recovery of those sums, and an future fees and costs incurred, through the appropriate channels...

As such, Baker and Hill sent Coughlin a bill for the full rent of the property. $900 a month was the rent for the property under the commercial lease.
Baker and Hill wrote telling Coughlin they were continuing to charge him that even after the alleged illegal lockout of November 1, 2011. Further, Baker
and Hill flagrantly wrote to Coughlin in the same letter that the impermissible $1,500 in attorney's fees ordered by Judge Sferrazza was not enough for
them, and that they fully intended to continue to pursue recovery of the nearly $20,000 in attorney's fees they sought in their Memorandum of Fees and
Costs of October 27
th
, 2011, despite the res judicata effect of Judge Sferrazza's November 9, 2011 Order granting them $1,500 in attorney's fees, and
despite the fact that NRS 69.030 only allows for prevailing party attorney's fees in civil actions, while JCRCP 3 specifically provides that there are three
types of matters in Nevada's Justice Court, and expressly separates landlord tenant matters from civil actions, and, as such, the prevailing party
attorney's provisions of NRS 69.030 do not apply and there exists no other basis for an attorney's fees award under any of the arguments Baker or Hill
put forth. There conduct is tantamount to extortion while leveraging their law licenses and degrees.

Further, I would like for you to seek a continuance of the trial in this matter as this case is going to require extensive discovery, settlement negotiations,
and other complex legal work and there is not enough time for that as the schedule is currently set. I am attaching a collection of written materials the
landlord/property owner at 121 River Rock St 89501 (where the trespass arrest occurred sent me), including some letters that inform me they were
charging me the full rent of the property for the entire month of November 2011 (the illegal lockout allegedly occurred on November 1, 2011, though
there has been no proof of service or "receipt" pursuant to NRS 40, and given that the lockout was apparently signed by Judge Sferrazza on October
27th, 2011, that day does not count for service of the Order, the Reno Justice Court is closed on Fridays, non judicial weekend days don't count for the 3
days for service under NRCP 4-6, etc. As such, the earliest service by mail could have been affected for the Order for Summary Eviction would have been
November 2, 2011. It is alleged the lockout occurred prior to that time, and further, no emails were received from Richard Hill's email address,
rhill@richardhillaw.com at any point between August 17th, 2011 and November 18th, 2011, period. Whether any emails from Hills
rhill@richardhillaw.com address were "bounced back" to him or whether that address was added to my "blocked sender" list is a matter for Mr. Hill to
sludge his way through, but I can attest under penalty of perjury that I did not receive any emails from that rhill@richardhillaw.com email address
between that time period. I can further attest that I made calls and written correspondences to both Hill's rhill@richardhillaw.com email and his
associate Casey Baker, Esq.'s email, electroencephalographic addresses that went unresponded to with regard to my numerous requests to be allowed
access to remove my property commercial and otherwise

These included, but were not limited to, the following:

From: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com

Sent: Wed 11/09/11 12:43 PM

To: Casey Baker (cdbaker@richardhillaw.com)

Don't ignore my calls about my possessions. You potentially conducted an illegal lockout of a law office an inspection outside my presence. The lease
requires my presence. It also makes your guy responsible for the electric bill, read it carefully. Show your proof of any "receipt" of any lockout order 24
hours prior to your actions. My possessions better be safe and afforded all legal protections and I want updates one whatf is being done with them and
an opportunity to clean or otherwise put the premises in the condition I intended to leave it in prior to the illegal lockout. I want my possessions that
are in the house and all privacy rights respected. There is a motion for stay in district court right now.

Re: Verification of Your Debt? 11/10/11
To Casey Baker
(Sent: Thu 11/10/11 12:24 PM
You guys are way over the days for providing verification under the FDCPA. Can you say treble damages? I habe not received a single email such as
those you refer to from richard hill. I dont consent to service of anything via email from your shop. I know you want everything to be at warp speed, but
you have to serve me through the mail or some non electronic means. Make sure rich isnt getting "unnsuccessful email transmission" messages....i can
certainly prove i have not received any such emails from Dick. I want my stuff its important client materials etc. You guys have not returned my
messages about that, its wrong to try to charge me rent when you are ducking me.

From: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com Sent: Fri 11/11/11 12:49 AM To: Casey Baker (cdbaker@richardhillaw.com); rhill@richardhillaw.com
(rhill@richardhillaw.com) Hi Guys, I have been having some technical difficulties, some emails appear blank or black, kind of like your client described in
response to some of my emails. Hey, ever heard of a litigation hold notice? That is what this is ,please retain and failure messages you recieve in your
own email which might prove that an email you sent me just didn't quite make it. You know just producing a copy of some email you sent me (even
though i have repeatedly told you i dont consent to service electronically in any form and am not a registered efiler like you two legal eagles) is not
going to be good enough when i break out the old litigation hold notice and anything elese that might tend to show any emails you sent could not
have made it to me....why such a rush, Boys? You are doing your patented and typical bang up milking job on thos headstrong rich client of yours...smell
the flowers a little. For instance, you don't want to do an illegal lockout and illegal inspection, particularly where the lease calls for my presence at any
inspection and then if you did not make sure the "receipt" requirement was met for any lockout order then went ahead and violated someone's
constitutional rights to boot. Plus you are way late on the FDCPA stuff, and the prevailing party atty fee statute is for cicil actons, which jcrcp 3 separates
justice court matters into 3 types, and the civil actions mentioned in seller's prevailing party fee statute is mentioned as different from landord tenant
cases and small claims cases..So where is your good faith basis for moving for atty fees, much less for $20k worth of them. Why did you cite the
controlled substances manufacture statute to support your atty fee motion? I pulled every eviction y'all ever done... RJC has been like swinging the bat
in the on deck circle with 5 donuts on the bat for me, gentlemen. For you, its been the polar opposite. But we gettin' called up to the show! You never
know when you are on tape or film guys. And my bat speed is lookin' tremendous. I have tried again and again to get some response from you guys
about accesing my important files and keeping my very valuable possesions safe but have yet to here back feom you, in the event you have done a
lockout. Mr. Baker said he did some filmmaking or something when he broke in to any attorneys office, it was hard to hear through all the cooing.
Anyways, I aren't that smart, but dontcha have to like store my possessions after movin' them somewhere safe, the make a reasonably diligent attempt
to rent the place out to mitigate and damages or lost rent, plus provide me my deposit within like 10 days or something? I know mighty Casey likes to
give me lil research projects, but I am busy fleshing out some motion work right now, so maybe you get on that and let me know when and where I can
get my things and valuable client files, hopefully you two points of light haven't done nuthhin' to 'em. Now, I dont want to come between you and
Casey...I know he is probably getting a little tired of you keeping most of the profit while he gets dirty doing the gutters, but you guys have a nice lil
batman robin thing going and it would be a shame to see it end, so let's just try and make this work."

From the alleged date of the illegal lockout of November 1, 2011 until Casey Baker's November 10, 2011 written bill to me for full rent for the month of
November 2011 (ie, after the alleged illegal lockout and therefore extinguishing the eviction and creating a new lease or rescinding the eviction order
and, perhaps making extortionate threats to apply an unlawful rent distraint in contravention of NRS 40.460, and NRS 40. 520, etc.) I received two
written correspondences of any sort from anyone connected with the landlord Matt Merliss (a neurosurgeon graduate of Beverly Hills HS) and the law
office of Richard G. Hill, Esq. (including Hill and Baker, etc.). These two written correspondences from Casey Baker are attached and pasted below:

subject: Verification of Your Debt
11/10/11
Casey Baker
To zachcoughlin@hotmail.com
From: Casey Baker (cdbaker@richardhillaw.com)
Sent: Thu 11/10/11 11:13 AM
To: zachcoughlin@hotmail.com
1 attachment
LT Coughlin (verif of debt)(11-10-11).pdf (146.0 KB)
Mr. Coughlin:
Attached please find my letter to you dated November 10, 2011.
Sincerely,
Casey D. Baker, Esq.
Richard G. Hill, Chartered
652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858

Email: cdbaker@richardhillaw.com
CONFIDENTIAL: ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT; ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
This e-mail may contain legally privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use, or disclose
this communication to anyone other than the intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the
email message from your system. Thank you.
Circular 230 Notice.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including
any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code
or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.
RE: request for 30 days additional to stay in possession disability

11/04/11
Casey Baker
Sent: Fri 11/04/11 12:36 PM


Mr. Coughlin:

We have never been served with any paper entitled Motion to Continue in Possession. If you have proof to the contrary, please provide it.
With respect to your request for another 30 days, please identify the legal and factual basis for your request, including any specific statute you are
purporting to invoke.
Casey Baker

Below for your convenience is a copy of the email I recently sent you as my, Zach Coughlin's, counsel of record, Mr. Puentes:

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Subject: continuance and my files
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 01:11:35 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,


officer to write out, curiously). I DO NOT WANT YOU TO DISCUSS MY CASE WITH ANYONE OUTSIDE OF MY PRESENCE, INCLUDING VERBAL AND OR
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. THIS INCLUDES ANY COMMUNICATIONS, VERBAL OR WRITTEN WITH THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT AND ANYONE IN
ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THE RENO POLICE DEPARTMENT OR RENO CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AS WELL AS LEW TAITEL.

Please email or fax me a complete copy of my file, including all pleadings, correspondences, and any other documentation or media at all connected
with my case. Please further disclose any conflicts of interest you might have in representing me. I did not agree to a continuance, and I believe it is my
right as a client to control the means and objectives of the litigation and or defense, and that, to me, does not include waiving my right to contest any
motion for a continuance or making things nice and easy for Richard G. Hill, Esq. Further, I would like to know who agreed to the continuance and why
it is Mr. Taitel is no longer attorney of record (nothing against you, please believe that).

Further, if Mr. Taitel is no longer attorney of record in this matter, please explain why, in detail, in writing. If he has withdrawn, and if you did so based
on some conflict of interest, how is it that that conflict of interest did not preclude him from apparently agreeing to a continuance or failing to file an
opposition or alerting me to the situation at all? Please note my new address and contact information below. Additionally, please indicate, in writing,
the extent to which you have an established procedure to check for conflicts prior to taking on cases and prior to obtaining confidential client files and
information. Please indicate in writing any deviation from such a procedure or failing of your office's practices to prevent such prejudice to my case in
your taking on my representation. Please copy me on any and all correspondences and or documentation or discovery in any way related to this matter.

Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402


faxed signed letter attached
Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:35 AM
2 attachments
12 14 11 faxed letter to Puentes 11 CR 26405 2I.pdf (55.0 KB) , Coughlin IFP and Financial Inquiry Application RMC 11222011 11 CR 26405
2I.pdf (381.9 KB)
Mr. Puentes,
Please find my faxed signed letter attached. Also, if I am supposed to file an updated Financial Status
Application, please find that attached.

December 13th, 2011
Dear Mr. Puentes,
Hello, I received a package from you in the mail today. It did not contain a letter from you or any
indication of whether you will subpoena Dr. Merliss to attend the January Trial date, which is fast
approaching, whether you will depose him or Richard Hill, etc. Please respond in writing regard the
various written requests and questions I posed to you in my recent written correspondences, including,
but not limited to, whether you will comply with my requests to file a Motion in Limine, Motion to
Dismiss, Depose Dr. Merliss and Richard Hill, file a Motion to Set Aside the Continuance, for which I
was never appropriately provided a chance to contest, or served the Original Motion for Continuance.
I want to be copied, in writing, on every single thing related in any way to this case. RMC Rules
require the attorney, such as you and Lew Taitel to file a Notice of Appearance and to file a Motion to
Withdraw. Please provide a copy of the docket in this case. I do not see where Mr. Taitel ever filed a
Motion to Withdraw or where an Order Granting such a withdrawal was granted. It is my
understanding, though, that an Order Granting a Motion to Dismiss was likely entered. I want for you
to file a Motion To Set Aside that Order if it was based on Richard Hill citing some lame reason, like he
was going to be Porsche shopping in Florida or otherwise on vacation for some extended stretch or that
Richard Hill was the only person able to testify about whatever it is Richard Hill may want to testify
about. Dr. Merliss can take time out of raking in millions of dollars being a Beverly Hills HS graduate
neurosurgeon. I want him subpoenaed and deposed for the upcoming trial. I want a subpoena duces
tecum served on Richard Hill for any evidence related to this case, including any videos. Further, I
want you to make an inquiry and take appropriate action to discern whether I was appropriately served
any Notice Setting Hearing documents in this case, ascertaining exactly who (including which Marshal)
may have served me anything, the manner and place in which is was served, whose signature is there,
etc., whether the signature bears a date that is PRIOR in time to the Print Date on the Notice Setting
Hearing, etc.
Further, I want you to subpoena or obtain a copy of (and provide one to me) of the video of the
November 14th, 2011 arraignment, the entire video, start to finish (not just my appearance), I will pay
any charge if I have to, but I believe an IFP was granted that would cover such a charge in this matter.
I do not believe it would be accurate for the Reno Municipal Court to state or write, with respect to my
and the November 14, 2011 arraignment, that DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED
HIS/HER RIGHTS BY THE JUDGE AND INDICATED THAT HE/SHE UNDERSTOOD THEM
COMPLETELY... If the RMC has made that assertion in writing I want you to file something in
writing contesting that assertion. I do not believe I have been told that there is any possibility that I will
be required to pay you or the RMC any fees in connection with your representation. If that is not the
case, please explain in writing.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin, Esq

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
ZachCoughlin@hotmail.com

client controls means and objectives of litigation under Rules of Professional
Conduct
Nevada Bar No: 9473

** Notice** This messageand accompanying documents arecovered by theelectronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and may contain
confidential information intended for thespecified individual (s) only. If you arenot theintended recipient or an agent responsiblefor delivering it to theintended
recipient, you arehereby notified that you havereceived this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or thetaking of any action based on the
contents of this information is strictly prohibited. This message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient(s) and may contain information that is
privileged, attorney work product or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that any
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you receive this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender, delete this e-mail from your computer, and
destroy any copies in any form immediately. Receipt by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney-client, work product, or
other applicable privilege.

Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:52 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,

Please let me know when we can discuss my case, the trial is very soon. I received a mailing from you, but it did not have a signed letter
from you stating what was in the package. Please email me or fax me any document production in the future and redact my personally
identifiable information from all documentions coming in or out of your office.
In the mailing I received from you was:
1. WCSO Mugshot Profile booking no: 1119876, one page
2. Criminal Complaint 11-22185, one page, signed by Richard Hill, not filestamped
3. ARrest Report and Declaration of Probable Cause rpd 1101921 C r650225 , Declarant RPD Officer Carter, no Magistrate signature
(please find out why), one page
4. RPD, 3 pages 11-22185 Adminstrative Information, etc. (please subpoena and depose both RPD Officer's Lopez and Carter, asking them
whether they verbally identified themselves prior to, according to Hill, kicking the door down, and further questions them concerning the
accuracy of Hill's written statement and whether Officer Carter said to the accused that Richard Hill pays him, Officer Carter, a lot of
money and therefore Carter arrests who Hills says to arrest and does what Hill says to do. Further, please depose both officers, asking
whether the accused requested they take any action or ask Hill any questions and whether the Officers did so. Please subpoena the RPD for
any recordings, calls, documentation relating to this matter, or RPD Sargent Tarter's alleged retaliation against me and the traffic citations
he called in another RPD officer to write against me on or around November 15th, 2011. Please file a counterclaimalleged 42 USC 1983
violations againt the City of Reno and the RPD, in addition to other appropriate counterclaims. Please depose Hill to verify his written
account that he actually walked into the Basement, that Merliss himself kicked the door down, whether the RPD Officers verbally
identified themselves prior to the door being kicked down, whether the accused hesitated at all upon the RPD identifying themselves, etc....

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


CORRECTION FW: client controls means and objectives of litigation under Rules
of Professional Conduct
confidential information intended for thespecified individual (s) only. If you arenot theintended recipient or anagent responsiblefor delivering it to theintended

Sent: Wed 12/14/11 1:19 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,

Please amend the list below to include the following:
5. RPD Statement by Richard Hill 11-22185

Further, please note I mistakenly noted in paragraph 4 below, that Hill was attributed as making a
written stament about entering the basement. Please, instead, ask the same questions of Officer Carter,
as to whether he "entered the doorway of the basement and found..." and what exactly he means by "He
was hesitant to come out and eventually did so". IE, what exactly does "eventually" mean? Like, one
second, ten minutes? What? Whether Officer Carter ever actually stepped foot in the basement, or
whether by writing that he "entered the doorway" Officer Carter is actually stating that he peeked his
head in or otherwise peered in. Please inquire as to whether the RPD refused to kick the door down or
whether someone else did, etc. PLEASE ASK OFFICER CARTER WHETHER HIS WRITTEN
STATMENT IS ENTIRELY ACCURATE WHERE IT ATTRIBUTES A QUOTE TO THE
ACCUSED THAT CARTER IS OR WAS "ON RICHARD HILL'S PAYROLL..." and further what
exactly was allegedly said about "working a deal". Please ask Carter and Lopez whether the accused
asked why they didn't just issue a citation and whether one would be arrested for getting their mail after
an eviction and why exactly an incarceration was necessary compared to a citation. Please further
inquire as to whether these Officers refused to make any arrests or investigation requested by the
accused and whether Carter indicated that he would never arrest anyone based on anything said by the
person he is arresting at the time such accusations, or counter accusations, are made. Please further
send Merliss and Hill subpoena duces tecum/interrogatories/request for production/ and request for
admission seeking specific, written indication and evidence supporting all contentions in any of the
materials upon which this arrest or this case is based, including, but not limited to Hill's written
statement that "We have observed evidence that he was coming and going."

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin

Subject: client controls means and objectives of litigation under Rules of Professional Conduct
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:52:25 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,


THIS COULD WIN THE CASE IN 11 CR 26405 2I

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:02 AM
5 attachments
11 1 2011 Affidavit of Service, Notice of Entry of Order, and Order for Summary Eviction Rev2011-001708.pdf (7.8 MB) , Affidavit of Service
Sheriff's Machen 4 30 pm 11 1 2011.pdf (555.1 KB) , 12 14 11 fax to Puentes ISSUES THAT CAN WIN THE CASE.pdf (144.2 KB) , 11 21 11
Declaration of Richard Hill attach to his M for OSC (11-21-11) Compare to Police Reports and deposition of RPD's Carter and Lopez and
Merliss.pdf (791.4 KB) , 11 21 2011 REV2011-00178 RICHARD HILL'S M for OSC (11-21-11).pdf (711.7 KB)
ZachCoughlin, Esq.
817N. VirginiaSt. #2
Reno, NV89501
Tel: pleaseonlycommunicateinwriting
Fax: 9496677402
LicensedinNevada, NV Bar No: 9473

December 14
th
, 2011

Dear Mr. Puentes,

Mr. Puentes,

Please find attached the Affidavit of Service, filed November 7th, 2011 in the eviction case in RJ C (REV2011-0017808) from which the
trespass case you are Attorney of Record for (RMC 11 CR 26405 2I) stems. TURNS OUT, THE AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE FILED BY
THE WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S AUTHORIZED AGENT, J OHN MACHEN ADMITS, IN WRITING, THAT THE EVICTION
ORDER AND LOCKOUT WERE SERVED AND CONDUCTED PRIOR TO THE TIME AND DATE CALLED FOR BY THE
EVICTION ORDER (WHICH WAS NOT EVEN PUT INTO THE MAIL WITH A PROOF OF SERVICE UNTIL NOVEMBER 1,
2011...AND NRCP 4-6 APPLY TO STATUTORY UNLAWFUL DETAINER ACTIONS, THEREFORE, THE RJ C IS CLOSED
FRIDAYS AND OTHER NON JUDICIAL DAYS DO NOT COUNT, NOR DOES THE DAY THE ORDER IS SIGNED COUNT).
PLEASE ALSO FIND ATTACHED RICHARD HILL, ESQ'S DECLARATION ATTACHED TO A MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE HE
FILED IN REV2011-001708, WHICH I BELIEVE MAY PROVIDE FERTILE GROUND FOR IMPEACHING THE WRITTEN
STATEMENTS AND FUTURE TESTIMONY OF RPD OFFICER'S CARTER, LOPEZ, LANDLORD MERLISS, HILL HIMSELF,
ETC. PLEASE DO NOT DISCUSS THIS VERBALLY OR IN WRITING WITH ANYONE OTHER THAN MYSELF ABSENT MY
EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT PRIOR TO DOING SO.

I prefer to discuss this with you prior to your taking any action in relation to this illegal lockout or insufficient service of process or early
lockout or however it is described. The Sheriff's server, Machen, might try to argue that he served the Eviction Order at 4:30 pm, then
waited around until after 5 pm (as required by the Eviction Order) to perform the actual lockout. I think it would be best to get Machen
admitting, by tricking him into admitting, if necessary, that he performed the lockout within minutes of serving the Eviction Order.
Further, the law in our State does not seemexceptionally clear with regard to the service and process requirements and timelines, and
manner of calculating time with respect to the "receipt" of Lockout Orders. The Affidavit of Service by Machen states that he "personally
served the described documents upon" my, Zach Coughlin...However, I can attest by Affidavit that I was not "personally served" to the
extent that "personally served" means or implies that I was there, that Machen saw me or identified me, or any of the other indicators of
something, such as a Complaint, being "personally served" such as I understand the phrase to me. NRCP 5(b)(2)(A)(i-iii). Further, as
Baker and Hill have so often pointed out, I cannot, according to them, receive any attorney's fee award for appearing as pro se attorney, as
such, NRCP 5(b)(2)(A)(i-iii), should apply to me only as a party, and not as a party's attorney, and, therefore, according to NRCP 5,
Service: "(2) Service under this rule is made by: (A) Delivering a copy to the attorney or the party by: (i) handing it to the attorney or to the
party; (ii) leaving it at the attorneys or partys office with a clerk or other person in charge, or if there is no one in charge, leaving it in a
conspicuous place in the office; or (iii) if the office is closed or the person to be served has no office, leaving it at the persons dwelling
house or usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion residing there..." So, either it was my office, in which
case a No Cause Eviction Notice makes impermissible a Summary Eviction Proceeding under NRS 40.253, and therefore, the Order of
Summary Eviction is void for lack of jurisdiction, or, the Affidavit of Service was on my home, and was not "handed" to me, or
"personally served" (despite the Affidavit attesting to having "personally served" me), nor was the Order of Summary Eviction served in
accordance with NRCP 5(b)(2)(A)(iii), which requires: "if the office is closed or the person to be served has no office, leaving it at the
persons dwelling house or usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion residing there.."

Further, I believe posting an Order on one's residence door, particularly in the context of serving a No Cause Notice of Eviction or
Unlawful Detainer, is only valid if the document being served is also placed in the mail and 3 non judicial days are accorded for service to
be complete. See NRCP 6(e). I do not believe they can prove that at all, not even close. NRCP applies to Summary Eviction Actions,
according to the following:
"NRS 40.380 Provisions governing appeals. Either party may, within 10 days, appeal from the judgment rendered. But an appeal by the
defendant shall not stay the execution of the judgment, unless, within the 10 days, the defendant shall execute and file with the court or
justice the defendants undertaking to the plaintiff, with two or more sureties, in an amount to be fixed by the court or justice, but which
shall not be less than twice the amount of the judgment and costs, to the effect that, if the judgment appealed frombe affirmed or the
appeal be dismissed, the appellant will pay the judgment and the cost of appeal, the value of the use and occupation of the property, and
damages justly accruing to the plaintiff during the pendency of the appeal. Upon taking the appeal and filing the undertaking, all further
proceedings in the case shall be stayed.
Actually, a lot of people seemed confused regarding the 24 hours lockout thing. The only appearance in either NRS 118A or NRS 40, in the provisions
applicable to Summary Eviction Proceedings of anything related to 24 hours is in NRS 40.253(5), which only speaks to a situation where the Tenant
does not file a Tenant's Answer or Tenant's Affidavit, which is clearly inapplicable here, as the Tenant did file such a Opposition to the No Cause Eviction
Notice: 5. Upon noncompliance with the notice:
(a) The landlord or the landlords agent may apply by affidavit of complaint for eviction to the justice court of the township in which the dwelling,
apartment, mobile home or commercial premises are located or to the district court of the county in which the dwelling, apartment, mobile home or
commercial premises are located, whichever has jurisdiction over the matter. The court may thereupon issue an order directing the sheriff or
constable of the county to remove the tenant within 24 hours after receipt of the order. The affidavit must state or contain...
So, absent some statutory provision allowing the Order of Summary Eviction to result in a lockout by the Washoe County Sheriff's Office prior to the 3
days for mailing where personal service of the Order of Summary Eviction was not effectuated, despite what WCSO employee may have incorrectly (or
falsely) asserted in the WCSO's John Machem's Affidavit of Service from, file stamped November 7, 2011 (especially where it is timestamped 4:30 pm,
November 1, 2011, especially where the Order of Summary Eviction explicitly reads that no such lockout shall occur prior to 5:00 pm on November 1,
2011). See, NRCP 5(b)(2)(A)(i-iii), NRCP 6(e).
Interestingly, Richard Hill knows his case is toast under NRCP 5(b)(2)(A)(i-iii), NRCP 6(e), in addition to NRCP 11. That is why in
Richard Hill's November 21, 2011 Motion for Order To Show Cause, on page 2, Hills resorts to literally grasping at straws, imagining that
what the Washoe County Sheriff's Office customarily does is somehow automatically codified into mandatory precedent black letter law.
To wit, Richard Hill wrote in his Motion For Order To Show Cause that: FACTS SHOWING CONTEMPT OF COURT 6. EXHIBIT
1 was served on Coughlin on November " 2011 by the Washoe County Sheriffs Department, by posting same on the front door of the
property in the manner customary for evictions in Washoe County. The locks to the premises were changed at that time, thereby ejecting
and dispossessing Coughlin of possession of the Property. Further, therein Richard Hill admits that the lockout occurred at 4:30 pm, as
indicated in writing in the WCSO's Machem's Affidavit of Service, contra to the mandate of J udge Sferrazza's Order of Summary Eviction
requiring any lockout to occur after 5:00 pm, November 1, 2011.
NRS 40.385 Stay of execution upon appeal; duty of tenant who retains possession of premises to pay rent during stay. Upon an
appeal from an order entered pursuant to NRS 40.253:
1. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a stay of execution may be obtained by filing with the trial court a bond in
the amount of $250 to cover the expected costs on appeal. In an action concerning a lease of commercial property or any other
property for which the monthly rent exceeds $1,000, the court may, upon its own motion or that of a party, and upon a showing of
good cause, order an additional bond to be posted to cover the expected costs on appeal. A surety upon the bond submits to the
jurisdiction of the appellate court and irrevocably appoints the clerk of that court as the suretys agent upon whom papers
affecting the suretys liability upon the bond may be served. Liability of a surety may be enforced, or the bond may be released, on
motion in the appellate court without independent action.
2. A tenant who retains possession of the premises that are the subject of the appeal during the pendency of the appeal shall pay to the
landlord rent in the amount provided in the underlying contract between the tenant and the landlord as it becomes due. If the tenant fails to
pay such rent, the landlord may initiate new proceedings for a summary eviction by serving the tenant with a new notice pursuant to NRS
40.253.
NRS 40.390 Appellate court not to dismiss or quash proceedings for want of form. In all cases of appeal under NRS 40.220 to 40.420,
inclusive, the appellate court shall not dismiss or quash the proceedings for want of form, provided the proceedings have been conducted
substantially according to the provisions of NRS 40.220 to 40.420, inclusive; and amendments to the complaint, answer or summons, in
matters of form only, may be allowed by the court at any time before final judgment upon such terms as may be just; and all matters of
excuse, justification or avoidance of the allegations in the complaint may be given in evidence under the answer.
NRS 40.400 Rules of practice. The provisions of NRS, Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure and Nevada Rules of Appellate
Procedure relative to civil actions, appeals and new trials, so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of NRS 40.220 to
40.420, inclusive, apply to the proceedings mentioned in those sections.
So, considering that NRS 40.400 requires that NRCP apply to Summary Eviction Proceedings under NRS 40.253, then service, process,
and time calculations of such must comport with the dictates of NRCP 5-6: " RULE 5. SERVICE AND FILING OF PLEADINGS AND
OTHER PAPERS
(a) Service: When Required. Except as otherwise provided in these rules, every order required by its terms to be served, every
pleading subsequent to the original complaint unless the court otherwise orders because of numerous defendants, every paper relating to
discovery required to be served upon a party unless the court otherwiseorders, every written motion other than one which may be heard ex
parte, and every written notice, appearance, demand, offer of judgment, designation of record on appeal, and similar paper shall be served
upon each of the parties. No service need be made on parties in default for failure to appear except that pleadings asserting new or
additional claims for relief against them shall be served upon themin the manner provided for service of summons in Rule 4.
(b) Same: How Made.
(1) Whenever under these rules service is required or permitted to be made upon a party represented by an attorney, the service
shall be made upon the attorney unless the court orders that service be made upon the party.
(2) Service under this rule is made by:
(A) Delivering a copy to the attorney or the party by:
(i) handing it to the attorney or to the party;
(ii) leaving it at the attorneys or partys office with a clerk or other person in charge, or if there is no one in charge,
leaving it in a conspicuous place in the office; or
(iii) if the office is closed or the person to be served has no office, leaving it at the persons dwelling house or usual place
of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion residing there.
(B) Mailing a copy to the attorney or the party at his or her last known address. Service by mail is complete on mailing;
provided, however, a motion, answer or other document constituting the initial appearance of a party must also, if served by mail,
be filed within the time allowed for service; and provided further, that after such initial appearance, service by mail be made only
by mailing from a point within the State of Nevada.
(C) If the attorney or the party has no known address, leaving a copy with the clerk of the court.
(D) Delivering a copy by electronic means if the attorney or the party served has consented to service by electronic
means. Service by electronic means is complete on transmission provided, however, a motion, answer or other document
constituting the initial appearance of a party must also, if served by electronic means, be filed within the time allowed for service.
The served attorneys or partys consent to service by electronic means shall be expressly stated and filed in writing with the clerk
of the court and served on the other parties to the action. The written consent shall identify:
(i) the persons upon whom service must be made;
(ii) the appropriate address or location for such service, such as the electronic-mail address or facsimile number;
(iii) the format to be used for attachments; and
(iv) any other limits on the scope or duration of the consent.
An attorneys or partys consent shall remain effective until expressly revoked or until the representation of a party changes
through entry, withdrawal, or substitution of counsel. An attorney or party who has consented to service by electronic means shall,
within 10 days after any change of electronic-mail address or facsimile number, serve and file notice of the new electronic-mail address or
facsimile number.
(3) Service by electronic means under Rule 5(b)(2)(D) is not effective if the party making service learns that the attempted
service did not reach the person to be served.
(4) Proof of service may be made by certificate of an attorney or of the attorneys employee, or by written admission, or by
affidavit, or other proof satisfactory to the court. Failure to make proof of service shall not affect the validity of service...
RULE 6. TIME
(a) Computation. In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these rules, by the local rules of any district court, by
order of court, or by any applicable statute, the day of the act, event, or default from which the designated period of time begins to run
shall not be included. The last day of the period so computed shall be included, unless it is a Saturday, a Sunday, or a nonjudicial day, in
which event the period runs until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, a Sunday, or a nonjudicial day, or, when the act to be
done is the filing of a paper in court, a day on which weather or other conditions have made the office of the clerk of the district court
inaccessible, in which event the period runs until the end of the next day which is not one of the aforementioned days. When the period of
time prescribed or allowed is less than 11 days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and nonjudicial days shall be excluded in the
computation except for those proceedings filed under Titles 12 or 13 of the Nevada Revised Statutes...
(e) Additional Time After Service by Mail or Electronic Means. Whenever a party has the right or is required to do some act
or take some proceedings within a prescribed period after the service of a notice or other paper, other than process, upon the party
and the notice or paper is served upon the party by mail or by electronic means, 3 days shall be added to the prescribed period.
Subdivision (a) is revised to extend the exclusion of intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, and nonjudicial days to the computation of time
periods less than 11 days consistent with the 1985 amendments to the federal rule. Additionally, the inaccessibility of the court
provision found in subdivision (a) of the federal rule is added to Rule 6(a). Subdivision (a) is further amended, by adding language
referring to proceedings filed under Titles 12 or 13 of the Nevada Revised Statutes, to avoid any changes to current procedures in
probate, guardianship and trust proceedings....
Subdivision (e) is amended to provide an additional 3 days to act in response to a paper that is served by electronic means under
new paragraph (2)(D) added to Rule 5(b)."
NRS 40.253 Unlawful detainer: Supplemental remedy of summary eviction and exclusion of tenant for default in payment of rent.
1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 10, in addition to the remedy provided in NRS 40.2512 and 40.290 to 40.420, inclusive,
when the tenant of any dwelling, apartment, mobile home, recreational vehicle or commercial premises with periodic rent reserved
by the month or any shorter period is in default in payment of the rent, the landlord or the landlordsagent, unless otherwise agreed in
writing, may serve or have served a notice in writing, requiring in the alternative the payment of the rent or the surrender of the premises...
4. If the tenant files such an affidavit at or before the time stated in the notice, the landlord or the landlords agent, after receipt of a
file-stamped copy of the affidavit which was filed, shall not provide for the nonadmittance of the tenant to the premises by locking or
otherwise.
5. Upon noncompliance with the notice:
(a) The landlord or the landlords agent may apply by affidavit of complaint for eviction to the justice court of the township in which
the dwelling, apartment, mobile home or commercial premises are located or to the district court of the county in which the dwelling,
apartment, mobile home or commercial premises are located, whichever has jurisdiction over the matter. The court may thereupon issue an
order directing the sheriff or constable of the county to remove the tenant within 24 hours after receipt of the order..
6. Upon the filing by the tenant of the affidavit permitted in subsection 3, regardless of the information contained in the affidavit, and
the filing by the landlord of the affidavit permitted by subsection 5, the justice court or the district court shall hold a hearing, after service
of notice of the hearing upon the parties, to determine the truthfulness and sufficiency of any affidavit or notice provided for in this section.
If the court determines that there is no legal defense as to the alleged unlawful detainer and the tenant is guilty of an unlawful
detainer, the court may issue a summary order for removal of the tenant or an order providing for the nonadmittance of the
tenant. If the court determines that there is a legal defense as to the alleged unlawful detainer, the court shall refuse to grant either
party any relief, and, except as otherwise provided in this subsection, shall require that any further proceedings be conducted
pursuant to NRS 40.290 to 40.420, inclusive. The issuance of a summary order for removal of the tenant does not preclude an action
by the tenant for any damages or other relief to which the tenant may be entitled....
7. The tenant may, upon payment of the appropriate fees relating to the filing and service of a motion, file a motion with the court, on a
form provided by the clerk of the court, to dispute the amount of the costs, if any, claimed by the landlord pursuant to NRS 118.207 or
118A.460 for the inventory, moving and storage of personal property left on the premises. The motion must be filed within 20 days after the
summary order for removal of the tenant or the abandonment of the premises by the tenant, or within 20 days after:
(a) The tenant has vacated or been removed fromthe premises; and
(b) A copy of those charges has been requested by or provided to the tenant,
whichever is later.
8. Upon the filing of a motion pursuant to subsection 7, the court shall schedule a hearing on the motion. The hearing must be
held within 10 days after the filing of the motion. The court shall affix the date of the hearing to the motion and order a copy
served upon the landlord by the sheriff, constable or other process server. At the hearing, the court may:
(a) Determine the costs, if any, claimed by the landlord pursuant to NRS 118.207 or 118A.460 and any accumulating daily costs; and
(b) Order the release of the tenants property upon the payment of the charges determined to be due or if no charges are determined to
be due.
Landlord Merliss filed only a No Cause Notice of Eviction in REV2011-001708 on Commercial Tenant Zach Coughlin, Esq.'s law office.
As such, a Summary Eviction Proceeding is impermissible given the requirement of NRS 40.253 that the Notice alleged non-payment of
rent to allow the landlord to proceed under the Summary Eviction Proceeding section, NRS 40.253. Further, Judge Sferrazza was
precluded from ruling on anything other than possession of the premises pursuant to NRS 40.253(6), Anvui, and Glazier. Further, the
tenancy did not terminate under the Lease Agreement, it ws renewed.
NRS 40.254 Unlawful detainer: Supplemental remedy of summary eviction and exclusion of tenant from certain types of property.
Except as otherwise provided by specific statute, in addition to the remedy provided in NRS 40.251 and in NRS 40.290 to 40.420, inclusive,
when the tenant of a dwelling unit which is subject to the provisions of chapter 118A of NRS, part of a low-rent housing program operated
by a public housing authority, a mobile home or a recreational vehicle is guilty of an unlawful detainer, the landlord is entitled to the
summary procedures provided in NRS 40.253 except that:
1. Written notice to surrender the premises must:...(e) A statement that the claim for relief was authorized by law.
As such, the too early lockout brings into play the following:
NRS 118A.390 Unlawful removal or exclusion of tenant or willful interruption of essential services; procedure for expedited relief.
1. If the landlord unlawfully removes the tenant from the premises or excludes the tenant by blocking or attempting to block the
tenants entry upon the premises or willfully interrupts or causes or permits the interruption of any essential service required by
the rental agreement or this chapter, the tenant may recover immediate possession pursuant to subsection 4, proceed under NRS
118A.380 or terminate the rental agreement and, in addition to any other remedy, recover the tenants actual damages, receive an
amount not greater than $1,000 to be fixed by the court, or both.
2. In determining the amount, if any, to be awarded under subsection 1, the court shall consider:
(a) Whether the landlord acted in good faith;
(b) The course of conduct between the landlord and the tenant; and
(c) The degree of harmto the tenant caused by the landlords conduct.
3. If the rental agreement is terminated pursuant to subsection 1, the landlord shall return all prepaid rent and security recoverable under
this chapter.
4. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 5, the tenant may recover immediatepossession of the premises from the landlord by filing a
verified complaint for expedited relief for the unlawful removal or exclusion of the tenant fromthe premises or the willful interruption of
essential services.
5. A verified complaint for expedited relief:
(a) Must be filed with the court within 5 judicial days after the date of the unlawful act by the landlord, and the verified complaint must be
dismissed if it is not timely filed. If the verified complaint for expedited relief is dismissed pursuant to this paragraph, the tenant retains the
right to pursue all other available remedies against the landlord.
(b) May not be filed with the court if an action for summary eviction or unlawful detainer is already pending between the landlord and
tenant, but the tenant may seek similar relief before the judge presiding over the pending action.
6. The court shall conduct a hearing on the verified complaint for expedited relief within 3 judicial days after the filing of the verified
complaint for expedited relief. Before or at the scheduled hearing, the tenant must provide proof that the landlord has been properly served
with a copy of the verified complaint for expedited relief. Upon the hearing, if it is determined that the landlord has violated any of the
provisions of subsection 1, the court may:
(a) Order the landlord to restore to the tenant the premises or essential services, or both;
(b) Award damages pursuant to subsection 1; and
(c) Enjoin the landlord fromviolating the provisions of subsection 1 and, if the circumstances so warrant, hold the landlord in contempt of
court.
7. The payment of all costs and official fees must be deferred for any tenant who files a verified complaint for expedited relief. After any
hearing and not later than final disposition of the filing or order, the court shall assess the costs and fees against the party that does not
prevail, except that the court may reduce themor waive them, as justice may require.

NRS 118A.090 Exclude defined. Exclude means to evict or to prohibit entry by locking doors or by otherwise blocking or attempting to block entry,
or to make a dwelling unit uninhabitable by interrupting or causing the interruption of electric, gas, water or other essential services.
ALL PAPERS AND PLEADINGS AND CORRESPONDENCS PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED TO THE RENO JUSTICE COURT AND OR ITS EMPLOYEES IS HEREBY
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO THIS FILING.
NRS 118A.190: Notice: Definition; service.
1. A person has notice of a fact if:
(a) The person has actual knowledge of it;
(b) The person has received a notice or notification of it; or
(c) From all the facts and circumstances the person reasonably should know that it exists.
2. Written notices to the tenant prescribed by this chapter shall be served in the manner provided by NRS 40.280.
3. Written notices to the landlord prescribed by this chapter may be delivered or mailed to the place of business of the landlord designated in the rental
agreement or to any place held out by the landlord as the place for the receipt of rental payments from the tenant and are effective from the date of
delivery or mailing.
NRS 40.280 Service of notices to quit; proof required before issuance of order to remove.
1. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 40.253, the notices required by NRS 40.251 to 40.260, inclusive, may be served:
(a) By delivering a copy to the tenant personally, in the presence of a witness;
(b) If the tenant is absent from the tenants place of residence or from the tenants usual place of business, by leaving a copy with a person of suitable
age and discretion at either place and mailing a copy to the tenant at the tenants place of residence or place of business; or
(c) If the place of residence or business cannot be ascertained, or a person of suitable age or discretion cannot be found there, by posting a copy in a
conspicuous place on the leased property, delivering a copy to a person there residing, if the person can be found, and mailing a copy to the tenant at
the place where the leased property is situated.
I did not receive any of the emails allegedly sent to my from Richard Hill's email address, rhill@richardhillaw.com between August 18
th
, 2011 to
November 17
th
, 2011, and certainly none from rhill@richardhillaw.com during the period between the illegal lockout at 4:30 pm November 1, 2011 and
the trespass arrest of November 13
th
, 2011 which allegedly spoke to my being provided access to the property for the purpose of my removing my
belongings, despite my numerous calls and written requests, which outlined the exigencies inherent to my being precluded access to my client files
incident to an unlawful and improperly notice and too early occurring lockout by the WCSO. I and my business have been damaged greatly by these
acts. Further, I had repeatedly sent both Baker and Hill notice, in writing, that I did not consent to service or notice of anything via electronic means.
Further NRS 118A.190 does not speak to notice of a legal finding, but rather to notice of a fact. As such, I was not appropriately served notice of the
Order of Summary Eviction, and an illegal lockout occurred, as such no criminal trespass charge can stand.
NRS 118A.260 Disclosure of names and addresses of managers and owners; emergency telephone number; service of process.
1. The landlord, or any person authorized to enter into a rental agreement on his or her behalf, shall disclose to the tenant in writing at or before the
commencement of the tenancy:
(a) The name and address of:
(1) The persons authorized to manage the premises;
(2) A person within this State authorized to act for and on behalf of the landlord for the purpose of service of process and receiving notices and
demands; and
(3) The principal or corporate owner.
(b) A telephone number at which a responsible person who resides in the county or within 60 miles of where the premises are located may be called in
case of emergency.
2 The information required to be furnished by this section must be kept current and this section is enforceable against any successor landlord or

FW: THIS COULD WIN THE CASE IN 11 CR 26405 2I
manager of the premises.
3. A party who enters into a rental agreement on behalf of the landlord and fails to comply with this section is an agent of the landlord for purposes of:
(a) Service of process and receiving notices and demands; and
(b) Performing the obligations of the landlord under law and under the rental agreement.
4. In any action against a landlord which involves his or her rental property, service of process upon the manager of the property or a person described
in paragraph (a) of subsection 1 shall be deemed to be service upon the landlord. The obligations of the landlord devolve upon the persons authorized
to enter into a rental agreement on his or her behalf.
5. This section does not limit or remove the liability of an undisclosed landlord.
NRS 40.310 Issue of fact to be tried by jury if proper demand made. Whenever an issue of fact is presented by the pleadings, it shall be tried by a jury, if
proper demand is made pursuant to the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure or the Justice Court Rules of Civil Procedure

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:39 AM
5 attachments
Hi Mr. Puentes,

What is inconsistent in the discovery you provided me and Hill's Motion to Show Cause? I am
interested to see what you come up with and who you would want to ask what questions. I went to the
University of Washington too, for awhile at least, year round from 9/95 to 12/96.

Hill's Declaration in his 11 21, 2011 Motion to Show Cause indicates that:
"DECLARATION OF RICHARD G. HILL, ESQ.
RICHARD G. HILL, ESQ., being first duly sworn, deposes and under penalty
of perjury avers:
1. I am a resident of the City of Reno, County of Washoe, State of Nevada,
and over 18 years of age. This declaration is based on my personal knowledge, exceptthose
matters stated on information and belief, and as to those items I believe them to be true.
This declaration is made in support of plaintiffs Motion for Contempt Citation, and
represents my testimony if called on to present same in court.
2. I am an attorney duly licensed as such by the State of Nevada to practice
before all courts of this State and maintain my office at 652 Forest Street, Reno, Nevada.
I am also licensed to practice before the United States District Court for the District of
Nevada, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supreme Court.
III
3. My office represents the plaintiff, Dr. Matthew Merliss, in this matter.
4. On October 27, 2011, this court signed a summary eviction order, and on
November 1, 2011, the Washoe County Sheriff's Department served that order. The notice
was posted on the door of the home by the Washoe County Sheriff's Department in the
manner customary in Washoe County for evictions. The locks on the front door and back
door were changed, and we retained all keys to the home.
5. After that date, I began to notice that it looked like somebody had been
getting into the home. On approximately November 4, 2011, I became concerned about the
home and its contents. I entered it and was able to confirm that "somebody" had been
getting in. I thought I had secured the means of entry being used by whoever it was that
was getting in. However, on later visits to the home, it was clear that the home was still
being surreptitiously accessed.
6. On November 13, 2011, Dr. Merliss came to Reno because he wanted to
inspect the home. Upon entry, it was clear that somebody had again accessed the home.
7. We tried to enter the basement and found the door was barricaded, not
locked, from the inside. We were concerned that whoever had been accessing the home was
inside, so we called the police.
8. When the police arrived, they agreed with us that it was very likely that
somebody was barricaded in the basement. The police tried to coax the personto come out,
but without success.
9. When the police declined to break down the door, Dr. Merliss did so. The
police looked inside and discovered the defendant, Zachary Coughlin, and his dog.
10. Coughlin came out peacefully, went upstairs and was placed under arrest
by the police for trespassing.
11. After Coughlin was taken to jail, Dr. Merliss and I tried to videotape the
contents ofthe basement where Coughlin had been hiding. It was too dark to effectively
videotape, but we were able to ascertain that Coughlin and his dog have been living. in the
III
basement of the home for quite some time, likely even before the lockout. Iobserved that
Coughlin had a bed set up. He had several computer monitors. He had a store of both food
and water. He had electric space heaters.
12. Since the eviction order was served, my associate, Mr. Baker, and I had
sent numerous emails to Coughlin, in which we both repeatedly made it clear to him that
he was not to be at the home without our prior permission. No such permission was given.
Mr. Coughlin had no reason to possibly think he was permitted on the property. We had
tried to coax him to cooperate on getting his possessions out, without success, or even a
response.
13. As a result of Mr. Coughlin's break-ins, Dr. Merliss has incurred a bill of
$1,060 with a licensed contractor to secure the premises. That does not include the cost of
the door that was broken in order to get Coughlin out. That does not include the numerous
hours of me and my staff to deal with Mr. Coughlin's repeated break-ins at the home.
14. I am no expert, but I believe Mr. Coughlin is what is called a "hoarder."
He has many car seats throughout the house. He has many dead televisions. He has a box
of car window servo motors. The attic, which can only be accessed through a very narrow
opening, is full of items, including dead electronic devices.
15. We have found drugs at the home. We found a bag of what looks like
marijuana on the kitchen counter. I found a crack pipe. The contractor found what he said
was a large quantity of pills.
16. Mr. Coughlin has been harassing and stalking me, and possibly, my staff.
On November 15, 2011, he burst intomy office and created a scene. Then, he was parading
up and down the sidewalk across the street with a video camera screaming obscenities at
me and my staff.
III
II I
III
17. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct..."
But RPD Officer Carter wrote in his Supplemental Declaration: "On November 13, 2011 at
approximately 1200 hours I responded to 121 River Rock St, Reno, on a report of an
unwanted subject in the home. I arrived on scene with Sgt Lopez and we met with the RIP. Richard Hill,
who told
us the following:Richard is a local attorney who is representing the home owner, Matthew Merliss.
Matthew filed eviction papers on
his tenant, Zachary Coughlin, at 121 River Rock St last month and they were served at the home by
leaving them
on the door. The eviction papers stated that Zachary was to vacate the property on November 1, 2011 .
Matthew has been to the house several times over the past week and has observed evidence of someone
coming
and going. Today he was at the house and found the basement door to be locked from inside.
Matthew contacted Richard who responded and called the police.
Sgt Lopez and I knocked on the basement door and announced loudly "Reno Police" and called out for
Zachary to
open the door. We were met with no response. Matthew decided he would kick the door open, and did
so.
I entered the doorway of the basement and found Zachary standing at the rear of the room holding a
small dog.
He was hesitant to come out and eventually did so.
Zachary came upstairs and instantly started arguing his legal standing in the house, asking me
"hypothetically
speaking" type questions. He then told me I was making a false arrest due to the fact that I am on
Richard Hill's
payroll and he was going to sue me.
I tried to explain to Zachary that he was seNed eviction papers and he asked me what I could do about it
if he
hypothetically didn't get them . He then told me that he had worked a deal with Matthew to continue
paying rent
and that the legal eviction was no longer val id.
I again tried to explain to Zachary that a judge had signed anorder forcing him to leave the property and
all he did
was cite civil case law to me (l'm unsure if any of the cases he was rambling on about even exist) and
tell me that
I was making a bad arrest.
Due to Zachary not believing he has done anything wrong that the fact he believes he still has standing
there is
reasonable grounds to believe Zachary will return to the house. Therefore he did not qualify for a
misdemeanor
citation.
Richard completed a statement on Matthews' behalf and signed a criminal complaint.
Zachary was transported and booked into the Washoe County Jail without incident for
Trespassing...."Further, Richard Hill's own Written Statment of 11 13, 2011, provided to the RPD writes
that "We evicted Coughlin. The papers were posted by WCSO on 11/1/11 We have observed evidence
that he was coming and going...."

Why didn't Merliss make a Written Statement. Was Merliss really in Reno during the time frame to
observe what Hill asserts Merliss observed in Hill's Declaration of 11 21, 2011? What other holes do
you see?

Hills 11 21, 2011 Declaration states that: "6. OnNovember 13, 2011, Dr. Merliss came to Reno because
he wanted to
somebody was barricaded in the basement. The police tried to coax the person to come out,
by the police for trespassing."

However, RPD Officer Carter's Narrative, on page 3 of 3 from his November 14th, 2011 Report
writes that: "Matthew has been to the house several times over the past week and has
observed evidence of someone coming and going. Today he was at the house and found the
basement door to be locked from inside.
Sgt Lopez and I knocked on the basement door and announced loudly "Reno Police" and
called out for Zachary to open the door. We were met with no response. Matthew decided he
would kick the door open, and did so.
I entered the doorway of the basement and found Zachary standing at the rear of the room
holding a small dog.
He was hesitant to come out and eventually did so."

Hill's Declaration contains nothing about this "reluctance" RPD Officer Carter mentions

FW: 121 River Rock
Further, Hill's Declaration makes no mention of Merliss's noticing anything at the property or
any trips by Merliss to the property, in marked contrast to RPD Officer's Carter writing that
"Matthew has been to the house several times over the past week and has observed evidence
of someone coming and going." Additionally, Merliss picked up my dog and held it in his
hands close to his body and demanded that I let him have it, and the RPD Officers did nothing
about it, further, Merliss was taunting me during the arrest demanding I give him "some more
eye contact", accusing me of costing him $20,000 for the informed consent wrong site legal
surgery that was Hill's billing of $20K in a Summary Eviction Proceeding where JCRCP 3 and
NRS 69.030 preclude an award of fees, etc. Notice Hill's Declaration only writes that "the police
tried to coax the person out" but clearly does not corroborate RPD's Carter's assertion that the
RPD announced itself as police prior to the door being kicked down. Hills Written Statement
that the eviction papers were "served" by the WCSO "leaving them on the door" is a violation
of NRCP 11 and leaves him and his client liable for the wrongful arrest and defamation that
occurred incident to RPD's actions.

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Sat 12/17/11 12:15 AM
To: ballardd@reno.gov; howardk@reno.gov; robertsp@reno.gov; renomunirecords@reno.gov; hazlett-stevensc@reno.gov; puenteslaw@aol.com

Unbelievable. The idea that exculpating evidence is being withheld under some "lien" is transmitted into the universe, next thing I know, my law office
is broken in to and the Richard B. Hill gang is stil asserting a lien on property that was stolen, in my opinion,as a result of their own negligence, leaving
a window air conditioner unit in a window, without even putting a window jam between the top of the sill and lower pain, facing a sidewalk a block
from the Lakemill Lodge and across from City Center Apartments, great. Great. And I still have not been faxed or appropriately served the Order and
Contempt OrderI was told would be faxed to me.

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


To: cdbaker@richardhillaw.com; knielsen@richardhillaw.com; sgallagher@richardhillaw.com
Subject: RE: 121 River Rock
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:43:38 -0800

Dear Mr. Baker,

I drove by the property recently and saw you had added boarding up the front door on very, very recently. Unfortunately, your client and your firm,
despite billing up some $1,060 for "securing" the property on top of charging $900 for storage for what could fit inside a 10x20 foot storage shed,
never once providing an inventory, and contributing to a wrongful arrest and defamation causing me and my clients great damage, failed to take even
basic steps to secure the property, despite my making numerous written requests that you do so, including, but not limited to, taking the damn window
unit air conditioner out of the window facing the sidewalk on the side of the house very close to the damn Lakemill Lodge, or even putting a strong
stick in between the bottom sliding window pain and the top of the sill to prevent someone from simply pushing in the window unit air conditioner and
pushing the window up to gain access. Further, a blanket that was on the orange circular couch is clearly in the flower bed in front of the house.
Additionally, there are reports that someone with your office gave someone a mattress from the inventory of Coughlin Memory Foam (a Nevada
licensed business located at the property) and an expensive mattress platform has clearly been damaged and placed in the flower bed as well, in
addition to one of the wooden porch shades being removed from the front porch. You and your client are, of course, liable for all of this.

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

** Notice** This messageand accompanying documents arecovered by the electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and may contain
recipient, you arehereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or thetaking of any action based on the

From: cdbaker@richardhillaw.com
CC: rhill@richardhillaw.com
Subject: 121 River Rock
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:50:02 -0800


need to communicate with you regarding my requests
Mr. Coughlin:

The River Rock property has been broken into. We believe the break-in occurred sometime on Monday, December 12, 2011. There appear to be items
missing, including the TV in the living room, perhaps a computer monitor, and perhaps some stereo equipment. I cant tell what else. The contents of
the residence appear to have been rifled through.

I am providing you with this information as a courtesy. This email does NOT constitute permission for you to go to the River Rock property.

652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858

This e-mail may contain legally privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use, or disclose this communication to anyone other than the
intended recipient. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the email message from your system. Thank you.
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be
used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed
herein.

Sent: Mon 12/26/11 3:52 PM

Dear Mr. Puentes,
I called you just now and left a message. I have received nothing from you in regard to my written requests for action on your part and for information
in connection with the matter for which you are attorney of record RMC 11 CR 22185 2I.

Please respond in writing.

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


scope of representation

new address for me

Sent: Fri 12/30/11 10:36 PM
Dear Mr. Puentes,
Please move for a continuance immediately in this matter, set for trial on J anuary 10th, 2011. You
assured me in person at our meeting at your office that you would be able to get one, and I definitely
want and need one, and RMCR indicates there are certain deadlines for moving for one, which I have
already asked you to do in writing.

I am upset that you slammed down the telephone ended our telephone conversation abruptly when we
spoke yesterday, immediately after I asked you to provide something in writing outlining the scope of
your representation of me. I wish for you to prepare and file (after receiving express prior written
authorization from me upon review of your drafts) the Motion to Supress and Motions in Limine I
previously request that you file, in addition to subpoening Dr. Merliss, Richard Hill, both RPD Officers
at the scene of the trespassing arrest, and a subpoena duces tecume to the Law Office of Richard Hill,
the RPD, and Dr. Merliss demanding any and all documentation and or media at all connected with this
matter in any way. Further you indicated that you had not even attempted to view the discovery
produced by the Reno City Attorney, nor did you have any interest in seeing anything I might have to
show you. That was enormously upsetting to me, as any sentient human being might reasonably be
expected to anticipate. Please note my new address. Please file a conflict motion seeking to make the
Reno City Atty recuse itself in light of the conflicts of interest incident to the various arrests and torts
against me committed by the RPD and Reno City Attorney.

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



Pendency of Criminal Prosecution as Ground for Continuance or Postponement
of Civil Action Involving Facts or Transactions upon which Prosecution Is
PredicatedState CasesPendency of Criminal Prosecution as Ground for
Continuance or Postponement of Civil
Sent: Sat 12/31/11 1:32 AM

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

** Notice** This messageand accompanying documentsarecovered by theelectronic CommunicationsPrivacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, andmay contain confidential information intended for the
specifiedindividual (s) only. If you arenot theintendedrecipient or an agent responsiblefor delivering it to theintended recipient, you areherebynotifiedthat you havereceived thisdocument in error andthat
any review, dissemination, copying, or thetaking of any action based on thecontentsof thisinformation isstrictly prohibited. This message is confidential, intended only for the named recipient
(s) and may contain information that is privileged, attorney work product or exempt fromdisclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are
notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you receive this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender, delete this e-mail from your computer, and destroy any copies in
any form immediately. Receipt by anyone other than the named recipient(s) is not a waiver of any attorney-client, work product, or other applicable privilege.

Sent: Sat 12/31/11 8:14 PM
2 attachments
jail time counsel sixth amendment possibility misdemeanor.pdf (3.1 MB) , fifth amendment right civil proceeding parallel.pdf (2.6 MB)
Pendency of Criminal Prosecution as Ground for Continuance or Postponement of Civil
Action Involving Facts or Transactions upon which Prosecution Is PredicatedState
Cases...37 A.L.R.6th 511 (Originally published in 2008)
;please find that ALR attached, perhaps it speaks to the res gestae and or stay during the pendency of the
civil appeal we discussed vis a vis the criminal trespass charge

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Is Roberto Puentes on Youtube.com? also more motivation for you in this case

Zach Coughlin has shared a folder with you.

Sent: Sat 12/31/11 9:19 PM
10 attachments
Legal malpractice in defense of criminal prosecution.pdf (6.7 MB) , Public Defender's Immunity from Liability for Malpractice.pdf (4.0 MB) ,
process server fraud harass trespass.pdf (3.1 MB) , f_Circumstances giving rise to prejudicial conflict of interests between criminal defendant.pdf
(2.7 MB) , public defender liability.pdf (2.2 MB) , conflicts with PUBLIC DEFENDER EMPLOYEES.pdf (2.0 MB) , Civil liability of attorney for abuse
of process process server trespass fraud.pdf (1925.1 KB) , process server abuse harass trespass.pdf (1816.6 KB) , Trespass state prosecution for
unauthorized entry or occupation, for public demonstration purposes, of business, industrial, or utility premises.pdf (339.6 KB) , SUBPOENA TO
TESTIFY AT A HEARING OR TRIAL IN A CRIMINAL CASE.pdf (281.9 KB)
Hi Mr. Puentes,
I know you have repeatedly told me you could care less to watch any youtube.com videos, regardless of
whether they prove my innocence or whatever, however, I think you might need to watch some of these:
http://www.youtube.com/results?
search_query=nevada+court+services&oq=nevada+court+services&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=18l3308l0l3556l19l15l0l9l0l1l311l1375l0.1.4.1l6l0

It seems Nevada Court Services, which shares an office and a receptionist with the former appointed public defender for this case representing me, Lew
Taitel, Esq, who departed from RMC Rules by failing to file a Motion to Withdraw when he sought to and failed to disclose the conflict of interest that
he failed to prevent his taking on my case and reviewing ultra personal information, that is directly connected to the subject matter of the litigation
from which the conflict arises as well as the defense of the suit you and he have both appeared as attorney of record in, this trespass case. I don't think
you are on any of the videos, but there are so many ultra zealous documentary filmmakers these days that I cannot be sure.

Anyways, Lew Taitel, as I have indicated to you in writing, is listed as "associated with" Nevada Court Services, on their website, with his picture. They
share and office and a receptionist, and perhaps others staff, in the office across from the former Chocolate Bar. PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANTLY OF
ALL, AND SOMETHING I WANT YOU TO LITIGATE AGGREsSIVELY (CLIENT CONTROLS MEANS AND OBJECTIVES OF A LITIGATION, WHETHER
APPOINTED ATTORNEY LIKES IT OR NOT) IS THAT NEVADA COURT SERVICES, INCLUDE ITS PROCESS SERVER JOEL DURDEN, CAN BE SEEN
TRESPASSING ONTO MY PROPERTY AND OTHERWISE ASSAULTING, HARASSING, AND VEXING ME, BEHIND MY BACK GATE, NO LESS IN THE VIDEOS
FOUND AT THE LINK ABOVE.

PLEASE DISCLOSE ANY CONFLICTS OR PREVIOUS WORKING RELATIONSHIPS YOU HAVE WITH ANY OF THE RENO CITY ATTORNEY, RPD, RENO
MUNICIPAL COURT STAFF, RICHARD HILL, OR ANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS WITH WHOM YOU HAVE HAD PRIOR DEALINGS AND THEREFOR MAY
PRESENT A SITUATION WHERE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST ARISES.

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

specifiedindividual (s) only. If you arenot theintendedrecipient or an agent responsiblefor delivering it to theintended recipient, you arehereby notifiedthat you havereceived thisdocument in error andthat

Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:22 AM

video of trespass arrest
Dear Mr. Puentes, Please let me know, in writing, the status of the Motion For Continuance you indicated you would both file and which you felt sure
would be obtained, either through written stipulation with opposing counsel of by Order of the RMC
Zach has 14 files to share with you on SkyDrive. To view them, click the links below.
zach's arrest 001.avi
Download all
Share your files with
Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:43 AM
1 attachment
zach's arrest 009.flv (10.4 MB)
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=43084638f32f5f28&resid=43084638F32F5F28!1050&parid=43084638F32F5F28!117&authkey=!ACPUJSqi94trtcY

Dear Mr. Puentes,

Please provide an indication, in writing, as to the status of the continuance of the upcoming trespass trial, which you indicated would be obtained.

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


another video of the arrest which lacks anyone telling Coughlin to leave or
seeking to issue a citation in lieu of custodial arrest

ARRESTED FOR JAYWALKING BY RENO PD

Sent: Thu 1/05/12 3:26 PM
1 attachment

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Fri 1/13/12 7:49 AM
To: peteeastman@gmail.com; tcoughlinmd@hotmail.com; marybarkbark@yahoo.com; carcoughster@gmail.com; melissa.l.ulloa@gmail.com;
tjhlaw@eschelon.com; geofgiles@hotmail.com; teddyjames25@gmail.com; jgoodnight@washoecounty.us; puenteslaw@aol.com
1 attachment
SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO OPPOSITION CV08-01709 1 13 12.pdf (162.9 KB)
Nevada Courts Services CEO Jeff Chandler drove by the scene while I was in the patrol car. I am suing
Nevada Court Services incident to their trespassing into my backyard and banging on windows and
ringing doorbells in teams for 40 minutes at a clip three times a day on Richard HIlls behalf. Mr.
Puentes, as my court appointed defender in the trespass action against me (arrested at Richard Hill's
behest by an RPD Officer would said Hill pays him money) you recently informed me you have ties to
Nevada Court Services and Lew Taitel, the court appointed defender whom mysteriously was able to
withdraw from my representation prior to your involvement despite not filing a motion in compliance
with Reno Municipal Court Rules, nor any Order granting such a withdrawal being filed. Can you
clarify your, in your words "extremely close relationship with Lew Taitel" and your "business
relationship" with Nevada Court Services?

Sincerely


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Document Code:
Zach Coughlin,Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
1422 E. 9th St., #2
tel: 775 229 6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Reno, NV 89512
Co-counsel for Defendant Coughlin
" ,:-...
' .. ! . .
- ." 1', :' '
2012 FEB 15 AM 9: 53
",' .
IN THE JUSTICE COURT OF RENO TOWNSHIP
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
STATE OF NEVADA;
Plaintiff,
)
)
) Case No: 11 CR 26405
)
12 VS.
)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
-25
26
21
28
)
Defendant.
)
)
Notice of ADD""! Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For Publlcadon Of Transcript at Publlc Expense.
Petition for In Foona Pauperis Status
FACTS
Bobby Puentes threw me under the bus, than reveal the fact that he had a conflict. He whined
about how the case was "hard" rather than do some lawyering. The man doesn't know how to bum a
cd. He attempted to shift the job ofbuming a cd fex discovery onto me, yet he is the one taking home
the RIC, especialIy the prosecutors for the Reno City Attorney, as he is just a teddy bear to
- 1 -
NQti!;'lLD'[AJUll'.ru.Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRcp 59. JCRCP 60. Motion M _
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusa!; Motion For Publication Qf Transcript at Public Expense.
for In FOnDa PauDeris Statu.$.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<rosecutors liBe DraBe D?ho reminded the undersigned that she ?as the # <la>er on the )eno /igh
9irls .ennis .eam in high school a&ter the /earing on 3e=ruar> !, !(!;...Being a tedd> =ear is &ine,
- guess, =ut not e'actl> the &irst thing - looB &or in de&ense counsel. Eoral o& the stor>, donAt thro?
client under the =us instead o& disclosing im<ermissi=le con&lict that >our con&lict checBs should have
revealed <rior to entering the sanctit> o& the attorne> client relationshi<, something that should =e
sacred, not Cust something 5uentes enteres to get a <a>checB and dum<s once it =ecomes
inconvenient.
De&endantF6<<ellant, Zach Coughlin, here=> &iles this Notice o& 6<<eal, Eotion to *acate and
or "et 6side, 0C)C5 $9, 0C)C5 %(, Eotion &or )econsideration8 Eotion &or )ecusal8 Eotion 3or
5u=lication 2& .ranscri<t at 5u=lic E'<ense, 5etition &or -n 3orma 5au<eris "tatus.
3urther no one has e'<lained .aitels m>sterious a=ilit> to 4ithdra? as Counsel ?ithout
com<l>ing ?ith )EC )ule $ or e'<laining ?h> he ?ithdre?. Not sure there is an 2rder allo?ing
.aitelAs ?ithdra?. 5uentes Eotion to 4ithdra argued:
@.he instant matter ?as set &or trial on 0anuar> (, !(!, /o?ever, a de&ense
motion to continue ?as &iled on 0anuar> 3,!(!, not o<<osed, and granted. 6 ne?
trial date is <ending. 1nder "u<reme Court )ule 4%, the attorne> in an action ma>
=e changed at an> time =e&ore Cudgment u<on the consent o& the attorne>,
a<<roved => the client, or u<on order o& the court or Cudge thereo& on the
a<<lication o& the attorne> or client. "C) 4%. 3urther, under N)5C , %D=;, a
la?>er ma> ?ithdra? &rom re<resenting a client i& the same can =e accom<lished
?ithout material adverse e&&ect on the interests o& the client8 a client insists u<on
taBing action the la?>er considers re<ugnant, or ?ith ?hich the la?>er has
&undamental disagreement8 the re<resentation has =een rendered unreasona=l>
di&&icult => the client8 or other good cause &or ?ithdra?al e'ists. "ee N)5C ,
%D=;D;, D4;, D%;, D7;. .he undersigned regret&ull> maBes this motion as continued
re<resentation o& the de&endant in this matter has =een rendered unreasona=l>
di&&icult and the de&endant ?ill =e =etter served => having an alternative legal
de&ender a<<ointed to re<resent him.@
6ctuall> 5uentes does not state ?ith su&&icient <articularit> ?h> or ho? his ?ithdra? @can
=e accom<lished ?ithout material adverse e&&ect on the interests o& the client@. -ndeed, having his
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<rivate and con&idential case &ile <assed around liBe a hot <otato => )EC @&ormer <rosecutor@
de&enders is not in clientAs =est interest. 5uentes is required to detail Cust ho? @the re<resentation
has =een rendered unreasona=l> di&&icult => the client@ and this rule is su=Cect to a good &aith
requirement. .hat is, la?>ers canAt invoBe it to get out o& di&&icult or com<le' cases or to insure
the> onl> receive eas> cases. Can some=od> e'<lain to me ?h> DicB /ill going on vacation is a
su&&icient Custi&ication &or continuing a criminal trial, =ut m> =eing evicted and ?rong&ull> arrested
Ddue to DicB /illAs alleged =ri=er> o& the )5D and the )5DAs ?rong&ull arrest o& me, etc., and DicB
/illAs a<<l>ing a ?rong&ul and outla?ed rent distraint u<on =oth m> clientAs &iles and e'cul<ator>
evidence in C) !!7%; does not <resent a valid =asis &or a continuanceG 6nd - told .aitle -
?anted an o<<osition &iled to the motion &or continuance, >et it ?as not. "ee attached E'hi=it &or
su<<ort &or the contention that 5uentes ?ithdra? here is ina<<ro<riate as has =een most o& his
actions in this matter.
52-N." 6ND 61./2)-.-E"
6N6:7"-"
-NC2)52)6.E B7 )E3E)ENCE 6:: :64 6ND 6""E).-2N" -N 6..6C/ED
565E)" 6ND 5:E6D-N9" 6ND 4)-.-N9" -N EH/-B-. :
)econsideration 4DC) !D9;, DC) 3...
)1:E $9. NE4 .)-6:"8 6EENDEEN. 23 01D9EEN."
'a( )rounds* 6 ne? trial ma> =e granted to all or an> o& the <arties and on all or <art o& the issues &or an> o& the
&ollo?ing causes or grounds materiall> a&&ecting the su=stantial rights o& an aggrieved <art>: D; -rregularit> in the
<roceedings o& the court, Cur>, master, or adverse <art>, or an> order o& the court, or master, or a=use o& discretion =>
?hich either <art> ?as <revented &rom having a &air trial8 D!; Eisconduct o& the Cur> or <revailing <art>8 D3; 6ccident or
sur<rise ?hich ordinar> <rudence could not have guarded against8 D4; Ne?l> discovered evidence material &or the <art>
maBing the motion ?hich the <art> could not, ?ith reasona=le diligence, have discovered and <roduced at the trial8 D$;
Eani&est disregard => the Cur> o& the instructions o& the court8 D%; E'cessive damages a<<earing to have =een given under
the in&luence o& <assion or <reCudice8 or, D7; Error in la? occurring at the trial and o=Cected to => the <art> maBing the
motion. 2n a motion &or a ne? trial in an action tried ?ithout a Cur>, the court ma> o<en the Cudgment i& one has =een
entered, taBe additional testimon>, amend &indings o& &act and conclusions o& la? or maBe ne? &indings and conclusions,
and direct the entr> o& a ne? Cudgment.
'( "i&e for Motion* 6 motion &or a ne? trial shall =e &iled no later than ( da>s a&ter service o& ?ritten notice o& the
entr> o& the Cudgment.
- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
'c( "i&e for Ser+in, Affida+its* 4hen a motion &or ne? trial is =ased u<on a&&idavits the> shall =e &iled ?ith the motion.
.he o<<osing <art> has ( da>s a&ter service ?ithin ?hich to &ile o<<osing a&&idavits, ?hich <eriod ma> =e e'tended &or
an additional <eriod not e'ceeding !( da>s either => the court &or good cause sho?n or => the <arties => ?ritten
sti<ulation. .he court ma> <ermit re<l> a&&idavits.
'd( !n Court-s %nitiati+e; Notice; Specif.in, )rounds* No later than ( da>s a&ter entr> o& Cudgment the court, on its
o?n, ma> order a ne? trial &or an> reason that ?ould Custi&> granting one on a <art>Is motion. 6&ter giving the <arties
notice and an o<<ortunit> to =e heard, the court ma> grant a timel> motion &or a ne? trial &or a reason not stated in the
motion. 4hen granting a ne? trial on its o?n initiative or &or a reason not stated in a motion, the court shall s<eci&> the
grounds in its order.
'e( Motion to Alter or A&end a Jud,&ent* 6 motion to alter or amend the Cudgment shall =e &iled no later than ( da>s
a&ter service o& ?ritten notice o& entr> o& the Cudgment.
.he 2rder allo?ing 5uentes ?ithdr?as &its under @ -rregularit> in the <roceedings o& the court, Cur>, master, or
adverse <art>, or an> order o& the court, or master, or a=use o& discretion => ?hich either <art> ?as <revented &rom having
a &air trial@ as 5uentes ?as at least ommitting Be> in&ormation to the court, i& not misleading it as to his rationale &or
?ithdra?ing. 5lus 0udge 9ardnerAs 2rder, res<ect&ull> contains @Error in la? occurring at the trial and o=Cected to => the
<art> maBing the motion. 2n a motion &or a ne? trial in an action tried ?ithout a Cur>, the court ma> o<en the Cudgment i&
one has =een entered, taBe additional testimon>, amend &indings o& &act and conclusions o& la? or maBe ne? &indings and
conclusions, and direct the entr> o& a ne? Cudgment.@ .he la? sim<l> does not allo? &or such an unsu<<orted => &acts or
s<eci&ics Eotion to 4ithdra? to =e granted.
)1:E %(. )E:-E3 3)2E 01D9EEN. 2) 2)DE)
'a( Clerical Mista/es* Clerical mistaBes in Cudgments, orders or other <arts o& the record and errors therein arising &rom
oversight or omission ma> =e corrected => the court at an> time o& its o?n initiative or on the motion o& an> <art> and
a&ter such notice, i& an>, as the court orders. During the <endenc> o& an a<<eal, such mistaBes ma> =e so corrected =e&ore
the a<<eal is docBeted in the a<<ellate court, and therea&ter ?hile the a<<eal is <ending ma> =e so corrected ?ith leave o&
the a<<ellate court.
'( Mista/es; %nad+ertence; #$cusale Ne,lect; Ne0l. 1isco+ered #+idence; Fraud, #tc* 2n motion and u<on such
terms as are Cust, the court ma> relieve a <art> or <art>Is legal re<resentative &rom a &inal Cudgment, order, or <roceeding
&or the &ollo?ing reasons: D; mistaBe, inadvertence, sur<rise, or e'cusa=le neglect8 D!; ne?l> discovered evidence ?hich
=> due diligence could not have =een discovered in time to move &or a ne? trial under )ule $9D=;8 D3; &raud D?hether
hereto&ore denominated intrinsic or e'trinsic;, misre<resentation or other misconduct o& an adverse <art>8 D4; the
Cudgment is void8 or, D$; the Cudgment has =een satis&ied, released, or discharged, or a <rior Cudgment u<on ?hich it is
=ased has =een reversed or other?ise vacated, or it is no longer equita=le that an inCunction should have <ros<ective
a<<lication. .he motion shall =e made ?ithin a reasona=le time, and &or reasons D;, D!;, and D3; not more than % months
a&ter the <roceeding ?as taBen or the date that ?ritten notice o& entr> o& the Cudgment or order ?as served. 6 motion
under this su=division D=; does not a&&ect the &inalit> o& a Cudgment or sus<end its o<eration. .his rule does not limit the
<o?er o& a court to entertain an inde<endent action to relieve a <art> &rom a Cudgment, order, or <roceeding, or to set
aside a Cudgment &or &raud u<on the court. 4rits o& coram no=is, coram vo=is, audita querela, and =ills o& revie? and =ills
in the nature o& a =ill o& revie?, are a=olished, and the <rocedure &or o=taining an> relie& &rom a Cudgment shall =e =>
motion as <rescri=ed in these rules or => an inde<endent action.
.he 2rder or 0udgment is void as it e'tends to matters &or ?hich the Court cannot rule, ie, an 2rder allo?ing
?ithdra? ?here not good &aith =asis &or requesting a ?ithdra?al e'ists.
- 4 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<rosecutorial misconduct Dsuch as the D.6. ?ithholding @e'cul<ator>@ evidence that couldIve hel<ed >our de&ense;
Cudicial errors Dsuch as the Cudge <ermitting evidence that shouldIve =een e'cluded or vice versa;
erroneous a<<lication o& a la? or regulation im<ro<er Cur> instructions
ine&&ective assistance o& counsel or other mal<ractice the evidence did not <rove >our guilt =e>ond a reasona=le dou=t
36-:1)E .2 6332)D "-H./ 6EENDEEN. )-9/. .2 C21N"E: 2) 9)6N. DEE6ND 32) 01)7 .)-6:8
another DEE6ND 32) 01)7 .)-6: /E)EB7 E6DE -N E*EN. 23 NE4 .)-6:, "-E-:6):7 )EJ1E". 32)
-N 32)E6 5615E)-" ".6.1" /E)EB7 E6DE 6ND "1552).ED B7 6..6C/ED -35 5E.-.-2N
C2NC:1"-2N
De&endantF6<<elant Coughlin here=> res<ect&ull> requests all 2rders, Convictions,
0udgments, Contem<t 3indings, ?hatever, stemming &rom 3e=ruar> !nd ,!(! /earing on 5uentes
Eotion to 4ithdra? =e *acated or "et 6side or )econsidered and are here=> a<<eal ?ith an -35
request to ?aive the &iling &ee &or the notice o& a<<eal or allo? a relation =acB &or the &iling date u<on
an> denial o& the &ee ?aiver. 3urther, a co<> o& the audio o& the !F!F! /earing is here=> requested..
633-)E6.-2N 5ursuant to N)" !39B.(3(
.he undersigned does here=> a&&irm that the <receding document does not contain
the social securit> num=er o& an> <erson.
D6.ED this 3th Da> o& 3e=ruar>, !(
KFsF Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin
De&endant
- 5 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEC:6)6.-2N 23 Z6C/ C219:-N -N "1552). 23 ./E 32)E92-N9 D2C1EEN.
. .his Declaration is made <ursuant to the <rovisions o& N)" $3.(4$, - am <resentl> in the "tate o&
Nevada and - declare under <enalt> o& <erCur> that the &oregoing is true and correct.
!. Declarant is the 5lainti&& in the a=ove title action.
3. Declarant avers that the &actual statements set &or a=ove in the &oregoing document are, to the
=est o& his Bno?ledge and understanding, accurate.
4. -, Zach Coughlin, am availa=le to testi&>, i& necessar>, as to these matters. - declare under <enalt>
o& <erCur> that the &oregoing is true and correct.
E'ecuted on 3e=ruar> 3th, !(!
FsF Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin
5:6-N.-33
- 6 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5)223 23 "E)*-CE
0ill DraBe
DraBe0Lreno.gov
B7:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Zach Coughlin
De&endant
- 7 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-nde' to E'hi=its
- 8 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EH/-B-.
EH/-B-.
- 9 -

Sent: Fri 12/09/11 1:11 AM

Dear Mr. Puentes,


LEW TAITEL.



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402

Sent: Fri 12/09/11 3:53 AM
1 attachment

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
Fax: 949 667 7402

Dear Mr. Puentes,


th

Costs of October 27
th




Sent: Wed 11/09/11 12:43 PM



To Casey Baker
(Sent: Thu 11/10/11 12:24 PM



11/10/11
Casey Baker
Sent: Thu 11/10/11 11:13 AM
1 attachment
Mr. Coughlin:
Sincerely,
652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858


11/04/11
Casey Baker
Sent: Fri 11/04/11 12:36 PM


Mr. Coughlin:

Casey Baker


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 01:11:35 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,





Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:35 AM
2 attachments
2I.pdf (381.9 KB)
Mr. Puentes,

December 13th, 2011
Dear Mr. Puentes,
Hearing, etc.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin, Esq

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402

Conduct
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:52 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



Sent: Wed 12/14/11 1:19 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin

Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:52:25 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:02 AM
5 attachments
ZachCoughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV89501
Fax: 9496677402

December 14
th
, 2011

Dear Mr. Puentes,

Mr. Puentes,



40.253.
OTHER PAPERS
(b) Same: How Made.
facsimile number.
RULE 6. TIME
otherwise.
whichever is later.
be due.
this chapter.
essential services.
court.

th
, 2011 to
November 17
th
th
demands; and
case of emergency.


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:39 AM
5 attachments
Hi Mr. Puentes,


of perjury avers:
III
III
response.
me and my staff.
III
II I
III
who told
leaving them
coming
Zachary to
so.
small dog.
"hypothetically
Richard Hill's
if he
paying rent
all he did
tell me that
there is
misdemeanor
citation.

you see?

he wanted to



FW: 121 River Rock

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Sat 12/17/11 12:15 AM


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:43:38 -0800

Dear Mr. Baker,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:50:02 -0800


Mr. Coughlin:



652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858

herein.

Sent: Mon 12/26/11 3:52 PM

Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



new address for me

Sent: Fri 12/30/11 10:36 PM
Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



Sent: Sat 12/31/11 1:32 AM

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Sat 12/31/11 8:14 PM
2 attachments

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473




Sent: Sat 12/31/11 9:19 PM
10 attachments
Hi Mr. Puentes,




Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:22 AM

Download all
Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:43 AM
1 attachment

Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473




Sent: Thu 1/05/12 3:26 PM
1 attachment

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Fri 1/13/12 7:49 AM
1 attachment

Sincerely


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
L ......... ' ................ ........ ..
Document Code:
Zach Coughlin,Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
1422 E. 9th St., #2
tel: 7752296737
fax: 949 667 7402
Reno, NY 89512

Co-counsel far Defendant Coughlin
':f .
.. - .
- : , . t '. , '
2012 FEB 16 AM 9: 53
- ' ' , "
IN AND FOR ruE COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
STATE OF NEVADA;
Plaintiff;
)
)
) Case No: 11 CR 26405
)
12 VS.
)
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendant.
) "
)
--------------------------)
Notice o(Appeal Motion to or S@tAslde. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion (or
Reconsideration; Motion for ReC1!l!aJ: Motion For PubUcation Of Transcript at Public Expense.
Petition for In FOnDa Panpeds Statu.
FACTS
Bobby Puentes threw me under the bus, rather than reveal the fact that he had a conflict. He whined
about how the case was "hard" rather than do some lawyering. The man doesn't know how to bum a
cd. He attempted to shift the job ofbuming a cd for discovery onto me, yet he is the one taking home
the RJC, especially the prosecutors for the Reno City Attomey, as he is just a teddy bear to
- 1 -
Notice of Appeal. Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRcp 59. JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration: Motion for Recular: Motion For Publication Of Transcript at Public Expense.
PetltionJ2I:' In Fonna PmmeriaStatus
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
26

prosecutors like Drake (who reminded the undersigned that she was the #1 player on the Reno High
Girls Tennis Team in high school after the Hearing on February 2, 2012) ... Being a teddy bear is :fme,
I guess, but not exactly the first thing I look for in defense counsel. Moral of the story, don't throw
client under the bus instead of disclosing impermissible conflict that your conflict checks should have
revealed prior to entering the sanctity of the attorney client relationship, something that should be
sacred, not just something Puentes enteres to get a paycheck and dumps once it becomes
inconvenient.
Defendant/Appellant, Zach COUghlin, hereby flIes this Notice of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and
or Set Aside, JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60, Motion for Reconsideration; Motion fa- Recusal; Motion For
Publication Of Transcript at Public Expense, Petition for In Forma Pauperis Status.
Further no one has explained Taite1s m)'lltorious ability to Withdraw as Counsel without
complying with RMC Rule 5 or explaining why he withdrew. Not sure there is an Order allowing
Taitel's withdraw. Puentes Motion to Withdra argued:
"The instant matter was set fer trial on January 10, 2012, However, a defense
motion to continue was filed on January 3,2012, not opposed, and granted A new
trial date is pending. Under Supreme Court Rule 46, the attorney in an action may
be changed at any time before judgment upon the consent of the attorney,
approved by the client, or upon order of the court or judge thereof on the
application of the attorney or client. SCR 46. Further, under NRPC I, 16(b), a
lawyer may withdraw from representing a client if the same can be accomplished
without material adverse effect on the interests of the client; a client insists upon
taking action the lawyer considers repugnant, or with which the lawyer has
fundamental dis agreement; the representation has been rendered unreasonably
difficult by the client; or other good cause fa- withdrawal exists. See NRPC 1,
16(b)(1), (4), (6), (7). 1he undersigned regretfully makes this motion as continued
representation of the defend8llt in this matter has been rendered unreasonably
difficult and the defendant will be better served by having an alternative legal
defender appointed to represent him."
Actually Puentes does not state with sufficient particularity why or how his withdraw "can
be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of the client". Indeed, having his
- 2 -
&l,Uce of Appeal. Motion to Vacate and Of Set Aside. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion f.m:.
Reconsideration: Motion for Recusal: Modon For publication Of Transcript at Public Expense.
Petition for In Fanna Pauperis Status

1 prosewwrial misconduct (such as the D.A. withholding "cxculpatocy" evidence that could've helped your defense)
2
judicial errors (such as the judge pennitting evidence that should've been excluded or vice versa)
3
4 erroneous application 0 f a law or regulation improper jury inslluctions
5
inelf ective assistance of counselor other malpractice the evidence did not prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
6
1 FAILURE TO AFFORD SlXTH AMENDMENT RIGHT TO COUNSEL OR GRANT DEMAND FOR JURy TRIAL;
anoth..- DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL HEREBY MADE IN EVENT OFNEW TRIAL, SIMILARLY REQUEST FOR
8 INFORMAPAUPERlS STATUS HEREBY MAPEAND SUPPORTED BY ATTACHED IFP PBTITION
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
21
28
CONCWSION
DefendantiAppelant Coughlin hereby respectfully requests all Orders, Convictions,
Judgments, Contempt Findings, whatever, stemming from February 2nd ,2012 Hearing on Puentes
Motion to Withdraw be Vacated or Set Aside or Reconsidered and are hereby appeal with an IFP
request to waive the filing fee forthe notice of appeal or allow a relation back for the filing date upon
any denial of the fee waiver. Further, a copy of the audio of the 2/2112 Hearing is hereby requested ..
AFFIRMATION Pursuant to NRS .1J.21i.1UJl.
The undenigned does hereby affinn that the preceding document does not contain
the social security number of any person.
DATED this 13th Day of February, 20 II

Zach Coughlin
Defendant
- 5 -
NoUce of Appeal. MoUon to Vacate and or Set Aside. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration; Motion for Recusal; Motion For Publication Of Transcript @t Public Expense.
Petition for In Forma Pauperis Status
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEC:6)6.-2N 23 Z6C/ C219:-N -N "1552). 23 ./E 32)E92-N9 D2C1EEN.
. .his Declaration is made <ursuant to the <rovisions o& N)" $3.(4$, - am <resentl> in the "tate o&
Nevada and - declare under <enalt> o& <erCur> that the &oregoing is true and correct.
!. Declarant is the 5lainti&& in the a=ove title action.
3. Declarant avers that the &actual statements set &or a=ove in the &oregoing document are, to the
=est o& his Bno?ledge and understanding, accurate.
4. -, Zach Coughlin, am availa=le to testi&>, i& necessar>, as to these matters. - declare under <enalt>
o& <erCur> that the &oregoing is true and correct.
E'ecuted on 3e=ruar> 3th, !(!
FsF Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin
5:6-N.-33
- 6 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5)223 23 "E)*-CE
0ill DraBe
DraBe0Lreno.gov
B7:
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Zach Coughlin
De&endant
- 7 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-nde' to E'hi=its
- 8 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EH/-B-.
EH/-B-.
- 9 -

Sent: Fri 12/09/11 1:11 AM

Dear Mr. Puentes,


LEW TAITEL.



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402

Sent: Fri 12/09/11 3:53 AM
1 attachment

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
Fax: 949 667 7402

Dear Mr. Puentes,


th

Costs of October 27
th




Sent: Wed 11/09/11 12:43 PM



To Casey Baker
(Sent: Thu 11/10/11 12:24 PM



11/10/11
Casey Baker
Sent: Thu 11/10/11 11:13 AM
1 attachment
Mr. Coughlin:
Sincerely,
652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858


11/04/11
Casey Baker
Sent: Fri 11/04/11 12:36 PM


Mr. Coughlin:

Casey Baker


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 01:11:35 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,





Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:35 AM
2 attachments
2I.pdf (381.9 KB)
Mr. Puentes,

December 13th, 2011
Dear Mr. Puentes,
Hearing, etc.
Sincerely,
Zach Coughlin, Esq

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402

Conduct
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 12:52 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



Sent: Wed 12/14/11 1:19 AM
Dear Mr. Puentes,



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin

Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 00:52:25 -0800

Dear Mr. Puentes,



Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:02 AM
5 attachments
ZachCoughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV89501
Fax: 9496677402

December 14
th
, 2011

Dear Mr. Puentes,

Mr. Puentes,



40.253.
OTHER PAPERS
(b) Same: How Made.
facsimile number.
RULE 6. TIME
otherwise.
whichever is later.
be due.
this chapter.
essential services.
court.

th
, 2011 to
November 17
th
th
demands; and
case of emergency.


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473

Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.


Sent: Wed 12/14/11 5:39 AM
5 attachments
Hi Mr. Puentes,


of perjury avers:
III
III
response.
me and my staff.
III
II I
III
who told
leaving them
coming
Zachary to
so.
small dog.
"hypothetically
Richard Hill's
if he
paying rent
all he did
tell me that
there is
misdemeanor
citation.

you see?

he wanted to



FW: 121 River Rock

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Sat 12/17/11 12:15 AM


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:43:38 -0800

Dear Mr. Baker,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 13:50:02 -0800


Mr. Coughlin:



652 Forest Street
Reno, Nevada 89509
Phone: (775) 348-0888
Fax: (775) 348-0858

herein.

Sent: Mon 12/26/11 3:52 PM

Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 229-6737
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



new address for me

Sent: Fri 12/30/11 10:36 PM
Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St.
Reno, NV 89501
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473



Sent: Sat 12/31/11 1:32 AM

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Sat 12/31/11 8:14 PM
2 attachments

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473




Sent: Sat 12/31/11 9:19 PM
10 attachments
Hi Mr. Puentes,




Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:22 AM

Download all
Sent: Thu 1/05/12 8:43 AM
1 attachment

Dear Mr. Puentes,


Sincerely,

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473




Sent: Thu 1/05/12 3:26 PM
1 attachment

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


Sent: Fri 1/13/12 7:49 AM
1 attachment

Sincerely


Zach Coughlin, Esq.
1422 E. 9th St. #2
RENO, NV 89512
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402
Nevada Bar No: 9473


I LED

IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF ,2012
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEV ADJiY_-.l
1
...... '-LJ
CI1Y OF RENO, Plaintiff
Case No. 11 CR26405
vs.
Dept. No.2
______ 1
Reno .
By Court - 0""" '
.... L
. MOTION I",
.
Comes now the Reno City Attorney's Office and moves the court to grant the following: &f..P.::t:L
o Dismiss without Prejudice . B Dismiss with Prejudice
o Continue Increase Bail with Conditions
[8J Other. Opposition to Defendant's Motion filed 2113112
This motion is made and based on the following:
Defendant filed a Motion on his own behalf, in the above::entitled matter. on 2/13/12.
Upon review. the City Loomis. ESQ . was appointed by the Court to
Defendant. on 2/},/12. Accordingly. the City believes Defendant's pro per motion should not be
considered. Moreover. the City believes Defendant's request to vacate or set aside. or reconsider
tbis Court's 212/12. is without merit. .

I, Jill E. Drake. affirm and declare that the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge
and belief and made in good faith.
Date
Reno City Attorney's Office
ORDER
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY O.J..
ERED
that the motion be:
o Granted 0 Denied
o Other: _______________________ _
Dated this _ day 0[ ______ -'. 20_
MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE
IN THEi;mHCIPAL COURT OF THE ~ I F RENO
cd TY OF WASHOE, STATE OF ."ADA
ONE SOUTH SIERRA STREET, RENO, NY 89505
Mailing: P.O. Box 1900, Reno, NV 89505 PHONE (775)334-2290 FAX (775)334-3824
CITY OF RENO, PLAINTIFF
vo.
DEFENDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
Courl Case#: 11 CR 26405 21
Agency#: RPD 11-22185
DOB: 09127/1976
Accident#: Booking#: 19876
Status: OPEN
Language: ENGLISH
Attorney: LOOMIS, KEITH
BENCH TIliAL JUDGE GARDNER
BENCH1RIAL JUDGE GARDNER
c
B
8;00 am CONT\J\'UEl) BY REQUEST OF CITY
AITORNEY
rue, Jon 10,2012 1:00 pm BY REQUEST OF DEFENSE
llI13n011 FORMAL COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE COURT
11/14n0l1 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: LEW TAITEL; 475 S. ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE IA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PHONE (775) 322-2272
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HElSHE
WILL HAVE ALL 0 F THE NECESSARY INFORMA nON FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE.
REPRESENT RIMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON TIllS MAITER IN THE RENO MlINICll'AL COURT.
MAYBE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODAY'S DATE. IN TUE EVENT THAT TIllS ORDER EXPIRES,
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, 0 R
WOUJ,D LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE 0 F HISIHER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HISIHER
A ITOR,'iEY.
11114/2011 TilE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXpLAINED IlISIHER RIGHTS BY THE JUDGE AND INDICATED THAT
HEiSHE UNDERSTOOD THEM COMPLETELY.
1l!30nOll LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: ROBERTO PUENTES; 416 RIDGE STREET (p.O. BOX 2421) RENO, NEVADA
89505 PHONE (775) 786-7676
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR A ITORNEY SO THAT HEISHE
WILL HAVE ALL OF nlE NECESSAR Y INFORMATION FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT TIlE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT I\lMiHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDlNGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICll'AL COURT.
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENT A TlON BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAJNIN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODA Y'S DATE. IN THE EVENT THAT THIS ORDER EXPIRES,
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITJ\'ESSES THAT HEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HlSIlIER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT IDSiliER
ATTORNEY.
'EFgNDANT: COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
lefendant Initials:
Agency#i 11-22185
Print Dalll: 311312012
COURT CASE#: 11 CR2640S 21
Data Date: 3/1312012
Page I of3
" d/30/201 I
Ii
.. 212/2012
iI
[, 21212012
" 21212012
---C:_
BE
CASE.
U:CAL APPOINTED; KUru 9468 DOt:BLF. n BLVD SUITE A, RENO, -'EYADA 89521
PIlO!\E (775) 8537222
ALLOW TI,LY 3 BEFORE CO'lT ACTI liG YUJ;R A TTOR\ LY SU TIIA T HE!5HE
\lII.L HA VI. ALL OF Tm: NEO:SSARY INFOR,\IATION FROM TI11-: COliRT TO ASSIST YOli WITH YOUR CASE.
!TIS
HERCBY OIWF,RF:D 1'11.\1" THL A BOVENA \lED DEFE]\1JANT BC APPOI\'TED A LEG,\L DLI- ENDLR TO
RKI'HESEYr 111M/HER IN ANY AND ALL PHOCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MIINICIPAL COIJRT.
rr IS FTRTIlICR ORDERI':D THAT THF. DEFENDA;\T '\ FINA '<CIAL INQUIRY API'LICATIOIi AND
MA \' BE REQURf.D 10 PAY FELS FOR REI'I{ESI:liTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFf.;-iDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MOm'IIS FROM TODAY'S DATE. 1-:11 THE EVENT THAT THIS ORDER
THE DEFI';liDA \'1' :l-ILST SLBMIT Ali L'PDATED FI \,-,liCL\L []\'QURY APPL!( A TION FOR RECONSIDERA
IF TilE DEFt:NDANT HAS THAT liE/Sill:: WOeLD Lilm TO IIAVE W IT],;ESSES I'RJ>:SENT, OR
\\'OLlL.D J.I KE TO DfSCl SS Til J: DEFE'ISE OF HIS/HER Till-: IlEFLliDAliT COI"TACT IIISIHER
ATTORNEY,
U:CAL m:FE:"iDI{ RI:LJEVEIJ, PER GI(Al"lTD :\oraTiON IIARIN(;
IT IS IICREBY ORDERED THAT THE LI:GAL DEFf::-;DER BE RELIEVE!) f RO\l IIlsnll:R ASSIGNl\USr TO TIllS
CASE.
PRESENT IN COlIRT FOR TilE CITY OF RENO; JILL DRAKE FOR TIlE DEFE;';SI::: ROHERTO PIJENTES
CHARGE ANlfsENTENCit INFORMATION
,
-,
Charge I: 08,10.010 TRESPASSING
d
1101921
Jaililays:
WRT#:
o
! O!1 Dt:
/ An-CSL Dt:
"
lIIU120 II
11113/2011
, Plea.
11/H/201l - NOT GJ;ILTY
- --_ ... -... - - --
ii -:----,,,,,' 'i"
"
"
Additional Fees
-- "
"'ii"
.' -
Suspatded Days: 0
FINES
," ' Original AmI
,"".:
.
'J; "'iV"
Amt Paid
$40,00 $40,00 $0_00
$40,00 $40.00 $0.00
:'
i'
"
"
J;
,
-=-,
!
... CUSTODYIDOrw INF()RM4TION
= ..
I.
'Arrest Dare,
11/1512011
D1rtc
II /1512011
. '--Currefit Status-? ' '!",' . ' :", : ,-: -

S 310,00
. . . .-'" J!
Type ofBaiF
ACnVJ-: BO:'>'D
CASHO:'>'LY
B121473
. .=-:-"--_:.:.:: .. - - -;;;,. - - - - ---
--==---
...,,, .,:'. ; .'.,"'-.:
11113/2011 ARRLST BAIL A $310,00 "
. . - ._. - .0_- - -------- - - --- -.-- - ------------- . t,
U ______ j:
. _.- --;::- =--=----=---=:-: ---- - -.. -:--
CONDlTJONS
z4.::",.
<,<,'
:.
t" I -::-,., .. "i : ::1
,: IlA Ii-.:-co Ii 01 iiu;,;, m" I,U::I:f:A;,I':VROM'C-CSTOOY, ---.----------- - Ofrlcn:lfDt. - -- :\ovi4."""imt - -
Next Proof IJt:
"
----- -- --------- -;:
-,.--==-------\::':.:;.-
D 1,,'mO;\Nl',"(-6Cc; HLlN, j)':C-H'\R'V BA I(KER
Dcr endlmt I nithds;
Balance'
Compkted Dt: J'
!
--.
Print Dute: 3113/2012
- - -- ------c6uld C:M;t: #, II CR 26405 21
DoW OMc: 3113/2012
Page 2 of3
d' ; 1\IIHf. "Vri H 1' 1 IE cO:, ta BAli . N-n11S owe. L RESlI LTlN l'II E1SSUAl'c'f:: of A-
,I fAlU1R1-: TO COW' LY WARRANT OR ARREST AND I1\CARCERATION FOR Of COIIRT BATL
-, REVOt'ATIOI\', FOR r-t;R THr-R INI-OR \ (, \ "1'10:\, ('O:-'-T ACT nfl, SE:-1Tr-:-ICF. (,O\II' I.I I11\CI,_ \\ '1:\00\\' LOCArUl U:-; THF. F II< 51'
( FLOOR OF THSl<I -- "O MlI'I I1' IPAL CCll:Ii.T, O,:E SOIJll I SIr: RRA ST, "V (775) 334-2290,
,
ji THE SHALL API'EAR AS OROEREO !'OR All REVIEWS ANO SUALL COOPERATE FI!I.I .Y Wn:I ' IlIE
BAIUI+S'\'I(\I{:;IIALS ANIl ,ILL COLK I STAFF
THE DFI-'h NDAI\ r SHAI.L ATr END ALL COURT APPEARANCES ANO ON TIME A.'oID
'i AI.COlIlll.ANll DRI1G FREL.
!'HE or:n.XDA:>I 1 , I tALL K 1\0\1' HIS ' III.R coeR'1 IJ,IT!; AND MAI)l1 .III, CO'lTACT WITIllllSiHER An'OR"I:\'.
" .1 !'IUDR TO CHA'J (i1 NG HISfI II-R ADDRESS OR PHONE KU:v1BER, nil': IJEFENDANT SHALL NOTIFIY '1'1 11; COLIRT OF SUD I
"
.i OBEY I\J .LI.AWS,
1
(
Ii
"
(I.. ___ --__ . ___
.. --= __ :.. ... . :'.::= .. : ':;:- ...=,'t:. . '-- -",-..::;= - _ ."
ir ..
-, .-.=;::;':";- ; ." 7-:-===- - " :;:" 7
ADDITIONAL CASE INFORMATION
! 03/0512012 :-:0'1'1:5: SENDI'IG MOTlm: UP TO D, VIA BLACK rOLDER, Ti llS 15 HIS 2'10 FOR SAME MOTION
ii TODAY_
'l o3/0sno12 MIse 1'01'E5: 0-2 HAS FILE SE:\JlINU MOTlO'J UP TO DEPT VIA I\I,ACK FOLDER.
-.- .-.-:"."=.-:=:': _. _-- - - -- - - --.--- :--. - ---
= = = -.. ---==--
I I. THE S\\' Oll \ I:'iTI' IU:rER FUL L" I:HU{('I-lF. TED THIS OROF.R TO T ill.
ii Il EFE:'iDANT: IlATI:: _ ____ _ _
,I
'I RICCJ<:IVIW BV = ___ _ DATE: '1'111-1 [: _ _ _ _ _
,
:i
;!
I
B y IJI.L:_.=" ...... _=. :. .-==-.:.. ' .. :_:i,""_;;::;;::: .. ;;:;: . _,, _;:;;;; .. :;:. 0=0"-:: ' ;;::;::; -- '-.. :- .-.. --, , : -= , ,=. _=_ ",,::- .= ... ::- _ ",_=_ :c-. .--_- .. ';_
Iml' E:NDANT: COUGIII.I N. ZACIIARY SA Agency#, 1.1 22185 COURT CASf'. N: I I Cit 26405 21
Dl' f cndant I niLial s:
Pri nt Date: 3113/2012 D.1ll Date: 3113/20 12
Pag.3 of 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.".,
..,..,. .... """"
,008CIIIIIO
_HY ....
C1D2) 3)1.mo

Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
Notice Setting Hearing on the party(ies) set forth below:
__ Placing said document in a sealed envelope placed foc collecting and mailing
in the United States mail. at Reno, Nevada, postage prepaid, following ordinary
_x_
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Inner-officemail following ordinary business practices.
Personal Delivery.
Electronic mail to City Attorney and Keith Loomis Esq.
Daniel Wong
Cbief Criminal Deputy City Attorney
Reno City Anorney's office
Electronic mail
Keith Loomis Esq.
Electronic mail

FILED
ilENtl MUNICIPAL COURT
1 Document Code:
2012 MAR -5 AM 7: 36
Zach Coughlin
2 Nevada Bar No: 9473
3 1422 E. 9'" st. #2
Reno, NV 89512
4 Tele: 775-338-8 II 8
Fax: 949-667-7402
5
Attorney for Pro Se Attorney Plaintiff Denied Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel
6
7 IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
8
9
10
11
12
CIlY OF RENO;
PLAINTIFF,
VS.
)
)
)
) CaseNo:llCR26405
)
)
13 ZACR COUGHLIN; ) Dept No: 2
)
14
)
)
)
15
DEFENDANT.
16 1--------------------------------
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS CO-COUNSEL AND MOTION TO DISMISS
COMES NOW, Defendant, Zach Coughlin, by and through himself as co-counsel to
Defendant and files the above title dooument on his own behalf.
lEGAL ARGUMENT
Memorandum of Law In fuppgrt of Motion to Dismiss the Complaint
Introduction
The defendant, Zach Coughlin ("Coughlin") is charged with criminal trespass under
the Reno Municipal Code (RMC) .1 The factual allegations in the complaint are to the effect
- 1 -
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS CQ-COUNSEL AND MOTION TO DISMISS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that both counts occurred on the same date, at about the same time, and in the same
general icinit!. "ach count, though, inoled a separate incident.
#ana $rec%enridge was operating a ehicle that had been traeling each on &est 'treet,
approaching the intersection of $la%e (enue and had the right of wa!. Coughlin)s ehicle failed to
stop fo the stop sign and entered the intersection. $rec%enridge)s ehicle was forced to ta%e easie
action and steerred to the right, causing the ehicle to sideswipe a fire h!drant . . . . Coughlin failed
to stop for the accident . . . .#ana $rec%enridge complaint of pain to her legs and was transported to
(ll 'aints *ospital b! Rescue.
&ith regard to the second incident, the complaint alleges+
Coughlin)s ehicle continued east and went through the red light at the intersection of north
Memorial ,rie and &est street, 'tratman, who had been operating a ehicle owned b! Mic%)s (uto
-arts southbound on .orth Memorial ,rie, was struc% b! Coughlin)s ehicle . . . . "rnesto
(Coughlin) then ran from the ehicle leaing the secene of the accident. . . ( passenger in
Coughlin)s ehicle, /.*. . . . complained of pain to his nec% and bac% and was transported to (ll
'aints *ospital b! Rescue.
0inall!, the complaint alleges that "rnesto Coughlin was interiewed b! police and said that
he ran from the ehicle because, ""rnesto stated that his brother, /.*., did not want him
arrested for an accident and told him to run."
Argument
I. The compl!nt mu"t llege "u##!c!ent #ct" $!th!n the #our corner"% $hen &!e$e' !n common
"en"e mnner% to e"t(l!"h pro((le cu"e to (el!e&e tht the 'e#en'nt comm!tte' the o##en"e
llege'. )ere% the compl!nt !" 'e#!c!ent the tre"p"" chrge RMC *.+,.,+,.
, criminal com<laint mu0t meet <ro>a>le cau0e re@uirement0 to con.er <er0onal Auri0diction. State v.
White" 97 8i0. 2d 193" 197" 29% N.8.2d 34*" 347 B19$+;. , criminal com<laint i0 a 0el.'contained
charge that mu0t 0et .orth .act0 ?ithin it0 .our corner0 that are 0u..icient" in them0elve0 or together
?ith rea0ona>le in.erence0 derived there.rom" to allo? a rea0ona>le <er0on to conclude that a crime
?a0 <ro>a>l- committed and that the de.endant i0 <ro>a>l- cul<a>le. State v. Haugen" %2 8i0. 2d
791" 793" 191 N.8.2d 12" 13 B1971;. 1. the criminal com<laint .ail0 to e0ta>li0h <ro>a>le cau0e" the
court doe0 not o>tain <er0onal Auri0diction" and the charge mu0t >e di0mi00ed. &he criminal
com<laint" ho?ever" i0 not to >e read in a h-<ertechnical 0en0e >ut" rather" i0 to >e revie?ed on a
rea0ona>le >a0i0 a<<l-ing ordinar- common 0en0e. State v. Gaudesi" 112 8i0. 2d 213" 219" 332
N.8.2d 3+2" 3+% B19$3;. &here.ore" the .act0 alleged and the in.erence0 that ma- >e dra?n .rom
them mu0t >e 0u..icient to e0ta>li0h in a common 0en0e ?a- that there i0 <ro>a>le cau0e to >elieve the
de.endant committed the o..en0e charged. See id.
2ere" the com<laint <ur<ort0 to allege that Coughlin violated !=CC0 tre0<a00 0tatute $.1+.+1+ &he
element0 o. that o..en0e are: Element" o# the Cr!me Tht the Stte Mu"t Pro&e
' 2 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Reno Mun!c!pl Co'e "ect!on *.+,.,+,% pro&!'e" !n rele&nt prt- E&er. per"on $ho . . .
$!ll#ull. goe" or rem!n" upon n. ln' or !n n. (u!l'!ng #ter h&!ng (een $rne' (. the
o$ner or occupnt thereo# not to tre"p"" !" gu!lt. o# m!"'emenor.
A. The cr!m!nl tre"p"" compl!nt #!l" to e"t(l!"h pro((le cu"e (ecu"e !t #!l" to "ho$
n. not!ce or "er&!ce o# the $r!tten OR'er #or Summr. E&!ct!on $" con'ucte' !n l$#ul
mnner n' not too "oon n' thu" &o!'..
(or the0e rea0on0" the criminal com<laint mu0t >e di0mi00ed.
1 realiDe -ou ?ill liEel- not read all o. thi0. &he main thing i0 1 am re0<ect.ull- re@ue0ting that
-ou con.irm ?ith De<ut- =achem that he did" in .act" F<er0onall- 0erveF the Summar- Eviction
3rder on me at 121 !iver !ocE St." !eno $9%+1 on Novem>er 1" 2+11 at 4:3+ <m" in connection ?ith
<er.orming the locEout. 1t i0 m- <o0ition that 1 ?a0 not F<er0onall- 0ervedF and 1 am tr-ing to .igure
out ?hether De<ut- =achem i0 l-ing or ?hether the <hra0e F<er0onall- 0ervedF mean0 0omething
other than ?hat 1 >elieve it mean0" etc." etc. 1 a<<reciate -our attention to thi0.
1 am ?riting to in@uire a>out and com<lain ?ith regard to an ,..idavit o. Service .iled >- or .or 8CS3 De<ut- =achem
?ith re0<ect to the 0ervice o. a 3rder :ranting Summar- Eviction again0t me Bin m- la? o..ice ?here non'<a-ment o.
rent ?a0 not alleged" no le00 in violation o. N!S 4+.2%3 and ?here a G2"27% rent e0cro? de<o0it ?a0 .oi0ted u<on me in
violation o. 4+.2%3B*;" e0<eciall- ?here a 0ta- o. eviction ?a0 not granted even ?hile the !4C held on to mo0t all m-
mone-...;.
=- i00ue ?ith the 8CS3 i0 that =achemC0 ,..idavit o. Service indicate0 that he F<er0onall- 0ervedF me" ?hich Eind o.
remind0 me o. all that ro>o'0igning and =E!S .raud 1 come acro00 in m- da- Ao> Band do -ou ?onder ho? man-
attorne-0 in the .oreclo0ure de.en0e game 1 am in con0tant contact ?ith ?ho are ?atching and ?itne00 the <otential !1C3
violation0 thi0 ?riting mention0H;" ?hich include0 >eing a .oreclo0ure de.en0e attorne-. So ?hich i0 itH Did =achem
F<er0onall- 0erveF me the Summar- Eviction 3rderH !ichard :. 2ill" E0@. liEe0 to argue that 1 ?a0 F0ervedF in
com<liance ?ith all time related rule0 >ecau0e it ?a0 done in the Fu0ual cu0tom and <ractice o. the 8CS3. 8hat" e)actl-"
' 3 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
i0 the Fu0ual cu0tom and <ractice o. the 8CS3H 1 hear a lot a>out thi0 F?ithin 24 hour0F 0tu... So" 1 go hunting .or 0ome
>lacE letter la? to 0u<<ort ?hat tho0e at the !4C and in the cluele00 communit- at large B?hich o.ten include0 Nevada
6egal Service0 and 8a0hoe 6egal Service0" the <eo<le -ou gu-0 had 0uch trou>le actuall- 0erving in the la?0uit0 1 .iled"
?hich ma- have actuall- hel<ed im<roved legal 0ervice0 in thi0 communit-" i. the- ?ere not di0mi00ed due to
in0u..icienc- o. 0ervice o. <roce00" even ?here the 1(/ re@uired the 8CS3 to 0erved the de.endant0....;. ,n-?a-" >acE to
the F?ithin 24 hour0F <hra0eolog-: F
&hi0 ?hole >u0ine00 a>out I&he court ma- thereu<on i00ue an order directing the 0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to
remove the tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the order...J i0 ina<<lica>le to thi0 0ituation" ?here an 3rder :ranting
Summar- Eviction ?a0 0igned >- 3cto>er 27th" 2+11. &hat language i0 onl- .ound in 0ituation0 ina<<lica>le to the
current one. N!S 4+.2%3B3;B>;B2;" and N!S 4+.2%3B%;Ba; are the onl- 0ection0 o. N!S 4+ ?here thi0 I?ithin 24 hour0J
language occur0" and tho0e 0ituation0 onl- a<<l- ?here" in:
4+.2%3B3;B>;B2;: I 3. , notice 0erved <ur0uant to 0u>0ection 1 or 2 mu0t: ...B>; ,dvi0e the tenant: K. B2; &hat i. the court
determine0 that the tenant i0 guilt- o. an unla?.ul detainer" the court ma- i00ue a 0ummar- order .or removal o. the tenant
or an order <roviding .or the nonadmittance o. the tenant" directing the 0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to remove the
tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the orderJ
and"
4+.2%3B%;Ba;: I%. 5<on noncom<liance ?ith the notice: Ba; &he landlord or the landlordL0 agent ma- a<<l- >- a..idavit o.
com<laint .or eviction to the Au0tice court o. the to?n0hi< in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial
<remi0e0 are located or to the di0trict court o. the count- in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial
<remi0e0 are located" ?hichever ha0 Auri0diction over the matter. &he court ma- thereu<on i00ue an order directing the
0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to remove the tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the order.J &he ?a- the0e 0ummar-
eviction <roceeding0 are >eing carried out in !eno 4u0tice Court <re0entl- 0hocE0 the con0cience and violate0 Nevada
la?. &here i0 not >a0i0 .or e..ectuating a locEout the ?a- 8CS3C0 De<ut- =achem did in thi0 ca0e. &he a>ove t?o
0ection0 containing the I?ithin 24 hour0 o. recei<tJ language are ina<<lica>le" a0 tho0e 0ituation0 do not invoEe the
' 4 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<re0ent circum0tance0" ?here the &enant did .ile an ,..idavit and did conte0t thi0 matter to a degree not o.ten 0een. &o
re@uire NevadaC0 tenant0 to get u< and get out I?ithin 24 hour0J o. Irecei<t o. the orderJ B?hat doe0 that even meanH &he
u0e o. term0 liEe IrenditionJ" IrenderedJ" Inotice o. entr-J" I<ronouncedJ" i0 a>0ent here" and thi0 Irecei<t o. the orderJ
language i0 0omething rarel- .ound el0e?here in Nevada la?'0ee attached D=# 0tatutor- citation0" and in em<lo-ment
la? litigation0 ?here one mu0t .ile a Com<laint ?ithin 9+ da-0 o. Irecei<tJ o. a !ight &o Sue 6etter" a 0ituation ?hich
.ollo?0 N!C/ %B>;" and N!C/ *Be; in im<uting recei<t o. 0uch a letter" ?hen actual recei<t i0 not 0ho?n" >- a<<l-ing a
Icon0tructive noticeJ 0tandard that relie0 u<on the da-0 .or mailing e)ten0ion o. time .or item0 0erved in the mailing"
etc.;. 1n ,>raham v. 8ood0 2ole 3ceanogra<hic 1n0titute" %%3 (.3d 114 B10t Cir. 2++9;" the record did not re.lect ?hen
the <lainti.. received hi0 right'to'0ue letter. &he letter ?a0 i00ued on Novem>er 24" 2++*. &he court calculated that the 9+'
da- <eriod commenced on Novem>er 3+" 2++*" >a0ed on three da-0 .or mailing a.ter e)cluding Saturda-0 and Sunda-0.
1n order to >ring a claim under either &itle #11 or the ,D," a <lainti.. mu0t e)hau0t admini0trative remedie0 and 0ue
?ithin 9+ da-0 o. recei<t o. a right to 0ue letter. See 42 5.S.C. M 2+++e'%B.;B1;. See Bald?in Count- 8elcome Center v.
Bro?n" 4** 5.S. 147" 14$ n.1" 1+4 S.Ct. 1723" $+ 6.Ed.2d 19* B19$4;Bgranting <lainti.. an additional three da-0 .or
mailing <ur0uant to !ule *;....J ...
Dear 8a0hoe Count- Sheri..C0 3..ice"
htt<:NNen.?iEi<edia.orgN?iEiNServiceOo.O<roce00
FSu>0tituted 0ervice
8hen an individual <art- to >e 0erved i0 unavaila>le .or <er0onal 0ervice" man- Auri0diction0 allo? .or 0u>0tituted 0ervice.
Su>0tituted 0ervice allo?0 the <roce00 0erver to leave 0ervice document0 ?ith another re0<on0i>le individual" called a
' % '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<er0on o. 0uita>le age and di0cretion" 0uch a0 a coha>iting adult or a teenager. 5nder the (ederal !ule0" 0u>0tituted
0ervice ma- onl- >e made at the a>ode or d?elling o. the de.endant.P4Q Cali.ornia" Ne? 7orE"P%Q 1llinoi0" and man- other
5nited State0 Auri0diction0 re@uire that in addition to 0u>0tituted 0ervice" the document0 >e mailed to the reci<ient.P%Q
Su>0tituted 0ervice o.ten re@uire0 a 0erving <art- 0ho? that ordinar- 0ervice i0 im<ractica>le" that due diligence ha0 >een
made to attem<t to maEe <er0onal 0ervice >- deliver-" and that 0u>0tituted 0ervice ?ill reach the <art- and e..ect notice.
P%QF
1 am <rett- 0ure F<er0onall- 0ervedF mean0 -ou 0erved the <er0on in <er0on" not that a <er0on named =achem ?ent and
<o0ted a notice on a door" <er0onall- him0el.. See" 1 thinE -ou gu-0 are thinEing o. the F<er0onF in the ?ord <er0onall- a0
a<<l-ing to the 0erver" ?hen in all in0tance0 1 have ever 0een it u0ed in the la?" the F<er0onF <art o. F<er0onall-F a<<lie0
to the <er0on >eing 0erved. 2el< me out here" =ar-.
htt<0:NN0E-drive.live.comNredir.a0<)HcidR43+$4*3$.32.%.2$Sre0idR43+$4*3$(32(%(2$T1$97S<aridRroot
,l0o" doe0 the 8CS3 have a <o0ition on ?hat t-<e o. 0ervice i0 re@uired o. eviction order0 <rior to the 8CS3 or
?hoever doe0 it" >eing a>le to conduct a locEoutH
htt<:NN???.leg.0tate.nv.u0Ncourtrule0Nnrc<.html
N!C/ !56E *+. !E61E( (!3= 45D:=EN& 3! 3!DE!... Bc; De.ault 4udgment0: De.endant Not /er0onall- Served.
8hen a de.ault Audgment 0hall have >een taEen again0t an- <art- ?ho ?a0 not <er0onall- 0erved ?ith 0ummon0 and
com<laint" either in the State o. Nevada or in another Auri0diction" and ?ho ha0 not entered a general a<<earance in the
action" the court" a.ter notice to the adver0e <art-" u<on motion made ?ithin * month0 a.ter the date o. 0ervice o. ?ritten
' * '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
notice o. entr- o. 0uch Audgment" ma- vacate 0uch Audgment and allo? the <art- or the <art-L0 legal re<re0entative0 to
an0?er to the merit0 o. the original action. 8hen" ho?ever" a <art- ha0 >een <er0onall- 0erved ?ith 0ummon0 and
com<laint" either in the State o. Nevada or in another Auri0diction" the <art- mu0t maEe a<<lication to >e relieved .rom a
de.ault" a Audgment" an order" or other <roceeding taEen again0t the <art-" or .or <ermi00ion to .ile an an0?er" in
accordance ?ith the <rovi0ion0 o. 0u>divi0ion B>; o. thi0 rule.
3Ea-" 0o" reall-" -ou gu-0 do thi0 .or a living" right...-ou 0erve <eo<le thing0....and 0ign ,..idavit0 under <enalt- o.
<erAur- and 0tu.." and -ou are telling me -ou >elieve F<er0onall- 0ervedF can included 0ituation0 ?here the <er0on ?a0 not
thereH 3Ea-.....7ou do Eno? that" liEe" a Summon0 and Com<laint need to >e F<er0onall- 0ervedF in the 0en0e that" 0a-
=achem" ?ould need to 0ee that <er0on and 0erve it on them B1 donCt thinE the- have to taEe the <a<er" the- donCt need to
agree to acce<t 0ervice" >ut =achem doe0 need to 0ee that <er0on" in <er0on" <er0onall- ?hen he i0 0?earing under
<enalt- o. <erAur- that he F<er0onall- 0ervedF 0ome>od-. 50uall- F<er0onall- 0ervedF i0 onl- done in the ca0e o. the .ir0t
thing .iled Bunle00 there i0 an 1(/; in a ca0e" the Summon0 and Com<laint. &herea.ter" t-<icall-" <eo<le Au0t e..ect
F0u>0tituted 0erviceF >ecau0e it0 chea<er" le00 o. a ha00le" and F<er0onal 0erviceF i0 onl- re@uired .or 0erving the <leading0
that 0tart a ca0e" the Summon0 and Com<laint. 8o?....3Ea-" 0o thi0 i0 m- ?hole <oint" the0e 0tate 0<on0ored locEout0
under color o. 0tate la? 0hould not >e >eing done 0o .a0t" unle00 -ou gu-0 F<er0onall- 0erveF the tenant" 1 .eel the la? i0
@uite clear" -ou have to e..ect F0u>0tituted 0erviceF ?hich" under N!C/ *Ba; and N!C/ *Be; and N!C/ %B>;B2; Band
N!C/" not 4C!C/ i0 a<<lica>le to eviction matter0 according to N!S 11$,; the tenant cannot >e deemed to have
received or con0tructivel- received the 3rder until the 3 da-0 .or mailing ha0 <a00ed.
/er0onal 0ervice >- <roce00 0erver
' 7 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
/er0onal 0ervice i0 0ervice o. <roce00 directl- to the Bor a; <art- named on the 0ummon0" com<laint or <etition. 1n mo0t
la?0uit0 in the 5nited State0" <er0onal 0ervice i0 re@uired to <rove 0ervice. =o0t 0tate0 allo? 0u>0tituted 0ervice in almo0t
all la?0uit0 unle00 -ou are 0erving a cor<oration" 66C" 66/" or other >u0ine00 entit-9 in tho0e ca0e0" <er0onal 0ervice mu0t
>e achieved >- 0erving Bin hand; the document0 to the F!egi0tered ,gentF o. a >u0ine00 entit-. Some 0tate0 B(lorida; do
not re@uire that the document0 actuall- >e handed to the individual. 1n Cali.ornia and mo0t other 0tate0" the document0
mu0t >e vi0i>le to the <er0on >eing 0erved" i.e." not in a 0ealed envelo<e. 1. the individual re.u0e0 to acce<t 0ervice" .lee0"
clo0e0 the door" etc." and the individual ha0 >een <o0itivel- identi.ied a0 the <er0on to >e 0erved" document0 ma- >e
Fdro<F 0erved" and it i0 con0idered a valid 0ervice. /er0onal 0ervice o. <roce00 ha0 >een the hallmarE .or initialing
litigation .or nearl- 1++ -ear0" <rimaril- >ecau0e it guarantee0 actual notice to a de.endant o. a legal action again0t him or
her. /er0onal 0ervice o. <roce00 remain0 the mo0t relia>le and e..icaciou0 ?a- to >oth en0ure com<liance ?ith
con0titutionall- im<o0ed due <roce00 re@uirement0 o. notice to a de.endant and the o<<ortunit- to >e heard. P2QU &he
National 6a? !evie?: &he Continuing !elevance o. /er0onal Service o. /roce00
,nd even i. 0omething indicate0 Coughlin FEne?F a>out the 3rder" much liEe in the ca0e o. CoughlinC0 that ?a0
di0mi00ed ?here the 8a0hoe Count- Sheri..C0 didnCt manage to get the F<er0onal 0erviceF o. the Summon0 and Com<laint
done in time" or F0u..icientl-F" o<<o0ing coun0el in that matter could tell -ou that Factual noticeF i0 not a 0u>0titute .or
com<liance ?ith the 0ervice re@uirement0.
8hich i0 nice >ecau0e .olE0 liEe !ichard :. 2ill" E0@. have le00 o. an o<<ortunit- to game the 0-0tem and 0?oo< in ?ith
locEout then a00ert a >unch o. hooe- a>out N!S 11$,.4*+ Frea0ona>le 0torage" moving" and inventor-ing e)<en0e0F
0u>Aecting the tenantC0 <er0onal <ro<ert- to a lien. !ichard :. 2ill in0i0ted on thro?ing a?a- the la0t thing m- >eloved
grandmother gave me >e.ore 0he died 2 -ear0 ago in the to?n dum<. 2e and hi0 contractor lied a>out 0o man- thing0"
including the .act that the- u0ed m- o?n damn <l-?ood to >oard u< the >acE <orch o. the <ro<ert-" then 0u>mitted a >ill
to the court in an e)hi>it .or G1"+*+ .or F0ecuringF the <ro<ert- B?hich doe0nCt reall- a<<l- to N!S 11$,.4*+C0
' $ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Frea0ona>le 0torage moving and inventor-ing e)<en0e0F liEe it i0 re@uired to....urther" the charged me G9++ a month .or
0torage and 0ent me a >ill .or 0uch <rior to m- arre0t .or tre0<a00ing at the 121 !iver !ocE location"...?ell i. the- charged
me G9++ to have a home la? o..ice there" then ho? i0 it 0omeone could >e tre0<a00ing i. the- are >eing charged the .ull
rental value .or Fu0e and occu<anc- o. the <remi0e0FH (urther" even i. it ?a0 a 0torage 0ituation0" there are 0ection0 o.
N!S 11$, devoted to evicting 0omeone .rom a 0torage .acilit-" not arre0ting them .or tre0<a00" and certainl- not a
cu0todial arre0t ?here the !/D 3..icer Carter and Sargent 6o<eD admit the- never i00ued a ?arning to me or a0Eed me to
leave <rior to conducting a cu0todial arre0t B?hich re@uired G$++ o. >ail" greatT" and 3 da-0 in Aail" no le00;. &hi0 i0
e0<eciall- <oor .orm ?here 3..icer Carter admitted to me that he taEe0 >ri>e0 .rom !ichard 2ill. 2e-" i. 3..icer Carter
did not 0a- that to me" go ahead and 0ue me" m- man....1Cm ?aiting.....thatC0 ?hat 1 thought.
2e can 0a- he ?a0 AoEing all he ?ant0" >ut it ainCt no AoEing a00 0ituation to me ?hen -ou are arre0ting me and cau0ing a
google 0earch re0ult .or m- name to 0ho? an arre0t....thatC0 damaging the onl- thing 1 have o. monetar- value Bm-
<ro.e00ional re<utation and name;. 1t ainCt no 0tand u< hour ?hen -ou are <utting me in cu..0" >ro. ,nd 3..icer Carter and
Sargent 6o<eD re.u0ed to <ro<erl- @uer- 2ill a0 to ?hether he had 0ent me" <rior to the tre0<a00ing arre0t" a >ill .or the
F.ull rental valueF o. the <ro<ert-" a value that" at G9++" ?a0 the 0ame charge .or the .ull Fu0e and occu<anc-F o. the
<remi0e0. ,nd !ichard :. 21ll" E0@. ?a0 too >u0- chortling and .illing out the Criminal Com<laint to >other 0etting them
0traight" de0<ite m- cue0" 1 gue00.
No?" add to that mal.ea0ance the .act that 4udge S.erraDDa let Ca0e- BaEer" E0@. <re<are the 3rder" ?hich mean0
.aith.ull- <ut to ?riting ?hat the 4udge announced" not attem<t to 0teal G2"27% .or -our Cali.ornian Beverl- 2ill0 2igh
School graduate neuro0urgeon client >- 0li<<ing in 0omething the Audge never 0aid" ie" that the neuro0urgeon get0 to Eee<
the G2"27% that 4udge S.erraDDa order the tenant to <a- into the !eno 4u0tice Court a0 a Frent e0cro?F de<o0it re@uired to
<re0erve the right to litigate ha>ita>ilit- i00ue0. No?" nevermind the .act that 4udge S.erraDDa actuall- did not have the
Auri0diction to re@uire that Bthere i0 not 4C!6# 44 in !eno" thatC0 a #ega0 rule" and i. !eno ?ant0 a rule liEe that o. it0
' 9 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
o?n 4C!C/ $3 re@uire0 the !4C to li0h it and get it a<<roved >- the Nevada Su<reme Court .ir0t....<eriod.;. 3Ea-" 0o"
to taEe it a 0te< even .urther" BaEerC0 order goe0 on to 0a- F>ut the G2"27% ?onCt >e relea0ed to the neuro0urgeon -et"
Fin0tead that 0um 0hall 0erve a0 0ecurit- .or CoughlinC0 co0t on a<<eal" <ur0uant to Nevada 4C!C/ 73...F. But ?ait" doe0nCt
that mean Coughlin then get0 a Sta- o. Eviction during the <endenc- o. the ,<<ealH 10ntC that ?a0 a 0ecurit- that large
mu0t >e .orH Becau0e the F,<<eal BondF i0 0et >- 0tatute at onl- a mere G2%+....0o holding on to 1+ time0 that much o.
CoughlinC0 ca0h mu0t have >een .or the FSu<er0edea0 BondF mentioned a -ielding one a Sta- o. Eviction in N!S 4+.3$+
and 4+.3$%.
1 Eno?" 1 Eno?" it0 con.u0ing >ecau0e actuall- tho0e 0ection0 .orce the landlord" hi0 attorne-0 and the !4C to choo0e
>et?een vie?ing Coughlin a0 a re0idential tenant ?ho0e rent i0 le00 than G1"+++" and ?hom there.ore i0 onl- re@uired to
<o0t a mea0l- 0u<er0edea0 >ond o. G2%+ Band remem>er" a 0u<er0edea0 >ond e@ual0 a 0ta- o. eviction e@ual0 not
tre0<a00ing; or the the other choice i0 to vie? Coughlin a0 a commercial tenant" ?hich ?ould allo? charging a higher
0u<er0edea0 >ond Be)ce<t .or that <e0E- <art a>out hi0 rent >eing under the G1"+++ re@uired >- the 0tatute to do 0o" hi0
rent >eing onl- G9++;" e)ce<t" darn it" old !ichard :. 2ill" E0@. and Ca0e- BaEer" E0@. elected to <ur0ue thi0 0ummar-
eviction <roceeding under a No Cau0e Eviction Notice" ?hich i0 not allo?ed again0t a commercial tenant Bie" -ou canCt
evict a commercial tenant u0ing the 0ummar- eviction <rocedure0 0et .orth in N!S 4+.2%3 unle00 -ou alllege non <a-ment
o. rent and 0erve a 3+ Da- Non /a-ment o. !ent Notice &o Vuit" ?hich the- didnCt >ecau0e the- Fare Au0t taEing the <ath
o. lea0t re0i0tance here" 7our 2onor Bin0ert their 0mug chucEling and o>no)iou0N<retentiou0 Fcan -ou >elieve thi0 gu-HF
laughter and head 0haEing...;.
N!S 4+.3$+ /rovi0ion0 governing a<<eal0. Either <art- ma-" ?ithin 1+ da-0" a<<eal .rom the Audgment rendered. But an
a<<eal >- the de.endant 0hall not 0ta- the e)ecution o. the Audgment" unle00" ?ithin the 1+ da-0" the de.endant 0hall
e)ecute and .ile ?ith the court or Au0tice the de.endantL0 undertaEing to the <lainti.." ?ith t?o or more 0uretie0" in an
amount to >e .i)ed >- the court or Au0tice" >ut ?hich 0hall not >e le00 than t?ice the amount o. the Audgment and co0t0" to
the e..ect that" i. the Audgment a<<ealed .rom >e a..irmed or the a<<eal >e di0mi00ed" the a<<ellant ?ill <a- the Audgment
and the co0t o. a<<eal" the value o. the u0e and occu<ation o. the <ro<ert-" and damage0 Au0tl- accruing to the <lainti..
' 1+ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
during the <endenc- o. the a<<eal. 5<on taEing the a<<eal and .iling the undertaEing" all .urther <roceeding0 in the ca0e
0hall >e 0ta-ed.
So" ?h- on earth i0 the Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice 0till tr-ing to tr- Coughlin on the tre0<a00 charge .or ?hich he endured a
cu0todial arre0t and .or ?hich old !ichard 2ill i0 0till .iling =otionC0 to Sho? Cau0e on in the a<<eal o. the 0ummar-
eviction matter in C#11'+3*2$H 8h-" oh ?h-H Doe0 the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice have 0ome 0ort o. ve0ted intere0t in
Eee<ing Coughlin do?n" >u0-" >e0otted" encum>ered" or other?i0eH 1t" ?h-" it couldnCt >e >ecau0e Coughlin ha0 a reall-
good ?rong.ul arre0t cau0e o. action again0t the !eno /olice De<artment" could itH htt<:NN???.-outu>e.comN?atchH
vR%/!7@431%>+
,nd" ?ell" -eah the 8a0hoe Count- Sheri..C0 3..ice didnCt @uite get tho0e Summon0 and Com<laint0 0erved in that one
ca0e Coughlin ?a0 0uing hi0 .ormer em<lo-er in" the one ?here Coughlin ?a0 granted an 3rder to /roceed 1n (orma
/au<eri0" ?hich re@uired the 8a0hoe Count- Sheri..C0 3..ice to 0erve the Summon0 and Com<laint0....But ?hat doe0 that
have to to ?ith the * da-0 Coughlin 0<ent in Aail on the arre0t 0ho?n in the -outu>e video a>oveH 1t0 not liEe the 8a0hoe
Count- Aailed videota<ed a 0cene ?here the- ?ere .orcing Coughlin to get naEed and <ut on a green dre00. 8hatC0 thatH 1t
i0H &he- did do thatH !eall-H No...8hatH &he- al0o .orced him to 0imulate oral and anal 0e) ?ith de<utie0" in the gui0e o.
0ome ridiculou0 F<rocedureF nece00ar- to in0ure De<ut- 0a.et-H 3h" ?o?. ,nd the- retaliated again0t him .or .ailing to
an0?er their religiou0 <re.erence interrogation @ue0tion0 >- <lacing him in an ic- cold cell .or hour0 at a time" re.u0ing
him medical care de0<ite hi0 <laintive crie0 .or hel<" ?hile ?earing a thin t'0hirtH 8o?. &he- didnCt Aam a ta0er needle in
hi0 0<ine .or e)tended <eriod0 o. time" though" did the-H 7our EiddingT 8hat0 ne)t" -our going tell me Sargent Sig.ree o.
the !eno /D ordered a cu0todial arre0t on Coughlin .or FAa-?alEingF ?hile Coughlin ?a0 <eace.ull- .ilming" .rom a
lic 0<ot" !ichard :. 2illC0 .raudulent contractor /hil 2o?ard de0tro-ing and taEing to the to?n dum< item0 o.
enormou0 0entimental value to Coughlin that he ?a0 <revented .rom retrieving .rom the <ro<ert- during the 0cant time he
?a0 allo?ed to Ba.ter he <aid G4$+ ?orth o. a lien .or ?hat he Ene? not" >ecau0e" de0<ite" olC Contractor /hilC0 .raudulent
G1"+*+ >ill .or F0ecuringF the >acE <orch B?ith 0cre?0 .acing the out0ide" ine)<lica>l-" and a ?indo? unit aNc le.t in the
?indo? .acing the 0ide?alE near the 6aEemill 6odge" 0ecured >- nothing >ut duct ta<e
1t i0 Eind o. a com>o neon 0ign that 0a-0 FBurglariDe thi0 /lace" Ever->od-TF;" CoughlinC0 .ormer home la? o..ice ?a0
>urglariDed on Decem>er 12" 2+11 ?hile !ichard :. 2ill ?a0 holding it0 content0 Bincluding" tacEil-" CoughlinC0 clientC0
.ile0" liEe the one0 .or the .oreclo0ure de.en0e action0" etc.;" a00erting hi0 FlienF. , lien .or F0torageF ?here the charge .or
0torage" G9++" ?a0 the 0ame a0 the charge .or F.ull u0e and occu<an-F ?a0. 2o?ever" that G9++ a month .or F0torageF al0o
' 11 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
included another G1"+*+ charge .or F0ecuringF Band that >ill actuall- li0ted F.i)ing a leaE in the >a0ement...neither o.
?hich 0eem to have much to do ?ith the Frea0ona>le 0torage" moving" and inventor-ingF e)<en0e0 0uch a lien i0 <rovided
.or under N!S 11$,.4*+....;. 4eeD" -our <ro>a>l- going to tell me Sargent Sig.ree ordered another cu0todial arre0t on
Coughlin Au0t t?o da-0 a.ter the Aa-?alEing arre0t" .or the 0ame .act <attern that =a0ter Edmond0on granted CoughlinC0
a<<lication0 .or /rotection0 3rder0 again0t >a0ed u<on the >atter- and a00ault0 that hi0 .ormer hou0emate0 committed.
Becau0e" Sargent Sig.ree thinE0 it0 Fmi0u0e o. 911F .or Coughlin to call ?hen he return0 home at night and hi0 dog ha0
m-0teriou0l- di0a<<eared" and hi0 hou0emate0 maEe menacing commentar- a>out it. Surel-" Coughlin" a .ormer dome0tic
violence attorne- ?ould have nothing hel<.ul to add to Sargnet Sig.reeC0 e)<ert o<inion that Fanimal a>u0e i0 not
dome0tic violenceF Btell that to N!S 33.+1+" Sarge; and that it0" rather" Fa matter .or animal controlF and that Sargent
Sig.ree ?a0 Ftr-ing to hel<F Coughlin >- arre0ting him" again" and nece00itating the G1"%++ >ail a00ociated ?ith the gro00
mi0demeanor charge" F=i0u0e o. 911F >ecau0e" a0 Sargent Sig.ree told Coughlin F-ou Eee< <utting -our0el. in 0ituation0
?here -ou are victimiDedF 0o it ?a0 nece00ar- to arre0t Coughlin in that regard.
But he-" at lea0t N# Energ- ha0nCt re.u0ed to let Coughlin get an- electrical 0ervice .or the <a0t ?eeE 0ince tho0e
?ith the /rotection 3rder0 again0t them cancelled the 0ervice and N# Energ- 0hut it o.." ?ithout <roviding an- notice to
Coughlin" right. Nevermind. But...>ut 0urel- ?hen N# Energ- 0hut o. the <o?er to CoughlinC0 home la? o..ice on
3cto>er 4th" 2+11" Au0t hour0 <rior to the >ad .aith Fin0<ectionF ?ith videogra<her o. CoughlinC 0 home la? o..ice that
Ca0e- BaEer" E0@. thought 0o ver- nece00ar- one da- >e.ore CoughlinC0 &enant ,n0?er ?a0 due...0urel- N# Energ- did
not leave the >acE gate to CoughlinC0 home la? o..ice o<en and 0<eed o.." CoughlinC0 >eloved mountain >iEe 0uddenl-
mi00ing Bthe one the <arent0 o. hi0 girl.riend o. % -ear0 gave him;H 8ell" N# Energ- i0 <ro>a>l- not retaliating again0t
Coughlin .or com<laining a>out that >- re.u0ing him electric 0ervice .or the <a0t 0even da-0" -ou ?ould have to a00ume....
N!S 4+.3$% Sta- o. e)ecution u<on a<<eal9 dut- o. tenant ?ho retain0 <o00e00ion o. <remi0e0 to <a- rent during 0ta-.
5<on an a<<eal .rom an order entered <ur0uant to N!S 4+.2%3:
1.E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided in thi0 0u>0ection" a 0ta- o. e)ecution ma- >e o>tained >- .iling ?ith the trial
court a >ond in the amount o. G2%+ to cover the e)<ected co0t0 on a<<eal. , 0uret- u<on the >ond 0u>mit0 to the
Auri0diction o. the a<<ellate court and irrevoca>l- a<<oint0 the clerE o. that court a0 the 0uret-L0 agent u<on ?hom <a<er0
a..ecting the 0uret-L0 lia>ilit- u<on the >ond ma- >e 0erved. 6ia>ilit- o. a 0uret- ma- >e en.orced" or the >ond ma- >e
relea0ed" on motion in the a<<ellate court ?ithout inde<endent action. , tenant o. commercial <ro<ert- ma- o>tain a 0ta-
' 12 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
o. e)ecution onl- u<on the i00uance o. a 0ta- <ur0uant to !ule $ o. the Nevada !ule0 o. ,<<ellate /rocedure and the
<o0ting o. a 0u<er0edea0 >ond in the amount o. 1++ <ercent o. the un<aid rent claim o. the landlord.
2. , tenant ?ho retain0 <o00e00ion o. the <remi0e0 that are the 0u>Aect o. the a<<eal during the <endenc- o. the a<<eal
0hall <a- to the landlord rent in the amount <rovided in the underl-ing contract >et?een the tenant and the landlord a0 it
>ecome0 due. 1. the tenant .ail0 to <a- 0uch rent" the landlord ma- initiate ne? <roceeding0 .or a 0ummar- eviction >-
0erving the tenant ?ith a ne? notice <ur0uant to N!S 4+.2%3.
N!S 4+.39+ ,<<ellate court not to di0mi00 or @ua0h <roceeding0 .or ?ant o. .orm. 1n all ca0e0 o. a<<eal under N!S
4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" the a<<ellate court 0hall not di0mi00 or @ua0h the <roceeding0 .or ?ant o. .orm" <rovided the
<roceeding0 have >een conducted 0u>0tantiall- according to the <rovi0ion0 o. N!S 4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive9 and
amendment0 to the com<laint" an0?er or 0ummon0" in matter0 o. .orm onl-" ma- >e allo?ed >- the court at an- time
>e.ore .inal Audgment u<on 0uch term0 a0 ma- >e Au0t9 and all matter0 o. e)cu0e" Au0ti.ication or avoidance o. the
allegation0 in the com<laint ma- >e given in evidence under the an0?er.
N!S 4+.4++ !ule0 o. <ractice. &he <rovi0ion0 o. N!S" Nevada !ule0 o. Civil /rocedure and Nevada !ule0 o. ,<<ellate
/rocedure relative to civil action0" a<<eal0 and ne? trial0" 0o .ar a0 the- are not incon0i0tent ?ith the <rovi0ion0 o. N!S
4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" a<<l- to the <roceeding0 mentioned in tho0e 0ection0.
But" >acE to the Sheri..C0 3..ice. ,nd" 1 am not reall- >u-ing the idea that -ou gu-0 donCt Eno? N!C/ 4 through * liEe
the >acE o. -our hand" >ut....hell" ma->e -ou donCt. But" clearl- the language in N!S 4+ a>out ho? the Sheri.. ma-
Fremove tenant .rom the <ro<ert- ?ithin 24 hour0 o. recei<t o. the 3rderF do not a<<l- ?here the &enant .iled a &enantC0
,n0?er and 0ho?ed u< to the 2earing and litigated the matter. E0<eciall- ?here" a0 here the lea0e had not terminated" >-
it0 term0" >ut ?a0 rather rene?ed. &hi0 i0 <articularl- true ?here N!S 11$, <revent0 0o terminating a holdover tenantC0
lea0e .or a retaliator- or di0criminator- <ur<o0e.
N!C/ 4: FBd; Summon0: /er0onal Service. &he 0ummon0 and com<laint 0hall >e 0erved together. &he <lainti..
0hall .urni0h the <er0on maEing 0ervice ?ith 0uch co<ie0 a0 are nece00ar-. Service 0hall >e made >- delivering a co<- o.
the 0umon0 attached to a co<- o. the com<laint a0 .ollo?0:...B*; Service 5<on 1ndividual0. 1n all other ca0e0 to the
de.endant <er0onall-" or >- leaving co<ie0 thereo. at the de.endantL0 d?elling hou0e or u0ual <lace o. a>ode ?ith 0ome
<er0on o. 0uita>le age and di0cretion then re0iding therein" or >- delivering a co<- o. the 0ummon0 and com<laint to an
agent authoriDed >- a<<ointment or >- la? to receive 0ervice o. <roce00. P,0 amended9 e..ective 4anuar- 1" 2++%.Q Be;
Same: 3ther Service. B1; Service >- /u>lication. Bi; :eneral. 1n addition to method0 o. <er0onal 0ervice" ?hen the <er0on
' 13 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
on ?hom 0ervice i0 to >e made re0ide0 out o. the 0tate" or ha0 de<arted .rom the 0tate" or cannot" a.ter due diligence" >e
.ound ?ithin the 0tate" or >- concealment 0eeE0 to avoid the 0ervice o. 0ummon0" and the .act 0hall a<<ear" >- a..idavit" to
the 0ati0.action o. the court or Audge thereo." and it 0hall a<<ear" either >- a..idavit or >- a veri.ied com<laint on .ile" that
a cau0e o. action e)i0t0 again0t the de.endant in re0<ect to ?hom the 0ervice i0 to >e made" and that the de.endant i0 a
nece00ar- or <ro<er <art- to the action" 0uch court or Audge ma- grant an order that the 0ervice >e made >- the lication
o. 0ummon0. /rovided" ?hen 0aid a..idavit i0 >a0ed on the .act that the <art- on ?hom 0ervice i0 to >e made re0ide0 out o.
the 0tate" and the <re0ent addre00 o. the <art- i0 unEno?n" it 0hall >e a 0u..icient 0ho?ing o. 0uch .act i. the a..iant 0hall
0tate generall- in 0uch a..idavit that at a <reviou0 time 0uch <er0on re0ided out o. thi0 0tate in a certain <lace Bnaming the
<lace and 0tating the late0t date Eno?n to a..iant ?hen 0uch <art- 0o re0ided there;9 that 0uch <lace i0 the la0t <lace in
?hich 0uch <art- re0ided to the Eno?ledge o. a..iant9 that 0uch <art- no longer re0ide0 at 0uch <lace9 that a..iant doe0 not
Eno? the <re0ent <lace o. re0idence o. 0uch <art- or ?here 0uch <art- can >e .ound9 and that a..iant doe0 not Eno? and
ha0 never >een in.ormed and ha0 no rea0on to >elieve that 0uch <art- no? re0ide0 in thi0 0tate9 and" in 0uch ca0e" it 0hall
>e <re0umed that 0uch <art- 0till re0ide0 and remain0 out o. the 0tate" and 0uch a..idavit 0hall >e deemed to >e a 0u..icient
0ho?ing o. due diligence to .ind the de.endant. &hi0 rule 0hall a<<l- to all manner o. civil action0" including tho0e .or
divorceF
Su>Aect: !E: 8CS3 De<ut- =achemC0 F<er0onall- 0ervedF ,..idavit o. 11N1N2+11
Date: &ue" 7 (e> 2+12 11:4+:39 '+$++
(rom: 6StuchellW?a0hoecount-.u0
&o: DachcoughlinWhotmail.com
CC: mEandara0Wda.?a0hoecount-.u0
=r. Coughlin"
3ur record0 indicate that the eviction conducted on that da- ?a0 <er0onall- 0erved >- De<ut- =achen >- <o0ting a co<-
o. the 3rder to the re0idence. &he re0idence ?a0 unoccu<ied at the time.
6iD Stuchell" Su<ervi0or
8CS3 Civil Section
(rom: Zach Coughlin Pmailto:DachcoughlinWhotmail.comQ
Sent: =onda-" (e>ruar- +*" 2+12 2:%$ ,=
' 14 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
&o: Stuchell" 6iD9 Xandara0" =ar-9 nvreno<dWco<logic.com9 Silva" !o)anna9 EadlicAWreno.gov9
.ourthe0tateWgmail.com9 Aame0andre>ole0Wm0n.com
Su>Aect: 8CS3 De<ut- =achemC0 F<er0onall- 0ervedF ,..idavit o. 11N1N2+11
Dear 1, Su<ervi0or Stuchell and DD, Xandara0"
1 realiDe -ou ?ill liEel- not read all o. thi0. &he main thing i0 1 am re0<ect.ull- re@ue0ting that -ou con.irm ?ith De<ut-
=achem that he did" in .act" F<er0onall- 0erveF the Summar- Eviction 3rder on me at 121 !iver !ocE St." !eno $9%+1 on
Novem>er 1" 2+11 at 4:3+ <m" in connection ?ith <er.orming the locEout. 1t i0 m- <o0ition that 1 ?a0 not F<er0onall-
0ervedF and 1 am tr-ing to .igure out ?hether De<ut- =achem i0 l-ing or ?hether the <hra0e F<er0onall- 0ervedF mean0
0omething other than ?hat 1 >elieve it mean0" etc." etc. 1 a<<reciate -our attention to thi0.
1 am ?riting to in@uire a>out and com<lain ?ith regard to an ,..idavit o. Service .iled >- or .or 8CS3 De<ut- =achem
?ith re0<ect to the 0ervice o. a 3rder :ranting Summar- Eviction again0t me Bin m- la? o..ice ?here non'<a-ment o.
rent ?a0 not alleged" no le00 in violation o. N!S 4+.2%3 and ?here a G2"27% rent e0cro? de<o0it ?a0 .oi0ted u<on me in
violation o. 4+.2%3B*;" e0<eciall- ?here a 0ta- o. eviction ?a0 not granted even ?hile the !4C held on to mo0t all m-
mone-...;.
=- i00ue ?ith the 8CS3 i0 that =achemC0 ,..idavit o. Service indicate0 that he F<er0onall- 0ervedF me" ?hich Eind o.
remind0 me o. all that ro>o'0igning and =E!S .raud 1 come acro00 in m- da- Ao> Band do -ou ?onder ho? man-
attorne-0 in the .oreclo0ure de.en0e game 1 am in con0tant contact ?ith ?ho are ?atching and ?itne00 the <otential !1C3
violation0 thi0 ?riting mention0H;" ?hich include0 >eing a .oreclo0ure de.en0e attorne-. So ?hich i0 itH Did =achem
F<er0onall- 0erveF me the Summar- Eviction 3rderH !ichard :. 2ill" E0@. liEe0 to argue that 1 ?a0 F0ervedF in
com<liance ?ith all time related rule0 >ecau0e it ?a0 done in the Fu0ual cu0tom and <ractice o. the 8CS3. 8hat" e)actl-"
i0 the Fu0ual cu0tom and <ractice o. the 8CS3H 1 hear a lot a>out thi0 F?ithin 24 hour0F 0tu... So" 1 go hunting .or 0ome
>lacE letter la? to 0u<<ort ?hat tho0e at the !4C and in the cluele00 communit- at large B?hich o.ten include0 Nevada
6egal Service0 and 8a0hoe 6egal Service0" the <eo<le -ou gu-0 had 0uch trou>le actuall- 0erving in the la?0uit0 1 .iled"
?hich ma- have actuall- hel<ed im<roved legal 0ervice0 in thi0 communit-" i. the- ?ere not di0mi00ed due to
in0u..icienc- o. 0ervice o. <roce00" even ?here the 1(/ re@uired the 8CS3 to 0erved the de.endant0....;. ,n-?a-" >acE to
the F?ithin 24 hour0F <hra0eolog-: F
' 1% '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
&hi0 ?hole >u0ine00 a>out I&he court ma- thereu<on i00ue an order directing the 0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to
remove the tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the order...J i0 ina<<lica>le to thi0 0ituation" ?here an 3rder :ranting
Summar- Eviction ?a0 0igned >- 3cto>er 27th" 2+11. &hat language i0 onl- .ound in 0ituation0 ina<<lica>le to the
current one. N!S 4+.2%3B3;B>;B2;" and N!S 4+.2%3B%;Ba; are the onl- 0ection0 o. N!S 4+ ?here thi0 I?ithin 24 hour0J
language occur0" and tho0e 0ituation0 onl- a<<l- ?here" in:
4+.2%3B3;B>;B2;: I 3. , notice 0erved <ur0uant to 0u>0ection 1 or 2 mu0t: ...B>; ,dvi0e the tenant: K. B2; &hat i. the court
determine0 that the tenant i0 guilt- o. an unla?.ul detainer" the court ma- i00ue a 0ummar- order .or removal o. the tenant
or an order <roviding .or the nonadmittance o. the tenant" directing the 0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to remove the
tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the orderJ
and"
4+.2%3B%;Ba;: I%. 5<on noncom<liance ?ith the notice: Ba; &he landlord or the landlordL0 agent ma- a<<l- >- a..idavit o.
com<laint .or eviction to the Au0tice court o. the to?n0hi< in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial
<remi0e0 are located or to the di0trict court o. the count- in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial
<remi0e0 are located" ?hichever ha0 Auri0diction over the matter. &he court ma- thereu<on i00ue an order directing the
0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to remove the tenant ?ithin 24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the order.J &he ?a- the0e 0ummar-
eviction <roceeding0 are >eing carried out in !eno 4u0tice Court <re0entl- 0hocE0 the con0cience and violate0 Nevada
la?. &here i0 not >a0i0 .or e..ectuating a locEout the ?a- 8CS3C0 De<ut- =achem did in thi0 ca0e. &he a>ove t?o
0ection0 containing the I?ithin 24 hour0 o. recei<tJ language are ina<<lica>le" a0 tho0e 0ituation0 do not invoEe the
<re0ent circum0tance0" ?here the &enant did .ile an ,..idavit and did conte0t thi0 matter to a degree not o.ten 0een. &o
re@uire NevadaC0 tenant0 to get u< and get out I?ithin 24 hour0J o. Irecei<t o. the orderJ B?hat doe0 that even meanH &he
u0e o. term0 liEe IrenditionJ" IrenderedJ" Inotice o. entr-J" I<ronouncedJ" i0 a>0ent here" and thi0 Irecei<t o. the orderJ
language i0 0omething rarel- .ound el0e?here in Nevada la?'0ee attached D=# 0tatutor- citation0" and in em<lo-ment
la? litigation0 ?here one mu0t .ile a Com<laint ?ithin 9+ da-0 o. Irecei<tJ o. a !ight &o Sue 6etter" a 0ituation ?hich
.ollo?0 N!C/ %B>;" and N!C/ *Be; in im<uting recei<t o. 0uch a letter" ?hen actual recei<t i0 not 0ho?n" >- a<<l-ing a
Icon0tructive noticeJ 0tandard that relie0 u<on the da-0 .or mailing e)ten0ion o. time .or item0 0erved in the mailing"
etc.;. 1n ,>raham v. 8ood0 2ole 3ceanogra<hic 1n0titute" %%3 (.3d 114 B10t Cir. 2++9;" the record did not re.lect ?hen
the <lainti.. received hi0 right'to'0ue letter. &he letter ?a0 i00ued on Novem>er 24" 2++*. &he court calculated that the 9+'
da- <eriod commenced on Novem>er 3+" 2++*" >a0ed on three da-0 .or mailing a.ter e)cluding Saturda-0 and Sunda-0.
' 1* '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1n order to >ring a claim under either &itle #11 or the ,D," a <lainti.. mu0t e)hau0t admini0trative remedie0 and 0ue
?ithin 9+ da-0 o. recei<t o. a right to 0ue letter. See 42 5.S.C. M 2+++e'%B.;B1;. See Bald?in Count- 8elcome Center v.
Bro?n" 4** 5.S. 147" 14$ n.1" 1+4 S.Ct. 1723" $+ 6.Ed.2d 19* B19$4;Bgranting <lainti.. an additional three da-0 .or
mailing <ur0uant to !ule *;.
(urther" de0<ite ?hat the inaccurate handout0 o. Nevada 6egal Service0 ma- 0a- a>out thi0 I24 hour0J and the
a<<lica>ilit- o. the 4C!C/ to ca0e0 liEe the0e" N!S 4+.4++ !ule0 o. <ractice" hold0 that :J&he <rovi0ion0 o. N!S" Nevada
!ule0 o. Civil /rocedure and Nevada !ule0 o. ,<<ellate /rocedure relative to civil action0" a<<eal0 and ne? trial0" 0o .ar
a0 the- are not incon0i0tent ?ith the <rovi0ion0 o. N!S 4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" a<<l- to the <roceeding0 mentioned
in tho0e 0ection0. ,0 0uch N!C/ *Ba;"Be; a<<lie0 to the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction that 8CS3 De<ut- =achem alleged"
under <enalt- o. <erAur-" that he F<er0onall- 0ervedF u<on me on Novem>er 1" 2+11. &hat i0 a lie >- =r. =achem" unle00
F<er0onall- 0ervedF i0 de.ined in a rather im<er0onal ?a- and or =achem and 1 have totall- di..erent under0tanding o. the
de.inition o. F<er0onall- 0ervedF" ?hich ma- >e the ca0e. 3r" <erha<0 the Sheri..C0 3..ice i0 >u0- and doe0nCt ?ant to ?ait
around to F<er0onall- 0erveF ever- tenant it ?i0he0 to evict. (ine" then Au0t u0e the Fmail it and allo? three da-0F rule in
N!C/ *Be;...the landlordC0 might not liEe it" >ut the- can u0e that .ru0tration a0 an incentive not to Aum< to litigating ever-
di0agreement a>out ha>ita>ilit- that a tenant >ring0 to them. 7ou ma- not realiDe ho? ridiculou0 0ome landlordC0 get. 1n
m- ca0e" 1 o..ered to .i) >a0ic thing0 that clearl- im<licated the ha>ita>ilit- rule0 in N!S 11$,.29+ and the Cali.ornian
neuro0urgeon" Beverl- 2ill 2igh School graduate landlord >alEed and com<lained then hired and attorne- .our da-0 into
a di0<ute.....at ?hich <oint the rule0 again0t contacting re<re0ented <artie0 <revented much in the ?a- o. real 0ettlement
di0cu00ion" <articularl- ?here o<<o0ing coun0el ha0 continuou0l- demon0trated a com<lete indi..erence to <ur0uing
0ettlement B?h- ?ould he at the rate0 he >ill0 hour0 atH;. 1 Au0t donCt thinE the Sheri..C0 3..ice need0 to 0ull- it0 image or
damage the citiDen tenant0 o. 8a0hoe Count- in the name o. <lea0ing <eo<le liEe Dr. =att =erli00 or !ichard :. 2ill"
E0@.
1 ,= !EV5ES&1N:" 1N 8!1&1N:" &2,& B3&2 3( 735! 3((1CES 1N#ES&1:,&E &21S ,ND
/!3#1DE , S83!N ,((1D,#1& (!3= =!. =,C2E= &2,& ,D=1&S &2,& 1 8,S N3& /E!S3N,667
/!ESEN& 82EN 2E SE!#ED &2E 3!DE! (3! S5==,!7 E#1C&13N 1N !4C !E#2+11'++17+$ 3N 11N1N12
,& 4:3+ /= B,CC3!D1N: &3 21S ,((1D,#1& 3( SE!#1CE;. 735 NE#E! XN38" 1 =1:2& 2,#E
1!!E(5&,B6E /!33( &2,& 1 8,S S3=E82E!E E6SE ,& &2,& &1=E" S3" BE C,!E(56. &here 0im<l- i0
' 17 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
not an-thing 0<eci.ic in Nevada la? addre00ing ho? 0uch Summar- Eviction 3rder0 are to >e 0erved and carried out. &he
0ection0 dealing ?ith
N!S 4+.2%3 5nla?.ul detainer: Su<<lemental remed- o. 0ummar- eviction and e)clu0ion o. tenant .or de.ault in
<a-ment o. rent....
*. 5<on the .iling >- the tenant o. the a..idavit <ermitted in 0u>0ection 3" regardle00 o. the in.ormation contained in the
a..idavit" and the .iling >- the landlord o. the a..idavit <ermitted >- 0u>0ection %" the Au0tice court or the di0trict court
0hall hold a hearing" a.ter 0ervice o. notice o. the hearing u<on the <artie0" to determine the truth.ulne00 and 0u..icienc- o.
an- a..idavit or notice <rovided .or in thi0 0ection. 1. the court determine0 that there i0 no legal de.en0e a0 to the alleged
unla?.ul detainer and the tenant i0 guilt- o. an unla?.ul detainer" the court ma- i00ue a 0ummar- order .or removal o. the
tenant or an order <roviding .or the nonadmittance o. the tenant....
7. &he tenant ma-" u<on <a-ment o. the a<<ro<riate .ee0 relating to the .iling and 0ervice o. a motion" .ile a motion ?ith
the court" on a .orm <rovided >- the clerE o. the court" to di0<ute the amount o. the co0t0" i. an-" claimed >- the landlord
<ur0uant to N!S 11$,.4*+ or 11$C.23+ .or the inventor-" moving and 0torage o. <er0onal <ro<ert- le.t on the <remi0e0.
&he motion mu0t >e .iled ?ithin 2+ da-0 a.ter the 0ummar- order .or removal o. the tenant or the a>andonment o. the
<remi0e0 >- the tenant" or ?ithin 2+ da-0 a.ter:
Ba; &he tenant ha0 vacated or >een removed .rom the <remi0e09 and
B>; , co<- o. tho0e charge0 ha0 >een re@ue0ted >- or <rovided to the tenant"
Y ?hichever i0 later.
$. 5<on the .iling o. a motion <ur0uant to 0u>0ection 7" the court 0hall 0chedule a hearing on the motion. &he hearing
mu0t >e held ?ithin 1+ da-0 a.ter the .iling o. the motion. &he court 0hall a..i) the date o. the hearing to the motion and
order a co<- 0erved u<on the landlord >- the 0heri.." con0ta>le or other <roce00 0erver. ,t the hearing" the court ma-:
Ba; Determine the co0t0" i. an-" claimed >- the landlord <ur0uant to N!S 11$,.4*+ or 11$C.23+ and an- accumulating
dail- co0t09 and
B>; 3rder the relea0e o. the tenantL0 <ro<ert- u<on the <a-ment o. the charge0 determined to >e due or i. no charge0 are
determined to >e due....F
1 al0o ?ant to Eno? ?h- N!S 4+. 2%3B$; ?a0 not .ollo?ed ?ith re0<ect to m- Novem>er 17th" 2+11 .iling o. a
=otion to Conte0t /er0onal /ro<ert- 6ien. 8h- didnCt the 8CS3 0erve notice" a0 re@uired >- N!S 4+.2%3B$; u<on the
landlordC0 attorne- !ichard 2illH 8h- didnCt 1 get a hearing ?ithin the 1+ da-0 called called .or >- that 0ection Bto get
' 1$ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
>acE m- clientC0 .ile0 no le00;" >ut rather" 1 had to ?ait a .ull 33 da-0 to get a hearing" and 0ervice o. notice o. the hearing
?a0 not e..ectuated" a0 re@uired >- N!S 4+.23%B$;" >- the 8CS3. 8h-H
/lea0e <rovide an indication" in ?riting" o. the name0 and ca0e num>er0 .or the la0t 2+ incidence0 ?hen the
8CS3 ha0 0erved notice o. a hearing 0et <ur0uant to N!S 4+.2%3B$;. 8hatC0 thatH &he 8CS3 ha0 NE#E! 0erved 0uch
noticeH 7et the 8CS3 i0 there ?ith >ell0 on Bor =achem i0; to lie in ,..idavit0 o. Service to locE out the citiDen tenant0
o. 8a0hoe Count- im<ermi00il>- earl- vi0 a vi0 N!C/ %B>;B2; and N!C/ *Be;H 8h- i0 thatH 10 it a con0<irac-H Doe0
mone- talEH 8hen 1 ?a0 arre0ted .or tre0<a00ing on Novem>er 12th" 2+11 >- !/D 3..icer Chri0 Carter and Sargent
6o<eD" Carter admitted to me that F!ichard 2ill <a-0 him a lot o. mone- and there.ore he arre0t0 ?hom !ichard 2ill 0a-0
to and doe0 ?hat !ichard 2ill 0a-0 to do....F Both Carter and Sargent 6o<eD re.u0ed to inve0tigate" de0<ite <rom<ting"
?hether !ichard 2ill ha0 0ent the tenantNarre0tee a >ill or demand letter in >ill .or the .ull rental value o. the <ro<ert-"
G9++ <er month" under 0ome inter<retation o. the Frea0ona>le 0torage" moving" and inventor-ing e)<en0e0F collecta>le >-
a landlord under a <er0onal <ro<ert- line 0et .orth in N!S 11$,.4*+ Bone could al0o inter<ret 0uch a >ill a0 2illC0
?ithdra?ing or eradicating the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction it0el." ?hich ?a0 not F<er0onall- 0ervedF >- the 8a0hoe
Count- Sheri.. Bde0<ite ?hat their ,..idavit o. Service 0a-0...1 ?a0nCt even there at the time the- changed the locE0...and
0o the Summar- Eviction 3rder ?a0 not <ro<erl- 0erved under N!C/ *" and de0<ite the !eno 4u0tice Court
im<ermi00i>l- converting G23++ o. m- mone- under a Frent e0cro?F 3rder it0 re@uired 1 com<l- ?ith in order to litigate
ha>ita>ilit- i00ue0 in a 0ummar- eviction <roceeding under N!S 4+.2%3" de0<ite N!S 4+.2%3B*;C0 e)<re00 dicate again0t
0uch an 3rder Bunle00" <ur0uant to 4C!C/ $3" a Au0tice court get0 0uch a rule" liEe 4u0tice Court !ule o. 6a0 #ega0
B4C!6#; !ule 44" li0hed and a<<roved >- the Nevada Su<reme Court" ?hich the !4C ha0 not" rather" the !4C a<<lie0
all the0e in0idiou0 0ecret Fhou0e rule0F BliEe .orcing tenant0 to deliver them0elve0 to the .iling o..ice to 0u>mit to <er0onal
0ervice notice o. a 0ummar- eviction hearing ?ithin" liEe" 12 hour0 o. the &enant .iling a &enantC0 ,n0?er or ,..idavit in
re0<on0e to an eviction Notice" rather than the 0ervice re@uirement0 o. 0uch notice .ollo?ing N!C/ * Bda-0 .or mailing"
etc." etc." in other ?ord0" in the !4C ever-thing i0 0<ed u< im<eri00il>- to hel< landlordC0 out" and the N#. S. Ct ruling in
:laDier and 6i<<i0 clearl- contem<late <er0onal lia>ilit- again0t the Court and or 4udge0 them0elve0 .or 0o doing;....,
Vui &am action or 0omething a la =au0ertC0 in Solano Count-" 1 >elieve" in Cali.ornia" ?ould >e ver- intere0ting...Still
havenCt heard an-thing .rom the !eno /D a>out the variou0 com<laint0 1 have .iled ?ith them in ?riting related to the
?rong.ul arre0t0" e)ce00ive .orce and other mi0conduct committed again0t me" though the- did arre0t me the other da- .or
calling 911incident to 0ome dome0tic violence .or ?hich 1 ?a0 granted to E)tended /rotection 3rder0 again0t m- .ormer
' 19 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
hou0emate0....old Sargent Sig.ree ordered that arre0t" a0 he did t?o da-0 <rior ?hen he ordered a cu0todial arre0t o. me .or
FAa-?alEingF.
(unn- thing" 1 never heard an-thing >acE .rom the !/D a>out com<laint0 liEe the .ollo?ing one:
I(rom:
Nv!eno/dWco<logic.com
Sent:
8ed 9N+7N11 1+:%1 /=
&o: DachcoughlinWhotmail.com
ZZZZD3 N3& !ES/3ND &3 &21S E'=,16ZZZZ
8eCre 0orr- the .ollo?ing <ro>lem ?a0 .ound during revie?
o. -our 0u>mitted re<ort &11++%9%*:
&21S 1S N3& &2E (3!5= (3! &21S &7/E 3( C3=/6,1N& 238E#E! &21S !E/3!& 8,S /!1N&ED ,ND
/,SSED 3N &3 &2E 3((1CE!CS S5/E!#1S3! ,ND 1& 8166 BE ,DD!ESSED.
&hanE -ou"
3..icer 83ZN1,X"
!eno /olice De<artmentJ
8hat i0 intere0ting there i0 that at lea0t 1 ?a0 <rovided the name o. an o..icer" a F8oDniaEF Bthough 1 have >een una>le to
con.irm the e)i0tence o.
0uch an !/D 3..icer... or ?hether F &21S 1S N3& &2E (3!5= (3! &21S &7/E 3( C3=/6,1N& 238E#E!
&21S !E/3!& 8,S /!1N&ED ,ND /,SSED 3N &3 &2E 3((1CE!CS S5/E!#1S3! ,ND 1& 8166 BE
,DD!ESSED.F
8hat i0 more 0trange i0 that 1 0u>mitted 0everal online <olice re<ort0 to the !eno /D Ba cou<le o. ?hich a00erted
com<laint0 again0t variou0 !eno /D o..icer0" or a0Eed ?h- !D/ 3..icer Carter" ?hom admitted taEing >ri>e0 .rom
!ichard :. 2ill" E0@. at the time o. m- cu0todial arre0t .or tre0<a00ing Bthe one ?here !ichard 2ill 0igned a Criminal
Com<laint .or tre0<a00" then 3..icer Carter and Sargent 6o<eD re.u0ed to .ollo? u< on m- im<loring them to a0E 2ill
?hether he ha0 recentl- 0ent me a >ill .or the F.ull rental valueF o. the <ro<ert-" the 0ame amount that had >een charged
.or the Fu0e and enAo-mentF o. the <remi0e0" G9++" in com<ari0ion to ?hat N!S 11$,.4*+ ma- deem Frea0ona>le
0torageF e)<en0e0 .or ?hich a lien i0 availa>le to a landlord" though N!S 11$,.%2+ ha0 outla?ed rent di0traint0 u<on
' 2+ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
tenantC0 <er0onal <ro<ert-....!egardle00" >et?een 4anuar- $ ' 12th" 2+12" and ?a0 arre0ted t?ice >- the !eno /D 0hortl-
a.ter 0u>mitting the0e ?ritten com<laint0 to the !eno /D.
,ctuall-" u<on >eing relea0ed .rom Aail on Novem>er 1%th" 2+11" incident to the cu0todial tre0<a00 arre0t" 1 ?ent
to !ichard 21llC0 o..ice to get m- ?allet and driverC0 licen0e. 2e re.u0ed to <rovide it to me until late Novem>er 22nd"
2+11. 2ill called the !eno /D on the 1%th Bor ma->e 1 did >ecau0e he ?a0 ?ithholding m- 0tate i00ued 1D" the one 1
?ould need to rent a room" drive m- car" and m- ?allet" ?hich i0 Eind o. u0e.ul in 0uch 0ituation0....;. ,n-?a-0" Sargent
&arter o. the !eno /D 0ho?ed u<" he ?ent in0ide 2illC0 o..ice ?ith 2ill .or @uite 0ome time and the re0ult ?a0 &arter
telling me to leave. 1 did" >ut ?hile driving do?n St. 6aurence to?ard0 S. #irginia B2illC0 o..ice i0 at *%2 (orre0t St.
$9%+3 and ?ould have re@uired turning do?n the ?rong ?a- o. a one ?a- 0treet" (orre0t" to go >acE to 2illC0 3..ice B0o
clearl- 1 ?a0 not headed to 2illC0 o..ice; Sargent &arter >egan tailing me" then he <ulled me over" then he gave me a
ticEet" in retaliation i. -ou a0E me .or re<orting !/D 3..icer Carter admitting that he taEe0 >ri>e0 .rom 2ill to Sargent
&arter minute0 earlier. 5h" ?ell" an-?a-0" another Sargent call0 me later that night" taEing the Fgood co<F role. But u<on
in.orming him o. ?hat !/D 3..icer Carter told me a>out 2ill <a-ing him mone- to arre0t <eo<le during the 11N12N11
tre0<a00ing arre0t" that Sargent immediatel- in.ormed me that" de0<ite thi0 >eing the .ir0t he heard o. that" he ?a0 0ure that
?a0 not ha<<ening....1 gue00 !/D 3..icer Carter i0 tr-ing to e)<lain a?a- hi0 comment0 a>out !ichard 2ill <a-ing him
mone- to arre0t <eo<le >- di0mi00ing them a0 0arca0m" a AoEe" 0aid in Ae0t" ?hatever....>ut 1 donCt 0ee ho? that 0ituation Ba
licen0e attorne- getting arre0ted .or a crime" a conviction .or ?hich ?ould re0ult in that attorne- >eing re@uired to re<ort
0aid conviction to the State Bar o. Nevada under SC! 111" etc." and <o00i>l- re0ulting in a 0u0<en0ion o. that attorne-C0
licen0e to <ractice la?" or ?or0e...; i0 all that Aocular o. a 0ituation. Com>ine that ?ith the too @uicE to di0mi00 m- re<ort0
o. >ri>er- >- !ichard 2ill to o..icer Carter to the !/D Sargent ?ho called me on 11N1%N11 regarding the retaliation >-
Sargent &arter that 1 com<lained o." and 1 donCt thinE it i0 all that unrea0ona>le .or an-one to taEe !/D 3..icer Carter at
hi0 ?ord regarding !ichard :. 2ill" E0@. <a-ing him mone- to arre0t ?hom 2ill 0a-0 to arre0t. ,dd to that Sargent
Sig.ree ordering m- arre0t .or Aa-?alEing B>- a trainee !/D 3..icer; on 4anuar- 12th" 2+11 Bcu0todial arre0t" >ail o. G1*+
em<tied m- >anE account out" or <rett- clo0e to it; ?hile 1 ?a0 <eace.ull- .ilming .rom a lic 0<ot !ichard :. 2ill"
E0@C0 contractor /hil 2o?ard" ?hom had 0u>mitted >ill0 in court0 record0 and .iling0 under the lien .or Frea0ona>le
0torage moving and inventor-ingF .ound in N!S 11$,.4*+" even ?here old /hil u0ed m- o?n <l-?ood at the <ro<ert- to
>oard u< the >acE <orch Bcuriou0l- leaving the 0cre?0 holding u< the <l-?ood e)<o0ed to e)terior o. the <ro<ert- ?here
an-one could ea0il- un0cre? them" and al0o leaving in a ?indo? unit ac 0ecured onl- >- ductta<e in a ?indo? .acing a
' 21 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0ide?alE >- the 6aEe=ill 6odge....?hich re0ulted in G$"+++ at lea0t o. m- <er0onal <ro<ert- >eing >urglariDed .rom m-
.ormer home la? o..ice on Decme>er 12th" 2+11 ?hile 2ill ?a0 a00erting a lien on all m- <er0onal <ro<ert- .ound therein
Band m- clientC0 .ile0" ?hich argua>l- are not even m- <ro<ert-" >ut rather" the clientC0 <ro<ert-;. 2ill ?ent on to <lace
?hat he >elieve0 to >e m- 0ocial 0ecurit- num>er in court record0" on <ur<o0e" de0<ite hi0 0igning an ,..irmation
<ur0uant to N!S 239B.+3+ that that ?a0 not the ca0e Battaching a t?o <age re<ort to the !/D a0 an E)hi>it;. &hen 2ill
and hi0 contractor /hil 2o?ard >oth committed <erAur- ?hen the 0igned Declaration0 atte0ting that 1 had clim>ed on the
contractor0 trucE or ever touched 2ill. 2ill lie0 con0tantl-" ?hether under <enalt- o. <erAur- or no?" 0o 1 donCt have time
to re>ut ever- little lie he maEe0 Bhe maEe0 me out to come0 acro00 a0 a 7o0emite Sam caricature o. a human >eing in hi0
.iling0 ?hen he de0cri>e0 me...;.
(urther" ?h- am 1 arre0ted .or tre0<a00ing and not tho0e .rom Nevada Court Service0 ?here the- ?ent >ehind
clo0ed gate the the >acE-ard o. m- home la? o..ice and >anged on ?indo? e)tremel- loudl- .or 4+ minute0 at a time 3
time0 a da-" one gu- ringing the door>ell" one gu- moving around all other 0ide0 o. the <ro<ert- >anging on the ?indo?0"
<eering in clo0ed >lind0" and a..ecting a <hon- Fcolor o. la?F tone" re0em>lance" and ver>al communication0"
mi0leadingl- announcing that the- ?ere FCourt Service0" come out no?TF" ?earing their <retend Sheri.. out.it0" >ig
e@ui<ment 0addled >elt0 Bincluding .irearm0" 1 >elieve" and radio0;" etc. "etc.
htt<:NN???.-outu>e.comN?atchHvRAV132@237D7
,dd to that that Nevada Court Service0 4e.. Chandler drive0 >- in hi0 =on0ter &rucE >aring hi0 <er0onaliDed FNCSF
licen0e <late ?hile 1 am in the !/D 0@uad car" handcu..ed" out0ide m- .ormer la? o..ice at 121 !iver !ocE" at the time o.
the 1N12N12 Aa-?alEing arre0t and the a<<earance0 are trou>ling. No?" add to that that 6e? &aitel" E0@. ?a0 m- court
a<<ointed lic de.ender in the !eno =unici<al Court in the tre0<a00 ca0e" and that 4udge :ardner had re.u0ed to
<rovide me the name0 o. <ro0<ective a<<ointed de.en0e coun0el B1 ?anted to run a con.lict0 checE; at m- arraignment
B?here =ar0hal =entDel >arEed at me in a threatening tone" u0ing menacing language;" ?hereu<on &aitel ?a0 a<<ointed
a0 m- de.en0e attorne- and .iled a notice o. a<<earance" and received m- con.idential .ile" <c 0heet" arre0t re<ort0" 00n"
etc....onl- it0 turn0 out that &aitel 0hare0 and o..ice and a rece<tioni0t ?ith Nevada Court Service0 and the- li0t him and
hi0 <icture on their ?e>0ite a0 Fa00ociated ?ithF their /roce00 Server cor<oration" de0<ite the <rohi>ition la?-er0 .ace
again0t .ee 0haring ?ith non'la?-er0. &hen" &aitel 0omeho? manage0 to get out o. de.ending m- ca0e ?ithout .iling a
=otion to 8ithdra? a0 Coun0el" de0<ite that >eing re@uired >- the !eno =unici<al Court !ule 3BB;:
' 22 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
!=C! !ule 3BB;: ,uthoriDation to !e<re0ent BB;: ,n attorne- de0iring to ?ithdra? .rom a ca0e 0hall .ile a
motion ?ith the court and 0erve the Cit- ,ttorne- ?ith the 0ame. &he court ma- rule on the motion or 0et a hearing.
But" <erha<0 mo0t trou>ling o. all i0 the im<lication that the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice" ?hich de.end0 action0
again0t the Cit- o. !eno /olice De<artment and it0 3..icer0" ha0 a ve0ted intere0t in di0crediting me in advance o. the
?rong.ul arre0t la?0uit that the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 o..ice Ene? ?a0 imminent at the time o. all o. the a>ove incident0"
relating to the .ollo?ing ,ugu0t 2+th" 2+11 ?rong.ul arre0t >- !/D 3..icerC0 Duralde and !o0a.
htt<:NN???.-outu>e.comN?atchHvR%/!7@431%>+ So" thatC0 ?hat attem<ting to coerce a 0u0<ectC0 con0ent to an
im<ermi00i>le 0earch 0ound0 liEeH ,dd to that that the tre0<a00ing ca0e i0 >e.ore 4udge :ardner" ?hom mo0t recentl- ?a0
em<lo-ed ?ith the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice.
,nd" -ou Eno? ?hat i0 .unn-H 3..icer Del #ecchio cu..ed me and <laced me in hi0 0@uad car la0t 0ummer a.ter
he terri.ied me and another gentleman ?ho had >ic-cle0. 2e veered acro00 the road and 0creeched hi0 0@uad car to a halt"
Aum<ed out" and did 0ome other 0tu.." then demanded m- name and 1D...and the la?-er in me didnCt liEe that that much"
and he didnCt liEe me not ?anting to give it to him. &hi0 occurred right in .ront o. m- home la? o..ice in the 0ummer o.
2+11. 2e cu..ed me and told me 1 ?a0 going to Aail .or 0omething a>out a light on the .ront o. m- >ic-cle Bthe one N#
Energ- liEel- 0tole ?hen the 0hut o.. m- <o?er" unnoticed" on 3cto>er 4" 2+11; de0<ite m- >iEe actuall- having 0uch a
light....>ut then Del #ecchioC0 <artner did him a 0olid and talEed 0ome 0en0e into him" and 1 hum>led it u< .or Del
#ecchio and ?e >oth let it go" and 1 didnCt go to Aail....5ntil Del #ecchio ?a0 <re0ent 0u<ervi0ing 0ome 3..icerC0 training
at the 0cene o. m- cu0todial B9 hour; Aa-?alEing arre0t; on 1N12N12. But Del #ecchio" 1 gue00 either didnCt ?ant to or
?a0nCt a>le to talE 0ome 0en0e into Sargent Sig.ree.....and then Sargent Sig.ree Bthe 0<elling i0 liEel- o..; had me arre0ted
and charged ?ith a gro00 mi0demeanor" F=i0u0e o. 911F Au0t t?o da-0 later" on 4anuar- 14th" 2+11 ?hen 1 called 911 to
re<ort that m- roommate0 ?ere laughing menacingl- ?hen 1 a0Eed them ?h- m- dog ?a0 mi00ing B1 had al0o >een
cha0ed u< to m- room numerou0 time0 0ince moving in ?ith the0e <eo<le" 0omething 1 had to do >ecau0e 0o much o. m-
mone- had >een taEen u< ?ith >ail or lo0t earning0 due to all the0e ?rong.ul arre0t0 and a>u0e o. <roce00e0 mentioned
a>ove...al0o the0e hou0emate0 had cha0ed me ?ith a ten inch >utcher Eni.e" t?o o. m- tire0 ?ere 0la0hed" 1 ?a0 locEed out
all night on Ne? 7ear0 Even ?hen the0e changed the locE0 at around midnight" had m- .urniture thro?n in the 0treet"
<ro<ert- 0tolen" co..ee thro?n on me" de0tro-ing m- 0mart <hone in the <roce00" etc." etc...,nd de0<ite the hou0emate
having an out0tanding arre0t ?arrant" and animal a>u0e >eing li0ted among0t the element0 o. dome0tic violence" Sargent
Sig.ree told me he ?a0 arre0ting me >ecau0e 1 FEee< <utting -our0el. in the0e 0ituation0F" liEe" ?here 1 am a victim" and
' 23 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that he ?a0 Ftr-ing to hel< -ouF" he 0aid ?ith a 0mirE and a laugh to hi0 .ello? !/D 3..icer0" ?hom then <roceeded to
u0e e)ce00ive .orce again0t me. 1 gue00 he ?a0 hel<ing me >- 0addling me ?ith a gro00 mi0demeanor ?ith a G1"%++ >ail"
e0<eciall- ?here it0 >een arranged .or Court Service0" or <re'&rial Service0 to .orever den- me an 3!" de0<ite m-
meeting the .actor0 .or 0uch 0et .orth in 0tatute B3+ -ear re0ident" entire immediate .amil- live0 here" licen0ed to <ractice
la? in Nevada" etc." etc;...1 gue00 it 0hould not >e too much o. a 0ur<ri0e to me that !eno Cit- ,ttorne- /am !o>ert0
.ailed to addre00 the <erAur- o. all three o. her ?itne00e0 or that her .ello? !eno Cit- ,ttorne- Chri0to<her 2aDlett'
Steven0 lied to me a>out ?hether or not the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice even had an- documentation related to m- arre0t
or ?hether it ?ould in the month >e.ore m- arraignment" de0<ite that .act that 0u>0e@uent <roduction0 o. di0cover- tend
to indicate that the !eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice did have tho0e material0 at the time. 1 could >e ?rong a>out 0ome o.
thi0...But that ?ould re@uire and a?.ul lot o. coincidence0.
(urther" the la? in our State doe0 not 0eem e)ce<tionall- clear ?ith regard to the 0ervice and
<roce00 re@uirement0 and timeline0" and manner o. calculating time ?ith re0<ect to the Frecei<tF o.
6ocEout 3rder0. &he ,..idavit o. Service >- =achen 0tate0 that he F<er0onall- 0erved the de0cri>ed
document0 u<onF m-" Zach Coughlin...2o?ever" 1 can atte0t >- ,..idavit that 1 ?a0 not F<er0onall-
0ervedF to the e)tent that F<er0onall- 0ervedF mean0 or im<lie0 that 1 ?a0 there" that =achen 0a? me
or identi.ied me" or an- o. the other indicator0 o. 0omething" 0uch a0 a Com<laint" >eing F<er0onall-
0ervedF 0uch a0 1 under0tand the <hra0e to me. N!C/ %B>;B2;B,;Bi'iii;. (urther" a0 BaEer and 2ill
have 0o o.ten <ointed out" 1 cannot" according to them" receive an- attorne-C0 .ee a?ard .or a<<earing
a0 <ro 0e attorne-" a0 0uch" N!C/ %B>;B2;B,;Bi'iii;" 0hould a<<l- to me onl- a0 a <art-" and not a0 a
<art-C0 attorne-" and" there.ore" according to N!C/ %" Service: FB2; Service under thi0 rule i0 made
>-: B,; Delivering a co<- to the attorne- or the <art- >-: Bi; handing it to the attorne- or to the <art-9
Bii; leaving it at the attorne-L0 or <art-L0 o..ice ?ith a clerE or other <er0on in charge" or i. there i0 no
one in charge" leaving it in a con0<icuou0 <lace in the o..ice9 or Biii; i. the o..ice i0 clo0ed or the
<er0on to >e 0erved ha0 no o..ice" leaving it at the per"on/" '$ell!ng hou"e or u"ul plce o# (o'e
$!th "ome per"on o# "u!t(le ge n' '!"cret!on re"!'!ng there...F So" either it ?a0 m- o..ice" in
' 24 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
?hich ca0e a No Cau0e Eviction Notice maEe0 im<ermi00i>le a Summar- Eviction /roceeding under
N!S 4+.2%3" and there.ore" the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction i0 void .or lacE o. Auri0diction" or" the
,..idavit o. Service ?a0 on m- home" and ?a0 not FhandedF to me" or F<er0onall- 0ervedF Bde0<ite
the ,..idavit atte0ting to having F<er0onall- 0ervedF me;" nor ?a0 the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction
0erved in accordance ?ith N!C/ %B>;B2;B,;Biii;" ?hich re@uire0: Fi. the o..ice i0 clo0ed or the <er0on
to >e 0erved ha0 no o..ice" leaving it at the per"on/" '$ell!ng hou"e or u"ul plce o# (o'e $!th
"ome per"on o# "u!t(le ge n' '!"cret!on re"!'!ng there..F
(urther" 1 >elieve <o0ting an 3rder on oneC0 re0idence door" <articularl- in the conte)t o. 0erving a No
Cau0e Notice o. Eviction or 5nla?.ul Detainer" i0 onl- valid i. the document >eing 0erved i0 al0o
<laced in the mail and 3 non Audicial da-0 are accorded .or 0ervice to >e com<lete. See N!C/ *Be;. 1
do not >elieve the- can <rove that at all" not even clo0e. N!C/ a<<lie0 to Summar- Eviction
,ction0" according to the .ollo?ing:
FN!S 4+.3$+ /rovi0ion0 governing a<<eal0. Either <art- ma-" ?ithin 1+ da-0" a<<eal .rom the
Audgment rendered. But an a<<eal >- the de.endant 0hall not 0ta- the e)ecution o. the Audgment"
unle00" ?ithin the 1+ da-0" the de.endant 0hall e)ecute and .ile ?ith the court or Au0tice the
de.endantL0 undertaEing to the <lainti.." ?ith t?o or more 0uretie0" in an amount to >e .i)ed >- the
court or Au0tice" >ut ?hich 0hall not >e le00 than t?ice the amount o. the Audgment and co0t0" to the
e..ect that" i. the Audgment a<<ealed .rom >e a..irmed or the a<<eal >e di0mi00ed" the a<<ellant ?ill
<a- the Audgment and the co0t o. a<<eal" the value o. the u0e and occu<ation o. the <ro<ert-" and
damage0 Au0tl- accruing to the <lainti.. during the <endenc- o. the a<<eal. 5<on taEing the a<<eal
and .iling the undertaEing" all .urther <roceeding0 in the ca0e 0hall >e 0ta-ed.J
,ctuall-" a lot o. <eo<le 0eemed con.u0ed regarding the I24 hour0J locEout thing. &he onl- a<<earance in either N!S
11$, or N!S 4+" in the <rovi0ion0 a<<lica>le to Summar- Eviction /roceeding0 o. an-thing related to I24 hour0J i0 in
' 2% '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
N!S 4+.2%3B%;" ?hich onl- 0<eaE0 to a 0ituation ?here the &enant doe0 not .ile a &enantC0 ,n0?er or &enantC0 ,..idavit"
?hich i0 clearl- ina<<lica>le here" a0 the &enant did .ile 0uch a 3<<o0ition to the No Cau0e Eviction Notice: I%. 5<on
noncom<liance ?ith the notice:
Ba; &he landlord or the landlordL0 agent ma- a<<l- >- a..idavit o. com<laint .or eviction to the Au0tice court o. the
to?n0hi< in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial <remi0e0 are located or to the di0trict court o. the
count- in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial <remi0e0 are located" ?hichever ha0 Auri0diction
over the matter. The court m. thereupon !""ue n or'er '!rect!ng the "her!## or con"t(le o# the count. to remo&e
the tennt $!th!n 01 hour" #ter rece!pt o# the or'er. &he a..idavit mu0t 0tate or contain...J
So" a>0ent 0ome 0tatutor- <rovi0ion allo?ing the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction to re0ult in a locEout >- the 8a0hoe
Count- Sheri..C0 3..ice <rior to the 3 da-0 .or mailing ?here <er0onal 0ervice o. the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction ?a0 not
e..ectuated" de0<ite ?hat 8CS3 em<lo-ee ma- have incorrectl- Bor .al0el-; a00erted in the 8CS3C0 4ohn =achemC0
,..idavit o. Service .rom" .ile 0tam<ed Novem>er 7" 2+11 Be0<eciall- ?here it i0 time0tam<ed 4:3+ <m" Novem>er 1"
2+11" e0<eciall- ?here the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction e)<licitl- read0 that no 0uch locEout 0hall occur <rior to %:++ <m
on Novem>er 1" 2+11;. See" N!C/ %B>;B2;B,;Bi'iii;" N!C/ *Be;.
Intere"t!ngl.% R!chr' )!ll 2no$" h!" c"e !" to"t un'er NRCP 34(54054A54!-!!!5% NRCP
64e5% !n ''!t!on to NRCP ++. Tht !" $h. !n R!chr' )!ll7" No&em(er 0+% 0,++ Mot!on #or
Or'er To Sho$ Cu"e% on pge 0% )!ll" re"ort" to l!terll. gr"p!ng t "tr$"% !mg!n!ng tht
$ht the 8"hoe Count. Sher!##7" O##!ce cu"tomr!l. 'oe" !" "omeho$ utomt!cll. co'!#!e'
!nto mn'tor. prece'ent (lc2 letter l$. To $!t% R!chr' )!ll $rote !n h!" Mot!on For Or'er
To Sho$ Cu"e tht- 9FACTS S)O8ING CONTEMPT OF COURT 6. E:)I;IT + $"
"er&e' on Coughl!n on No&em(er < 0,++ (. the 8"hoe Count. Sher!##" Deprtment% (.
po"t!ng "me on the #ront 'oor o# the propert. !n the mnner cu"tomr. #or e&!ct!on" !n
8"hoe Count.. The loc2" to the prem!"e" $ere chnge' t tht t!me% there(. e=ect!ng n'
'!"po""e""!ng Coughl!n o# po""e""!on o# the Propert..> Further% there!n R!chr' )!ll 'm!t"
tht the loc2out occurre' t 1-?, pm% " !n'!cte' !n $r!t!ng !n the 8CSO7" Mchem7"
A##!'&!t o# Ser&!ce% contr to the mn'te o# @u'ge S#errAA7" Or'er o# Summr. E&!ct!on
reBu!r!ng n. loc2out to occur after 3-,, pm% No&em(er +% 0,++.
NRS 1,.?*3 St. o# eCecut!on upon ppelD 'ut. o# tennt $ho ret!n" po""e""!on o#
prem!"e" to p. rent 'ur!ng "t.. Upon n ppel #rom n or'er entere' pur"unt to NRS
1,.03? -
+. ECcept " other$!"e pro&!'e' !n th!" "u("ect!on% "t. o# eCecut!on m. (e o(t!ne' (.
#!l!ng $!th the tr!l court (on' !n the mount o# E03, to co&er the eCpecte' co"t" on ppel. In
n ct!on concern!ng le"e o# commerc!l propert. or n. other propert. #or $h!ch the
monthl. rent eCcee'" E+%,,,% the court m.% upon !t" o$n mot!on or tht o# prt.% n' upon
' 2* '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"ho$!ng o# goo' cu"e% or'er n ''!t!onl (on' to (e po"te' to co&er the eCpecte' co"t" on
ppel. A "uret. upon the (on' "u(m!t" to the =ur!"'!ct!on o# the ppellte court n'
!rre&oc(l. ppo!nt" the cler2 o# tht court " the "uret./" gent upon $hom pper" ##ect!ng
the "uret./" l!(!l!t. upon the (on' m. (e "er&e'. L!(!l!t. o# "uret. m. (e en#orce'% or the
(on' m. (e rele"e'% on mot!on !n the ppellte court $!thout !n'epen'ent ct!on.
2. , tenant ?ho retain0 <o00e00ion o. the <remi0e0 that are the 0u>Aect o. the a<<eal during the
<endenc- o. the a<<eal 0hall <a- to the landlord rent in the amount <rovided in the underl-ing
contract >et?een the tenant and the landlord a0 it >ecome0 due. 1. the tenant .ail0 to <a- 0uch rent" the
landlord ma- initiate ne? <roceeding0 .or a 0ummar- eviction >- 0erving the tenant ?ith a ne?
notice <ur0uant to N!S 4+.2%3.
N!S 4+.39+ ,<<ellate court not to di0mi00 or @ua0h <roceeding0 .or ?ant o. .orm. 1n all ca0e0
o. a<<eal under N!S 4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" the a<<ellate court 0hall not di0mi00 or @ua0h the
<roceeding0 .or ?ant o. .orm" <rovided the <roceeding0 have >een conducted 0u>0tantiall- according
to the <rovi0ion0 o. N!S 4+.22+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive9 and amendment0 to the com<laint" an0?er or
0ummon0" in matter0 o. .orm onl-" ma- >e allo?ed >- the court at an- time >e.ore .inal Audgment
u<on 0uch term0 a0 ma- >e Au0t9 and all matter0 o. e)cu0e" Au0ti.ication or avoidance o. the allegation0
in the com<laint ma- >e given in evidence under the an0?er.
NRS 1,.1,, Rule" o# prct!ce. The pro&!"!on" o# NRS% Ne&' Rule" o# C!&!l Proce'ure
n' Ne&' Rule" o# Appellte Proce'ure relt!&e to c!&!l ct!on"% ppel" n' ne$ tr!l"% "o #r
" the. re not !ncon"!"tent $!th the pro&!"!on" o# NRS 1,.00, to 1,.10, % !nclu"!&e% ppl. to the
procee'!ng" ment!one' !n tho"e "ect!on".>
So" con0idering that N!S 4+.4++ re@uire0 that N!C/ a<<l- to Summar- Eviction /roceeding0 under
N!S 4+.2%3" then 0ervice" <roce00" and time calculation0 o. 0uch mu0t com<ort ?ith the dictate0 o.
N!C/ %'*: F !56E %. SE!#1CE ,ND (161N: 3( /6E,D1N:S ,ND 3&2E! /,/E!S
45 Ser&!ce- 8hen ReBu!re'. E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided in the0e rule0" ever- order re@uired
>- it0 term0 to >e 0erved" ever- <leading 0u>0e@uent to the original com<laint unle00 the court
other?i0e order0 >ecau0e o. numerou0 de.endant0" ever- <a<er relating to di0cover- re@uired to >e
0erved u<on a <art- unle00 the court other?i0e order0" ever- ?ritten motion other than one ?hich ma-
>e heard e) <arte" and ever- ?ritten notice" a<<earance" demand" o..er o. Audgment" de0ignation o.
record on a<<eal" and 0imilar <a<er 0hall >e 0erved u<on each o. the <artie0. No 0ervice need >e made
on <artie0 in de.ault .or .ailure to a<<ear e)ce<t that <leading0 a00erting ne? or additional claim0 .or
relie. again0t them 0hall >e 0erved u<on them in the manner <rovided .or 0ervice o. 0ummon0 in !ule
4.
4(5 Sme- )o$ M'e.
B1; 8henever under the0e rule0 0ervice i0 re@uired or <ermitted to >e made u<on a <art-
re<re0ented >- an attorne-" the 0ervice 0hall >e made u<on the attorne- unle00 the court order0 that
0ervice >e made u<on the <art-.
B2; Service under thi0 rule i0 made >-:
B,; Delivering a co<- to the attorne- or the <art- >-:
Bi; handing it to the attorne- or to the <art-9
Bii; leaving it at the attorne-L0 or <art-L0 o..ice ?ith a clerE or other <er0on in
charge" or i. there i0 no one in charge" leaving it in a con0<icuou0 <lace in the o..ice9 or
' 27 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Biii; i. the o..ice i0 clo0ed or the <er0on to >e 0erved ha0 no o..ice" leaving it at the
<er0onL0 d?elling hou0e or u0ual <lace o. a>ode ?ith 0ome <er0on o. 0uita>le age and di0cretion
re0iding there.
4;5 M!l!ng cop. to the ttorne. or the prt. t h!" or her l"t 2no$n ''re"".
Ser&!ce (. m!l !" complete on m!l!ngD pro&!'e'% ho$e&er% mot!on% n"$er or other
'ocument con"t!tut!ng the !n!t!l ppernce o# prt. mu"t l"o% !# "er&e' (. m!l% (e #!le'
$!th!n the t!me llo$e' #or "er&!ceD n' pro&!'e' #urther% tht #ter "uch !n!t!l ppernce%
"er&!ce (. m!l (e m'e onl. (. m!l!ng #rom po!nt $!th!n the Stte o# Ne&'.
BC; 1. the attorne- or the <art- ha0 no Eno?n addre00" leaving a co<- ?ith the clerE o. the
court.
4D5 Del!&er!ng cop. (. electron!c men" !# the ttorne. or the prt. "er&e' h"
con"ente' to "er&!ce (. electron!c men". Ser&!ce (. electron!c men" !" complete on
trn"m!""!on pro&!'e'% ho$e&er% mot!on% n"$er or other 'ocument con"t!tut!ng the !n!t!l
ppernce o# prt. mu"t l"o% !# "er&e' (. electron!c men"% (e #!le' $!th!n the t!me llo$e'
#or "er&!ce. The "er&e' ttorne./" or prt./" con"ent to "er&!ce (. electron!c men" "hll (e
eCpre""l. "tte' n' #!le' !n $r!t!ng $!th the cler2 o# the court n' "er&e' on the other prt!e"
to the ct!on. The $r!tten con"ent "hll !'ent!#.-
4!5 the per"on" upon $hom "er&!ce mu"t (e m'eD
4!!5 the ppropr!te ''re"" or loct!on #or "uch "er&!ce% "uch " the
electron!c-m!l ''re"" or #c"!m!le num(erD
4!!!5 the #ormt to (e u"e' #or ttchment"D n'
4!&5 n. other l!m!t" on the "cope or 'urt!on o# the con"ent.
An ttorne./" or prt./" con"ent "hll rem!n e##ect!&e unt!l eCpre""l. re&o2e' or unt!l the
repre"entt!on o# prt. chnge" through entr.% $!th'r$l% or "u("t!tut!on o# coun"el. ,n
attorne- or <art- ?ho ha0 con0ented to 0ervice >- electronic mean0 0hall" ?ithin 1+ da-0 a.ter an-
change o. electronic'mail addre00 or .ac0imile num>er" 0erve and .ile notice o. the ne? electronic'
mail addre00 or .ac0imile num>er.
4?5 Ser&!ce (. electron!c men" un'er Rule 34(54054D5 !" not e##ect!&e !# the prt.
m2!ng "er&!ce lern" tht the ttempte' "er&!ce '!' not rech the per"on to (e "er&e'.
B4; /roo. o. 0ervice ma- >e made >- certi.icate o. an attorne- or o. the attorne-L0 em<lo-ee"
or >- ?ritten admi00ion" or >- a..idavit" or other <roo. 0ati0.actor- to the court. (ailure to maEe <roo.
o. 0ervice 0hall not a..ect the validit- o. 0ervice...
RULE 6. 9TIME
45 Computt!on. 1n com<uting an- <eriod o. time <re0cri>ed or allo?ed >- the0e rule0" >- the
local rule0 o. an- di0trict court" >- order o. court" or >- an- a<<lica>le 0tatute" the da- o. the act"
event" or de.ault .rom ?hich the de0ignated <eriod o. time >egin0 to run 0hall not >e included. &he
la0t da- o. the <eriod 0o com<uted 0hall >e included" unle00 it i0 a Saturda-" a Sunda-" or a
nonAudicial da-" in ?hich event the <eriod run0 until the end o. the ne)t da- ?hich i0 not a Saturda-"
a Sunda-" or a nonAudicial da-" or" ?hen the act to >e done i0 the .iling o. a <a<er in court" a da- on
?hich ?eather or other condition0 have made the o..ice o. the clerE o. the di0trict court inacce00i>le"
in ?hich event the <eriod run0 until the end o. the ne)t da- ?hich i0 not one o. the a.orementioned
' 2$ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
da-0. 8hen the <eriod o. time <re0cri>ed or allo?ed i0 le00 than 11 da-0" intermediate Saturda-0"
Sunda-0" and nonAudicial da-0 0hall >e e)cluded in the com<utation e)ce<t .or tho0e <roceeding0
.iled under &itle0 12 or 13 o. the Nevada !evi0ed Statute0...
4e5 A''!t!onl T!me A#ter Ser&!ce (. M!l or Electron!c Men". 8hene&er prt. h" the
r!ght or !" reBu!re' to 'o "ome ct or t2e "ome procee'!ng" $!th!n pre"cr!(e' per!o' #ter
the "er&!ce o# not!ce or other pper% other thn proce""% upon the prt. n' the not!ce or
pper !" "er&e' upon the prt. (. m!l or (. electron!c men"% ? '." "hll (e ''e' to the
pre"cr!(e' per!o'.
Su>divi0ion Ba; i0 revi0ed to e)tend the e)clu0ion o. intermediate Saturda-0" Sunda-0" and
nonAudicial da-0 to the com<utation o. time <eriod0 le00 than 11 da-0 con0i0tent ?ith the 19$%
amendment0 to the .ederal rule. ,dditionall-" the [[inacce00i>ilit- o. the courtLL <rovi0ion .ound in
0u>divi0ion Ba; o. the .ederal rule i0 added to !ule *Ba;. Su>divi0ion Ba; i0 .urther amended" >- adding
language re.erring to [[<roceeding0 .iled under &itle0 12 or 13 o. the Nevada !evi0ed Statute0"LL to
avoid an- change0 to current <rocedure0 in <ro>ate" guardian0hi< and tru0t <roceeding0....
Su>divi0ion Be; i0 amended to <rovide an additional 3 da-0 to act in re0<on0e to a <a<er that i0
0erved >- electronic mean0 under ne? <aragra<h B2;BD; added to !ule %B>;.F
N!S 4+.2%3 5nla?.ul detainer: Su<<lemental remed- o. 0ummar- eviction and e)clu0ion o. tenant
.or de.ault in <a-ment o. rent.
1. E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided in 0u>0ection 1+" in addition to the remed- <rovided in N!S 4+.2%12 and
4+.29+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" ?hen the tennt o# n. '$ell!ng% prtment% mo(!le home% recret!onl
&eh!cle or commerc!l prem!"e" $!th per!o'!c rent re"er&e' (. the month or n. "horter per!o'
!" !n 'e#ult !n p.ment o# the rent" the landlord or the landlordL0 agent" unle00 other?i0e agreed in
?riting" ma- 0erve or have 0erved a notice in ?riting" re@uiring in the alternative the <a-ment o. the
rent or the 0urrender o. the <remi0e0...
4. 1. the tenant .ile0 0uch an a..idavit at or >e.ore the time 0tated in the notice" the landlord or
the landlordL0 agent" a.ter recei<t o. a .ile'0tam<ed co<- o. the a..idavit ?hich ?a0 .iled" 0hall not
<rovide .or the nonadmittance o. the tenant to the <remi0e0 >- locEing or other?i0e.
%. 5<on noncom<liance ?ith the notice:
Ba; &he landlord or the landlordL0 agent ma- a<<l- >- a..idavit o. com<laint .or eviction to the
Au0tice court o. the to?n0hi< in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial <remi0e0
are located or to the di0trict court o. the count- in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or
commercial <remi0e0 are located" ?hichever ha0 Auri0diction over the matter. &he court ma-
thereu<on i00ue an order directing the 0heri.. or con0ta>le o. the count- to remove the tenant ?ithin
24 hour0 a.ter recei<t o. the order..
*. 5<on the .iling >- the tenant o. the a..idavit <ermitted in 0u>0ection 3" regardle00 o. the
in.ormation contained in the a..idavit" and the .iling >- the landlord o. the a..idavit <ermitted >-
0u>0ection %" the Au0tice court or the di0trict court 0hall hold a hearing" a.ter 0ervice o. notice o. the
hearing u<on the <artie0" to determine the truth.ulne00 and 0u..icienc- o. an- a..idavit or notice
<rovided .or in thi0 0ection. I# the court 'eterm!ne" tht there !" no legl 'e#en"e " to the llege'
unl$#ul 'et!ner n' the tennt !" gu!lt. o# n unl$#ul 'et!ner% the court m. !""ue
"ummr. or'er #or remo&l o# the tennt or n or'er pro&!'!ng #or the non'm!ttnce o# the
tennt. I# the court 'eterm!ne" tht there !" legl 'e#en"e " to the llege' unl$#ul 'et!ner%
the court "hll re#u"e to grnt e!ther prt. n. rel!e#% n'% eCcept " other$!"e pro&!'e' !n th!"
' 29 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"u("ect!on% "hll reBu!re tht n. #urther procee'!ng" (e con'ucte' pur"unt to NRS 1,.0F, to
1,.10, % !nclu"!&e. The !""unce o# "ummr. or'er #or remo&l o# the tennt 'oe" not preclu'e
n ct!on (. the tennt #or n. 'mge" or other rel!e# to $h!ch the tennt m. (e ent!tle'....
7. &he tenant ma-" u<on <a-ment o. the a<<ro<riate .ee0 relating to the .iling and 0ervice o. a
motion" .ile a motion ?ith the court" on a .orm <rovided >- the clerE o. the court" to di0<ute the
amount o. the co0t0" i. an-" claimed >- the landlord <ur0uant to N!S 11$.2+7 or 11$,.4*+ .or the
inventor-" moving and 0torage o. <er0onal <ro<ert- le.t on the <remi0e0. &he motion mu0t >e .iled
?ithin 2+ da-0 a.ter the 0ummar- order .or removal o. the tenant or the a>andonment o. the <remi0e0
>- the tenant" or ?ithin 2+ da-0 a.ter:
Ba; &he tenant ha0 vacated or >een removed .rom the <remi0e09 and
B>; , co<- o. tho0e charge0 ha0 >een re@ue0ted >- or <rovided to the tenant"
Y ?hichever i0 later.
$. 5pon the #!l!ng o# mot!on pur"unt to "u("ect!on G% the court "hll "che'ule her!ng
on the mot!on. The her!ng mu"t (e hel' $!th!n +, '." #ter the #!l!ng o# the mot!on. The court
"hll ##!C the 'te o# the her!ng to the mot!on n' or'er cop. "er&e' upon the ln'lor' (.
the "her!##% con"t(le or other proce"" "er&er. At the her!ng% the court m.:
Ba; Determine the co0t0" i. an-" claimed >- the landlord <ur0uant to N!S 11$.2+7 or 11$,.4*+
and an- accumulating dail- co0t09 and
B>; 3rder the relea0e o. the tenantL0 <ro<ert- u<on the <a-ment o. the charge0 determined to >e
due or i. no charge0 are determined to >e due.J
6andlord =erli00 .iled onl- a No Cau0e Notice o. Eviction in !E#2+11'++17+$ on Commercial
&enant Zach Coughlin" E0@.C0 la? o..ice. ,0 0uch" a Summar- Eviction /roceeding i0 im<ermi00i>le
given the re@uirement o. N!S 4+.2%3 that the Notice alleged non'<a-ment o. rent to allo? the
landlord to <roceed under the Summar- Eviction /roceeding 0ection" N!S 4+.2%3. (urther" 4udge
S.erraDDa ?a0 <recluded .rom ruling on an-thing other than <o00e00ion o. the <remi0e0 <ur0uant to
N!S 4+.2%3B*;" ,nvui" and :laDier. (urther" the tenanc- did not terminate under the 6ea0e
,greement" it ?0 rene?ed.
N!S 4+.2%4 5nla?.ul detainer: Su<<lemental remed- o. 0ummar- eviction and e)clu0ion o.
tenant .rom certain t-<e0 o. <ro<ert-. E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided >- 0<eci.ic 0tatute" in addition to
the remed- <rovided in N!S 4+.2%1 and in N!S 4+.29+ to 4+.42+" inclu0ive" ?hen the tenant o. a
d?elling unit ?hich i0 0u>Aect to the <rovi0ion0 o. cha<ter 11$, o. N!S" <art o. a lo?'rent hou0ing
<rogram o<erated >- a lic hou0ing authorit-" a mo>ile home or a recreational vehicle i0 guilt- o.
an unla?.ul detainer" the landlord i0 entitled to the 0ummar- <rocedure0 <rovided in N!S 4+.2%3
e)ce<t that:
1. 8ritten notice to 0urrender the <remi0e0 mu0t:...4e5 A "ttement tht the cl!m #or rel!e# $"
uthor!Ae' (. l$.
,0 0uch" the too earl- locEout >ring0 into <la- the .ollo?ing:
IN!S 11$,.39+ 5nla?.ul removal or e)clu0ion o. tenant or ?ill.ul interru<tion o. e00ential
0ervice09 <rocedure .or e)<edited relie..
1. 1. the landlord unl$#ull. remo&e" the tennt #rom the prem!"e" or eCclu'e" the tennt (.
(loc2!ng or ttempt!ng to (loc2 the tennt/" entr. upon the prem!"e" or $!ll#ull. !nterrupt" or
' 3+ '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
cu"e" or perm!t" the !nterrupt!on o# n. e""ent!l "er&!ce reBu!re' (. the rentl greement or
th!" chpter% the tennt m. reco&er !mme'!te po""e""!on pur"unt to "u("ect!on 1% procee'
un'er NRS ++*A.?*, or term!nte the rentl greement n'% !n ''!t!on to n. other reme'.%
reco&er the tennt/" ctul 'mge"% rece!&e n mount not greter thn E+%,,, to (e #!Ce' (.
the court% or (oth.
2. 1n determining the amount" i. an-" to >e a?arded under 0u>0ection 1" the court 0hall con0ider:
Ba; 8hether the landlord acted in good .aith9
B>; &he cour0e o. conduct >et?een the landlord and the tenant9 and
Bc; &he degree o. harm to the tenant cau0ed >- the landlordL0 conduct.
3. 1. the rental agreement i0 terminated <ur0uant to 0u>0ection 1" the landlord 0hall return all
<re<aid rent and 0ecurit- recovera>le under thi0 cha<ter.
4. E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided in 0u>0ection %" the tenant ma- recover immediate <o00e00ion o.
the <remi0e0 .rom the landlord >- .iling a veri.ied com<laint .or e)<edited relie. .or the unla?.ul
removal or e)clu0ion o. the tenant .rom the <remi0e0 or the ?ill.ul interru<tion o. e00ential 0ervice0.
%. , veri.ied com<laint .or e)<edited relie.:
Ba; =u0t >e .iled ?ith the court ?ithin % Audicial da-0 a.ter the date o. the unla?.ul act >- the
landlord" and the veri.ied com<laint mu0t >e di0mi00ed i. it i0 not timel- .iled. 1. the veri.ied
com<laint .or e)<edited relie. i0 di0mi00ed <ur0uant to thi0 <aragra<h" the tenant retain0 the right to
<ur0ue all other availa>le remedie0 again0t the landlord.
B>; =a- not >e .iled ?ith the court i. an action .or 0ummar- eviction or unla?.ul detainer i0
alread- <ending >et?een the landlord and tenant" >ut the tenant ma- 0eeE 0imilar relie. >e.ore the
Audge <re0iding over the <ending action.
*. &he court 0hall conduct a hearing on the veri.ied com<laint .or e)<edited relie. ?ithin 3
Audicial da-0 a.ter the .iling o. the veri.ied com<laint .or e)<edited relie.. Be.ore or at the 0cheduled
hearing" the tenant mu0t <rovide <roo. that the landlord ha0 >een <ro<erl- 0erved ?ith a co<- o. the
veri.ied com<laint .or e)<edited relie.. 5<on the hearing" i. it i0 determined that the landlord ha0
violated an- o. the <rovi0ion0 o. 0u>0ection 1" the court ma-:
Ba; 3rder the landlord to re0tore to the tenant the <remi0e0 or e00ential 0ervice0" or >oth9
B>; ,?ard damage0 <ur0uant to 0u>0ection 19 and
Bc; EnAoin the landlord .rom violating the <rovi0ion0 o. 0u>0ection 1 and" i. the circum0tance0 0o
?arrant" hold the landlord in contem<t o. court.
7. &he <a-ment o. all co0t0 and o..icial .ee0 mu0t >e de.erred .or an- tenant ?ho .ile0 a veri.ied
com<laint .or e)<edited relie.. ,.ter an- hearing and not later than .inal di0<o0ition o. the .iling or
order" the court 0hall a00e00 the co0t0 and .ee0 again0t the <art- that doe0 not <revail" e)ce<t that the
court ma- reduce them or ?aive them" a0 Au0tice ma- re@uire.J
IN!S 11$,.+9+ IE)cludeJ de.ined. IE)cludeJ mean0 to evict or to <rohi>it entr- >- locEing door0 or >- other?i0e
>locEing or attem<ting to >locE entr-" or to maEe a d?elling unit uninha>ita>le >- interru<ting or cau0ing the interru<tion
o. electric" ga0" ?ater or other e00ential 0ervice0.J
' 31 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
,66 /,/E!S ,ND /6E,D1N:S ,ND C3!!ES/3NDENCS /!E#135S67 S5B=1&&ED &3 &2E !EN3
45S&1CE C35!& ,ND 3! 1&S E=/637EES 1S 2E!EB7 1NC3!/3!,&ED B7 !E(E!ENCE 1N&3 &21S
(161N:.
N!S 11$,.19+: I Notice: De.inition9 0ervice.
1. , <er0on ha0 notice o. a .act i.:
Ba; &he <er0on ha0 actual Eno?ledge o. it9
B>; &he <er0on ha0 received a notice or noti.ication o. it9 or
Bc; (rom all the .act0 and circum0tance0 the <er0on rea0ona>l- 0hould Eno? that it e)i0t0.
0. 8r!tten not!ce" to the tennt pre"cr!(e' (. th!" chpter "hll (e "er&e' !n the mnner pro&!'e' (. NRS
1,.0*,.
3. 8ritten notice0 to the landlord <re0cri>ed >- thi0 cha<ter ma- >e delivered or mailed to the <lace o. >u0ine00 o. the
landlord de0ignated in the rental agreement or to an- <lace held out >- the landlord a0 the <lace .or the recei<t o. rental
<a-ment0 .rom the tenant and are e..ective .rom the date o. deliver- or mailing.J
INRS 1,.0*, Service o. notice0 to @uit9 <roo. re@uired >e.ore i00uance o. order to remove.
1. E)ce<t a0 other?i0e <rovided in N!S 4+.2%3" the notice0 re@uired >- N!S 4+.2%1 to 4+.2*+" inclu0ive" ma- >e
0erved:
Ba; B- delivering a co<- to the tenant <er0onall-" in the <re0ence o. a ?itne009
B>; 1. the tenant i0 a>0ent .rom the tenantL0 <lace o. re0idence or .rom the tenantL0 u0ual <lace o. >u0ine00" >- leaving
a co<- ?ith a <er0on o. 0uita>le age and di0cretion at either <lace and mailing a co<- to the tenant at the tenantL0 <lace o.
re0idence or <lace o. >u0ine009 or
Bc; 1. the <lace o. re0idence or >u0ine00 cannot >e a0certained" or a <er0on o. 0uita>le age or di0cretion cannot >e
.ound there" >- <o0ting a co<- in a con0<icuou0 <lace on the lea0ed <ro<ert-" delivering a co<- to a <er0on there re0iding"
i. the <er0on can >e .ound" and mailing a co<- to the tenant at the <lace ?here the lea0ed <ro<ert- i0 0ituated.J
1 did not receive an- o. the email0 allegedl- 0ent to m- .rom !ichard 2illC0 email addre00" rhillWrichardhilla?.com
>et?een ,ugu0t 1$th" 2+11 to Novem>er 17th" 2+11" and certainl- none .rom rhillWrichardhilla?.com during the <eriod
>et?een the illegal locEout at 4:3+ <m Novem>er 1" 2+11 and the tre0<a00 arre0t o. Novem>er 13th" 2+11 ?hich allegedl-
0<oEe to m- >eing <rovided acce00 to the <ro<ert- .or the <ur<o0e o. m- removing m- >elonging0" de0<ite m- numerou0
call0 and ?ritten re@ue0t0" ?hich outlined the e)igencie0 inherent to m- >eing <recluded acce00 to m- client .ile0 incident
to an unla?.ul and im<ro<erl- notice and too earl- occurring locEout >- the 8CS3. 1 and m- >u0ine00 have >een
damaged greatl- >- the0e act0. (urther" 1 had re<eatedl- 0ent >oth BaEer and 2ill notice" in ?riting" that 1 did not con0ent
to 0ervice or notice o. an-thing via electronic mean0. (urther N!S 11$,.19+ doe0 not 0<eaE to Inotice o.J a legal
.inding" >ut rather to Inotice o. a .actJ. ,0 0uch" 1 ?a0 not a<<ro<riatel- 0erved notice o. the 3rder o. Summar- Eviction"
and an illegal locEout occurred" a0 0uch no criminal tre0<a00 charge can 0tand.
IN!S 11$,.2*+ Di0clo0ure o. name0 and addre00e0 o. manager0 and o?ner09 emergenc- tele<hone num>er9 0ervice o.
<roce00.
1. &he landlord" or an- <er0on authoriDed to enter into a rental agreement on hi0 or her >ehal." 0hall di0clo0e to the
tenant in ?riting at or >e.ore the commencement o. the tenanc-:
Ba; &he name and addre00 o.:
B1; &he <er0on0 authoriDed to manage the <remi0e09
B2; , <er0on ?ithin thi0 State authoriDed to act .or and on >ehal. o. the landlord .or the <ur<o0e o. 0ervice o.
<roce00 and receiving notice0 and demand09 and
B3; &he <rinci<al or cor<orate o?ner.
B>; , tele<hone num>er at ?hich a re0<on0i>le <er0on ?ho re0ide0 in the count- or ?ithin *+ mile0 o. ?here the
<remi0e0 are located ma- >e called in ca0e o. emergenc-.
' 32 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2. &he in.ormation re@uired to >e .urni0hed >- thi0 0ection mu0t >e Ee<t current" and thi0 0ection i0 en.orcea>le
again0t an- 0ucce00or landlord or manager o. the <remi0e0.
3. , <art- ?ho enter0 into a rental agreement on >ehal. o. the landlord and .ail0 to com<l- ?ith thi0 0ection i0 an
agent o. the landlord .or <ur<o0e0 o.:
Ba; Service o. <roce00 and receiving notice0 and demand09 and
B>; /er.orming the o>ligation0 o. the landlord under la? and under the rental agreement.
4. 1n an- action again0t a landlord ?hich involve0 hi0 or her rental <ro<ert-" 0ervice o. <roce00 u<on the manager o.
the <ro<ert- or a <er0on de0cri>ed in <aragra<h Ba; o. 0u>0ection 1 0hall >e deemed to >e 0ervice u<on the landlord. &he
o>ligation0 o. the landlord devolve u<on the <er0on0 authoriDed to enter into a rental agreement on hi0 or her >ehal..
%. &hi0 0ection doe0 not limit or remove the lia>ilit- o. an undi0clo0ed landlord.J
N!S 4+.31+ 100ue o. .act to >e tried >- Aur- i. <ro<er demand made. 8henever an i00ue o. .act i0 <re0ented >- the
<leading0" it 0hall >e tried >- a Aur-" i. <ro<er demand i0 made <ur0uant to the Nevada !ule0 o. Civil /rocedure or the
4u0tice Court !ule0 o. Civil /rocedure
,ctuall-" a lot o. <eo<le 0eemed con.u0ed regarding the I24 hour0J locEout thing. &he onl- a<<earance in either N!S
11$, or N!S 4+" in the <rovi0ion0 a<<lica>le to Summar- Eviction /roceeding0 o. an-thing related to I24 hour0J i0 in
N!S 4+.2%3B%;" ?hich onl- 0<eaE0 to a 0ituation ?here the &enant doe0 not .ile a &enantC0 ,n0?er or &enantC0 ,..idavit"
?hich i0 clearl- ina<<lica>le here" a0 the &enant did .ile 0uch a 3<<o0ition to the No Cau0e Eviction Notice: I%. 5<on
noncom<liance ?ith the notice:
Ba; &he landlord or the landlordL0 agent ma- a<<l- >- a..idavit o. com<laint .or eviction to the Au0tice court o. the
to?n0hi< in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial <remi0e0 are located or to the di0trict court o. the
count- in ?hich the d?elling" a<artment" mo>ile home or commercial <remi0e0 are located" ?hichever ha0 Auri0diction
over the matter. The court m. thereupon !""ue n or'er '!rect!ng the "her!## or con"t(le o# the count. to remo&e
the tennt $!th!n 01 hour" #ter rece!pt o# the or'er. &he a..idavit mu0t 0tate or contain...J
So% ("ent "ome "ttutor. pro&!"!on llo$!ng the Or'er o# Summr. E&!ct!on to re"ult !n
loc2out (. the 8"hoe Count. Sher!##7" O##!ce pr!or to the ? '." #or m!l!ng $here per"onl
"er&!ce o# the Or'er o# Summr. E&!ct!on $" not e##ectute'% 'e"p!te $ht 8CSO emplo.ee
m. h&e !ncorrectl. 4or #l"el.5 ""erte' !n the 8CSO7" @ohn Mchem7" A##!'&!t o# Ser&!ce
#rom% #!le "tmpe' No&em(er G% 0,++. Attche' " ECh!(!t +. E)hi>it 1: $" not e##ectute'%
'e"p!te $ht 8CSO emplo.ee m. h&e !ncorrectl. 4or #l"el.5 ""erte' !n the 8CSO7" @ohn
Mchem7" A##!'&!t o# Ser&!ce #rom% #!le "tmpe' No&em(er G% 0,++ long $!th $r!tten
'm!""!on #rom 8CSO C!&!l Ser&!ce D!&!"!on Super&!"or L!A Stuchell tht Mchem onl. po"te'
the Or'er o# Summr. E&!ct!on on the 'oor o# the #ormer home l$ o##!ce% rther thn
<per"onll. "er&e'< !t n' R!chr' )!ll E"B7" o$n Proo# o# Ser&!ce o# Not!ce o# Entr. o# the
Or'er #or Summr. E&!ct!on "ho$!ng m!le' on 'te o# No&em(er +% 0,++ 4n' the R@C
ne&er m!le' cop. o# tht OR'er ccor'!ng the to Recor' on Appel !n CH++-,?60*5- three
4?5 pge".
AFFIRMATION PURSUANT TO NRS 0?F;.,?,
&he under0igned doe0 here>- a..irm that the <receding document doe0 not contain the 0ocial
0ecurit- num>er o. an- <er0on.
Dated at !eno" Nevada" thi0 3rd da- o. =arch" 2+12"
' 33 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6,8 3((1CES 3( Zachar- BarEer Coughlin
Co'coun0el .or the De.endant
B-:OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Zach Coughlin" E0@.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
' 34 '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PROOF OF SERHICE
/ur0uant to N!C/ %B>;" 1 certi.- that 1 0erved a co<- o. the .oregoing document u<on the
.ollo?ing <art- >- .a)ing" emailing" dro<<ing o.. at their o..ice" and <lacing a true and correct co<-
o. the .oregoing document in the u0 mail addre00ed to:
4ill DraEe" E0@.
!eno Cit- ,ttorne-C0 3..ice ' Criminal Divi0on
/.3. Bo) 19++
!eno " N# $9%+%
/hone Num>er: 77%'334'2+%+ (a) num>er: 77%'334'242+
DraEe4Wreno.gov
,ttorne- .or Cit- o. !eno
Xeith 6lo-d 6oomi0" E0@.
94*$ Dou>le ! Blvd. Suite ,
!eno" N# $9%21
/hone Num>er: 77%'$%3'7222 (a) num>er: 77%'$%3'+$*+
Eeithloomi0WearthlinE.net
!=C (iling 3..ice (a) =achine: (a): B77%; 334'3$24
Date thi0 =arch 3" 2+12:
NSN Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin" De.endant
Co'Coun0el .or De.endant
' 3% '
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
INDE: TO E:)I;ITS
1. E)hi>it 1: $" not e##ectute'% 'e"p!te $ht 8CSO emplo.ee m. h&e !ncorrectl. 4or
#l"el.5 ""erte' !n the 8CSO7" @ohn Mchem7" A##!'&!t o# Ser&!ce #rom% #!le "tmpe'
No&em(er G% 0,++ long $!th $r!tten 'm!""!on #rom 8CSO C!&!l Ser&!ce D!&!"!on Super&!"or
L!A Stuchell tht Mchem onl. po"te' the Or'er o# Summr. E&!ct!on on the 'oor o# the
#ormer home l$ o##!ce% rther thn <per"onll. "er&e'< !t n' R!chr' )!ll E"B7" o$n Proo# o#
Ser&!ce o# Not!ce o# Entr. o# the Or'er #or Summr. E&!ct!on "ho$!ng m!le' on 'te o#
No&em(er +% 0,++ 4n' the R@C ne&er m!le' cop. o# tht OR'er ccor'!ng the to Recor' on
Appel !n CH++-,?60*5- three 4?5 pge".
' 3* '
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 1

LAW OFFicE
RtCHARD G, HILL
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 Pursuantto NRCP 5(b), I hereby certify that I am an employee of RICHARD G.
f-lWunW
3 HILL, CHARTERED, and that on the day of 9eteBQt., 2011, I deposited in the
4 appropriate place for pick-up and hand-delivery by Reno-Carson Messenger Service, a true
5 and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Entry of Order and a true and correct copy
6 of the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order for Summary Eviction,
7 file-stamped October 27, 2011, addressed to:
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
121 River Rock Street
Reno, Nevada 89501
J
PoS! Office 80)1 2551 28
Rsno, NevGc;fa 89505
(775) 348-0888
Fax(775) 348-0858
Ho1mail Print Message ...
RE: WCSO Deputy Machern's personally served" Affidavit of WI/2011
From: Stu.hon. Liz (LStuchell@washoecounty.us)
Sent Tue 1/07/12 11:40 AM
To; zachcoughlin@hotmail.ccm
Cc: Kandaras, Mary (mkandaras@da.washoecounty.us)
Mr. COughlin,
Our records IndlClt.! thilt the evittlOn on that day WI' personlilyserved by Deputy by postmg oil copy of the Order to the- The residente w.s unoccupied Irt the
time.
lit Stuchell, SUpervISor
wcso CIvil Sectio(1
..
FiLED
" NOV -7 AM 10: 52
IN THE RENO JUSTICE COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE .
RENO JUlll';
Matt Merliss
PLAINTIFF
Vs
DEFENDANT
STATE OF NEVADA
COUNTY OF WASHOE
55:
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
BY --'---
Civil File Number: 110 1)4;;-iSEPlITY
CASE No. REV2011001708
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
John Machen, being first duly sworn. deposes and says: That affiant is a citizen of the United States, over
18 years of age, not a party to the within entered action, and that in the County of Washoe, State of Nevada, personally
served the described documents upon:
Posted: Zachary Barker Coughlin
Location: 121 River Rock Street Reno, NV 89501
Date: 111112011 Time: 4:30PM
The document(s) served were: EVICTION ORDER, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND
ORDER FOR SUMMARY EVICTION; ORDER REQUIRING INSPECTION OF REAL PROPERTY
Richard G Hill Esq
PO Box 2551
652 Forest Street
Reno, NV 89505
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to me before me this
7.A,J
, ,) day __ 20 lL,
o II (l ,,--v,- (
NOTARY PUBLIC in and forsaid State of Nevada,
County of Washoe
ROXANNA L:Sj'LV;' l
{ Notary Public State 0' Nevada
: \' Appclntmenf Rl;!oorded In WaShoe County j
, Ne:Ql'III1IIilIjII'HU'-IlorlI014'

MICHAEL HALEY, SHERIFF
By: J2----
Sheriff uthori Agent
911 PARR BOULEVARD RENO. NV 89512-1000 (775) 328-3310

'=ILED
Case No. II CR 26405
2 Dept. No.2
3
4
5
6
7
8 THE CITY OF RENO,
9 Plaintiff,
10
II
12
\3
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
vs.
ORDER (#1)
ZACHARYB. COUGHUN,
Defendant.
~ /
On November 13, 2011, the above-referenced Defendant was arrested by the Reno
Police Department and charged with trespassing, a misdemeanor. The Defendant entered a pleaof not.
guilty to the trespassing charge and a trial date was set for December 13, 20\ 1. On November 23,
2011, the Reno City Attorney's office filed a Motion to Continue said trial date which was unopposed
by the defendant's court-appointed attomey, Lewis TaiteL Trial was continued and re-set for January
10,20\2, and Roberto Puentes was appointed by the Court as defendant's attorney.
On January 3, 20\2, the Defendant filed a Motion to Continue which was unopposed
by the Reno City Attorney's office. Trial was continued and re-set for February 2, 2012.
On January 18, 20\2, Defendant's attorney, Roberto Puentes, filed a Motion for
Withdrawal rf Attorney. This motion was set for hearing and on February 2, 2012, an evidentiary
hearing was conducted The defendant was present, defendants' counsel Roberto Puentes was present
and Jill Drake, Esq., was present on behalf of the City. At the conclusion of the haring, the Court
entered an Order granting the Motion to Withdraw filed by Mr. Puentes. Keith Loomis was appointed
by the Court to represent the Defendant. Trial is set for April 10, 2012, at 8:00 am No fillaljudgment
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

has been rendered in this case.
On February 16,2012, the defendant himself, an attorney, filed as co-counsel, a Notice
of Appeal, Motion to Vacate and or Set Aside, JCRCP 59, JCRCP 60, Motion for Reconsideration;
Motion for Recusal; Motion for publication of Transcript at Public Expense, Petition for In Forma
Pauperis Status. This same thirty-five (35) page Motion was filed twice with the Court. Initially it was
filed via fax on February 13,2012, and again filed via fax on Feb1UllI)' 16,2012. On February 22,
2012, the City filed an Opposition to Defendant's Motion. Attached to each of the defendant's thirty-
five (35) page Motions are a series of rambling e-mails from the defendant to Mr. Puentes. The
defendant's Motion referenced herein incorrectly is captioned as "In The Justice Court of the Reno
Township" instead of the Reno Municipal Court.
The pleading filed by the defendant on February 13,2012, captioned as many things, is
without merit and is hereby denied. Further, all further pleadings filed in this case on behalf of the
defendant, must be filed by the defendant's attorney and not by the defendant himself. As long as
defendant has an attorney representing him in this Court and in this case,all further pleadings shall be
filed by said attorney. Any further motions filed in violation of this Order will not be considered by the
Court and will be dismissed without prejudice.
Dated this 20th day of Match, 2012.
2
WDGiJ&JIJL.
Department Two
.....

'Po tk:tiI1WO

01) '-2190
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pursuant to NRCP S(b), 1 certify that 1 am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
ORDER (#1) on the party(ies) set forth below:
_X_
Placing said document in a sealed envelope placed for coJlecting and mailing
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Personal Delivery.
Jill Drake
Deputy City Attorney
Keith Loomis Esq.
9468 Double R Blvd., Suite A
Reno, NV 89521
Zachary Coughlin
1422 E. 9
th
St., #2
Reno, NV 89501
DA11lD "" 20" <by @:12\J\j

Case No. 11 CR 26405
2 Dept. No. 2
Dept. 2
Deputy Clerk
3
4
5 IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF RENO
6 COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
7
8 THE CITY OF RENO,
9 Plaintiff,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
vs.
ORDER (#2)
ZACHARY B. COUGHLIN,
Defendant.
______________________
On November 13, 2011, the above-referenced Defendant was arrested by the Reno
Police Department and charged with trespassing, a misdemeanor. The Defendant entered a plea of not
guilty to the trespassing charge and a trial date was set for December 13,2011. On November 23,
2011, the Reno City office filed a Motion to Continue said trial date which was unopposed
by the defendant's court-appointed attorney, Lewis Taite1. Trial was continued and re-set for January
10, 2012, and Roberto Puentes was appointed by the Court as defendant's attorney.
On January 3, 2012, the Defendant's attorney Roberto Puentes filed a Motion to
Continue which was unopposed by the Reno City Attorney's office. Trial was continued and re-set for
February 2, 2012.
On January 18, 2012, Defendant's attorney, Roberto Puentes, filed a Motion for
Withdrawal eX Attorney. This motion was set for hearing and on February 2, 2012, an evidentiary
hearing was conducted. The defendant was present, defendants' counsel Roberto Puentes was present
and Jill Drake, Esq., was present on behalf of the City. At the conclusion of the haring, the Cowt
entered an Order granting the Motion to Withdraw filed by Mr. Puentes. Keith Loomis was appointed
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

by the Court to represent the Defendant. Trial is set for April 10, 2012, at 8:00 a.m.
On February 16, 2012, the defendant himself, an attorney, filed as "Attorney for Pro Se
Attorney Plaintiff Denied Sixth Amendment Right to Counsel", a Notice of Appearance as Co-
Counsel and Motion to Dismiss. This same forty (40) page Motion was filed twice with the Court 0 n
March 5, 2012. The first pleading was filed at 7:36 a.m. via fax and the second was filed at 11: 19 a.m.
via fax. The defendant's motion referenced herein incorrectly is captioned "In the Second Judicial
District Court of the State of Nevada in and for the County of Washoe" instead of the Reno Municipal
Court. On March 21, 2012, the City filed a Motion to Strike Defendant's Motion to Dismiss
Complaint. The City's Motion to Strike aUeges that the City was never served with defendant's
Motion to Dismiss.
Notwithstanding the service issue raised inthe City's Motion to Strike, the Motion to
Dismiss filed by the defendant on March 5, 2012, is without merit, doesnotsetforth a basis to dismiss
the criminal complaint and therefore is hereby denied. Further, all further pleadings filed in this case
on behalf of the defendant must be filed by the defendant's attorney and not by the defendant himself. .
As long as defendant has an attorney representing him in this Court and in this case, all further
pleadings shall be filed by said attorney. Any further motions filed in violation of this Order will not
be considered by the Court and will be dismissed without prejudice.
Dated this 21st day of March, 2012.
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
""'"

y.a. .. \930

CERTIFICATE OF SERYICE
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
Reno, Nevada, and that on this date I served a true and correct copy ofthe foregoing
ORDER (#2) on the party(ies) set forth below:
_x_
Placing said document In a sealed envelope placed for collecting and mailing
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Inner-officemail following ordinary business'practices.
Personal Delivery.
Christopher Hazlett-Stevens
RenO City Attorney's office
Zachary Coughlin
1422 E,9
th
St., #2
Reno, NY 89501
Keith Loomis Esq.
9468 Double R Blvd., Ste. A
Reno, NV 89521
DATED this 21st day of March, 2012.

'='LEO
JOHN J. KADLlC
2' 2012
Reno City Attorney
2 Christopher Hazlett-Stevens
R:004J.&
By __ __
4
3 Nevada State Bar No. 10075
Post Office Bo)( 1900
DePuty Clerk
Reno, Nevada 89505
5 Attorneys for Plaintiff
6
7
8
9
IO
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
CITY OF RENO,
vs.
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF RENO,
CASE NO.: 12CR26405
Plaintiff,
DEPT. NO.: 2
ZACHARY CAUGHLIN,
Defendant.
----------------------- '
MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPL.AlNT
COMES NOW Plaintiff CITY OF RENO, by and through JOHN J. KADLIC, Reno City
Attorney, and Christopher Hazlett-Stevens, Deputy City Attorney, and files its Motion to Strike
as follows.
This Motion is made and based upon the pleading and documents on file herein, and the
Points and Authorities which are attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
From all appearances, Defendant filed 011 or about March 5, 2012 a Notice of Appearance
of Co-Counsel and Motion to Dismiss. The City requests the instant motion be stricken.
City Attorney
P.O. Box 1900

-1-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

The motion filed by Defendant contains a caption foc the Second Judicial District Court
yet was apparently filed in the Reno Municipal Court.
l
Said motion was filed on March 5, 2012
in the Reno Municipal Court. Yet, the City was never served with this Motion. NRS 178.584
states that motions must be served on the attorney in accordance with the manner provided in
civil actions. NRS 178.584(2). Rule 5 of the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure govern filing and
service of pleadings and other papers in civil actions. NRCP 5 states that every written motion
must be served upon the attorney for the party and specifies several alternative methods of
service.
The City first learned of this motion on March 20, 2012 by way of a courtesy copy
10 provided by the Court. See Declaration of Christopher Hazlett-Stevens attached hereto as
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
no City Attornt'j
P.O.8., 1900
teno, NY 89505
Exhibit" 1." The cez1ificate of services included in the motion claims that the motion was served
upon the Reno City Attorney's Office by faxing, emailing, dropping off at their office and
placing a true and correct copy of the document in the US mail addressed to Jill Drake, Esq. at
the Reno City Attorney's Office-Criminal Division. However, the City never received service of
this document as claimed in the certificate of service. See Exhibit "\."
While NCRP Rule 5 does allow for electronic service of certain documents, this service
is only pemlitted if the party served consents to service by electronic means.
2
The City has
never, either expressly or impliedly, consented to electronic service of documents in this case.
Accordingly, if defendant did send a copy of the motion to the City Attorney's Office in an
electronic fashion, this would not constitute proper service absent an express agreement as
specified in NRCP Rule 5.
/I
, It should be noted that defendant filed this motion on his own behalf and without his counsel.
2 In relevant part, NRCP5(b)(2)(D) states that service may be made by: Delivering a copy by electronic means if the
attorney or the party served has consented to service by electronic mellns. Service by electronic means is complete
on transmission provided, however, a motion, answer or other document constituting the initial appearance of a
party must also, if served by electronic means, be filed within the time allowed for service. The served attorney's or
party's consent to service by electronic means shall be expressly stated and filed in writing with the clerk of the
court and served on the other parties to the action. [Emphasis added]
-2-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
",0 CU1 M\i)Tftq
P.O. Do, 1900

In conclusion, the motion filed by deC endant is a fugitive document and should be
stricken by this Court. Accordingly, the City respectfully requests that this Honorable Court
grant the City's Motion to Strike.
Respectfully submitted this21" day of March, 2012.
-3-
r azlett-Stevens
P.O. Box 1900
Reno, NV 89505

CERTIFI CATE OF SERVICE
2 I certify that I am an employee of the Reno City Attorney, Reno, Nevada, and that on the
3 C) I .jr < day of March, 2012, I deposited for mailing at Reno, Nevada, first class postage
4 prepaid, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document addressed to:
5 Keith Loomis, Esq.
9468 Double R Blvd. #A
6 Reno, NY 89511
7
8
9
10
1I
12
13
14
15
16
\7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
City AttOJMY
P.O. JIG, 1900
Ren." NV 89505
-4-
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
mo City Anornc:)'
1'.0. Box 191)0
Reno, NY 89S05

DECLARA nON OF CHRISTOPHER HAZLETT -STEVENS
1.
That Declarant is a Deputy City Attorney for the City of Reno, Nevada, and is
licensed in the State of Nevada to practice law.
2.
That this Declaration is made in accordance with NRS 53.045 and in suppon of
the City's Motion to Strike.
3.
That 00 March 20, 2012 the City received a courtesy copy of a pleading styled;
"Notice of Appearance of Co-Counsel and Motion to Dismiss."
4.
5.
TItatthe City was never served a copy of said pleading.
lbat the City never consented to service by electronic means in the instant matter.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct
Executed 00 this 11 Ir day of March, 2012.
2

.FILED
Case No. 11 CR 26405
2 Dept. No.2 Reno Dept 2
BY __
tyClerk 3
4
5
6
7
8 THE CIlY OF RENO,
9 Plaintiff,
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
vs. ORDER SUSPENDING PROCEEDINGS
Defendant.

On Apri1lO, 2012, the aboVe-referenced defendant appeared with his attorney, Keith
Loomis, Esq., for trial in this case. Deputy City Attorney Christopher Hazlett-Stevens appeared on
behalf of the City of Reno. After hearing pre-trial legal arguments, after hearing directly from the
defendant himself and after being advised that a competency hearing (related to a Reno Justice Court
gross misdemeanor case involving the defendant) is now scheduled in the Second Judicial District
Court for April 19, 2012, a doubt has arisen as to the competency of the defendant. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the trial and all other proceedings in this case are
hereby suspended until the question of competence is determined.
Dated this 10th day of April, 2012.

Department Two
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
""'"
MUNJClP"'-ootnlT
PO a,.:1SQ)
.... "'''''"
(702)),..uso

CERTIfiCATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to NRCP S(b), I certify that 1 am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
ORDER on the party(ies) set forth below:
_ _ Placing said document in a sealed envelope placed far collecting and mailing
x
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Personal Delivery.
Electronic mail to all parties
---
Keith Loomis Esq.
Defense Counsel
Jay Dilworth
Municipal Court Judge
Kenneth Howard
Dorothy Nash-Holmes
DATED this) Oil> day of April, 2012.
~ J ~ Q p l
lNIttI<.; 1\ NIClPAL COURT OF THE CIT" RENO
COlililiTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NA'
aSOUTHSIERAA STREET,RENO,NV "05
Mailing: P.O. Box 1900, Reno, NV 89505 PHONE (775)334-2290 F "'(775;)31.4-3.,24
VS.
Court Case#: 11 CR 26405 21
DOB: 0912711976
Accident#: Bookiog#: 19876
Status: OPEN
Language: ENGLISH
Attorney: LOOMIS, KEITH
BENCHllUAL JUDGE GARDNER C Tile, Dec 13,2011 8:00 8m
BYREQUESTOFCny
BENCHllUAL JUDGE GARDNER B Tue, Jan 10,2012 1:00 pm BY REQUEST OF DEFENSE
1111412011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: LEW T AITEL; 475 S. ARLINGTON A VENUE, SUITE lA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PHONE (775) 322-2272
PLEASE ALWW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO TlIAT HElSHE
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVENAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HlMfHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTA nON BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODA Y'S DATE. IN THE EVENT THAT THIS ORDER EXPffiES,
THE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICA nON FOR RECONSIDERATION.
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HE/sHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF IDS/HER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HlSIHER
ATTORNEY.
1111412011 THE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED IIISIHER RIGHTS BY THEJUDGEAND INDICATED THAT
HElSHE UNDERSTOOD THEM COMPLETELY.
11/30Jl011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: ROBERTO PUENTES; 416 RIDGE STREET (P.O. BOX 2421) RENO, NEVADA
89505 PHONE (775) 7867676
PLEASE ALWW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO TIIAT HElSHE
WILL HAVE ALL 0 F THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOUR CASE.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVENAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT RIMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MA TrER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUffiV APPLICATION AND
MAYBE REQUffiED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENT A TION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
THE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUffiY APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION.
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OFHISIHER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HIS/HER

er eDdant Initials: ____________ Print Dat.: 4/10/2012
Data Date: 4/1012012
Page lof3
.---- _.----
II/Z012011 LEGAL DEFENDER RELONIlD: LEWIS TAITEL DEll
IT IS HEREBY ORDERElIi/lA T THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE HISIHER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE..
21212012 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED; KEITH LOOMIS: 9468 DOUBLE R BLVD SUITE A, RENO. NEVADA 89521
PHONE ('T7S) 8537222
2/212012
21212012
411012012
Offense Dt:
ArrestDI:
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HE/SHE
WILL HAVE ALL OF THE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM THE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITH YOVR CASE.
IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HIM/HER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THAT HFJSHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HISIHER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HIS/HER
ATTORNEY.
LEGAL DEFENDER RELIEVED: PER GRANTED MOTION HEARING
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE RELIEVED FROM mSIHER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE.
PRESENT IN COURT FOR THE CITY OF RENO: JILL DRAKE FOR THE DEFENSE: ROBERTO PUENTES
PRESENT IN COURT FOR THE CITY OF RENO: CHRISTOPHER HAZLE1TSTEVENS FOR THE DEFENSE:
KEITH LOOMIS
11/1312011
1111312011
Jail Days: 0
Suspended Days: 0
Pie,; 11114/2011 NOT GUILTY
Additional Fees
Supervision Fee Subtotal:
seo.OO 540.00 so.OO
SuP' Fce(.) Due:
IEFENDANT: COUGm.,IN, ZACHARY BARKER
Ageneyll: 1122185
____________ Print Date: 411012012 Initials:
so.oo
Next ProofDt:
Balance:
Completed Dt:
COURT CASE II: 11 CR 2640521
Oala Oat.: 411012012
Page 2 of3
I
FAILURll',Q COMPLY WITH TilE CONI> JNS OF BAIL AS DESCRIBED IN TIllS ORDER LL RESULT IN TIlE ISSUANCE OF A
FAILURE TO COMPLY WARRANT DR rADIATE ARREST AND INCARCERATION FOI!A-rrEMPTOF COURT AND/OR BAIL
REVOCATION. FOR FURTIlER INFORMllPrON, CONTACT TIlE SENTENCE COMPLJANCW!NOOW LOCATED ON TIlE FIRST
FLDOR OF TIlE REND MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE SOu-rn SIERRA ST, REND, NY (775) 334-2290.
TIlE DEFENDANT SHALL APPEAR AS ORDERED FOR ALL REVIEWS AND SHALL COOPERATE FULLY WITIl TIlE
BAILIFFSIMARSHALS AND ALL COURT STAFF.
TIlE DEFENDANT SHALL ATIEND ALL REVIEWS, COURT APPEARANCES AND COURT-ORDERED PROGRAMS ON llME AND
TIlE DEFENDANT SHALL KNOW HIS/HER COURT DATE AND MAINTAIN CONTACT WITH mSIHER A ITORNEY.
PRIOR TO CHANGING mSIHER ADDRESS OR PHONE NUMBER, THE DEFENDANT SHALL NOTIFIY TIlE COURT OF SUCH
CHANGE.
OBEY ALL LAWS.
. .. ... "'r
. .. .
04/1012012 ADDmONAL CASE INFORMATION: PROCEEDINGS SUSPENDED UNTIL COMPETENCY EV AL HAS BEEN COMPLETED
IN DISTRICT COURT MA ITER
03/0512012 MISC NOlES: SENDING MOTION UP TO 0-2 VIA BLACK FOLDER. rms IS ms 2ND REQUEST FOR SAME MOTION
TODAY.
03/0512011 MIse NOTES: D2 HAS FILE. SENDING MOTION UP TO DEPT VIA BLACK FOLDER.
THE HONORABLE
JUDGE'S SIGNATURE: DATE:
You are ordered by the Court to alrive drug/alcohol free and on time for all Court hearings and Court related programs. Failure to
appear in Court will result in the issuance of a warrant for your arrest. Any violation of this instant order may result in contempt
proceedings and the filing of additional criminal charges. In accordance with NRS 22.010, it is a misdemeanor for any person to fail.
relilse or neglect to comply with the terms of any order issued by the Municipal Court Judge. This order will remain in effect until the
Court issues another order superseding it.
UNDERSTAND AND PROMISE TO OBEY TIDS ORDER.
.. DATE: TIME: _ ___ _
I. THE SWORN INTPRETER HAVE FULLY INTERPRETED TIDS ORDER TO THE
DEFENDANT: DATE: _ _____ TIME: ____ _
RECEIVED BY DEPUTY: __ -r ....... ;;;:-_-;:-___ _________ DATE: TIME: ____ _
ISSUED BY MARSHAL: DATEN: - J -/a TIME:
Defendant Initials:
Agencyl/: 1111185
____________ PrinID.I.: 411011012
COURT CASE N: 11 CRl64051I
Dala Dale: 4110/1011
Page 3 oD
iN THE n ,NICIPAL COURT OF THE CIT JF RENO
C<Wt/TY OF WASHOE, STATE OF _V ADA
~ E SOUTH SIERRA STREET, RENO, NV'S05
Mailing: P.O. Box 1900, Reno, NV 89505 PHONE (775}334-2290 FAX <1l:ij3
i
3'3",l4
vs.
Court Casetl: 11 CR 26405 21 DOB: 09n711976
Accident#:
Status: OPEN
Language: ENGLISH
Booking#: 19876
BENCHTIUAL JUDGE GARDNER c Tue,1Jec 13. 2011 8;00 am REQUEST OF CITY
BllNCHTRlAL
lUOOEGARDNER 8 Tue, Jan IO,20ll 1:00 pm BY REQUEST OF DEFENSE
11113/2011 FORMAL COMPLAINT FILED WITII TIlE COURT
1111411011 LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: LEW TAITEL; 475 S. ARLINGTON AVENUE, SUITE lA RENO, NEVADA 89501
PIIONE (775) 322-2272
1 l 1 4 ~
11130fl011
PLE4SE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR A ITORNEY SO THAT IIE/SIIE
WILL IIAVE ALL OF TilE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM TIlE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITII YOUR CASE.
IT IS IlEREBY ORDERED TIIA T THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT IIIMIHER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MA ITER IN TIlE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
IT IS FURTIlER ORDERED THAT TIlE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION AND
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY 'IlIE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTHS FROM TODAY'S DATE. IN TilE EVENT TIIA T TIllS ORDER EXPIRES,
TIlE DEFENDANT MUST SUBMIT AN UPDATED FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERA TION.
IF TIlE DEFENDANT lIAS WITNESSES TIIAT IIE/SIIE WOULD LIKE TO IIA VE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD UKE TO DISCUSS TilE DEFENSE OF HISfflER CASE, TilE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HISIHER
ATTORNEY.
TIlE DEFENDANT APPEARED, WAS EXPLAINED IIISIIIER RIGIITS BY TilE JUDGE AND INDICATED TIIAT
IIEISIIE UNDERSTOOD TIlEM COMPLETELY.
LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED: ROBERTO PUENTES; 416 RIDGE STREET (P.O. BOX 1421) RENO, NEVADA
89505 PIIONE (17S) 786-7676
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO TIIATHElSIIE
WILL IIA VE ALL OF TilE NECESSARY INFORMATION FROM TIlE COURT TO ASSIST YOU WITII YOUR CASE.
IT IS IIEREBY ORDERED TIIA T TilE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL DEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HIM/HER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON TillS MA ITER IN nm RENO MUNIClP AL COURT.
IT IS FURTIlER ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT COMPLETE A FINANCIAL INQUIRY APPLICATION AND
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY TilE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SIX MONTIIS FROM TODA Y'S DATE. IN TIlE EVENT TIIA T TillS ORDER EXPIRES,
IF TIlE DEFENDANT liAS WITNESSES TIIA T IlEJSIIE WOULD LIKE TO IIA VE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HIS/HER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT H1SIIIER
)dendftnt Initials: ____________ PrinlDate: 5/812012
Dala Dale: SIS/20ll
Page I of3
/
Hl30120H
2/2I201Z
21212012
21212012
4/1()1l011
5/812012
51812012
LEGAL DEFENDER RELI tD: LEWIS TAlTEL 'roo)
IT IS HEREBY ORDEREW:HA T THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE RELIEVEJiIIlROM HISIHER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE. .
LEGAL DEFENDER APPOINTED; KEITH WOMIS: 9468 DOUBLE R BLVD SmTE A, RENO, NEVADA 89521
PHONE (775) 853-7222
PLEASE ALLOW APPROXIMATELY 3 WEEKS BEFORE CONTACTING YOUR ATTORNEY SO THAT HE/SHE
ITIS
HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT BE APPOINTED A LEGAL llEFENDER TO
REPRESENT HIM/HER IN ANY AND ALL PROCEEDINGS ON THIS MATTER IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT.
MAY BE REQUIRED TO PAY FEES FOR REPRESENTATION BY THE LEGAL DEFENDER. THIS ORDER WILL
IF THE DEFENDANT HAS WITNESSES THATHEISHE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WITNESSES PRESENT, OR
WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE DEFENSE OF HIS/HER CASE, THE DEFENDANT MUST CONTACT HISIHER
ATTORNEY.
LEGAL DEFENDER RELIEVED: PER GRANTED MOTION HEARING
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE RELIEVED FROM HISIHER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE.
PRESENT IN COURT FOR THE CITY OF RENO: JILL DRAKE FOR THE DEFENSE: ROBERTO PUENTES
PRESENT IN COURT FOR THE CITY OF RENO: CHRISTOPHER HAZLETT -STEVENS FOR THE DEFENSE:
KEITH LOOMIS
LEGAL DEFENDER RELlEVED: KEITH LOOMIS
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE LEGAL DEFENDER BE RELIEVED FROM HISIHER ASSIGNMENT TO THIS
CASE
PRESENT IN COURT FOR THE CITY OF RENO: CHRISTOPHER HAZLETT -STEVENS FOR THE DEFENSE: KEITH
WOMIS
Offense Dt: 11/1312011
JailDays: 0
Suspended Days: 0
Arrest Dt: 1111312011
Plea: 1l/14/2IIU - NOT GUILTY
Disposition:
OeCendant Initials: ____________ Print Date: 5/81l()12 D.ta nate: 51812() 12
Page 2 of3
Next PrOG. ..
Balan.,..
Compl'-:>t:
FAILURE TO COMPLY Willi THE CONDmONS OF BAIL AS DESCRIBED IN TIllS ORDER WILL RESULT IN THE ISSUANCE OF A
FAILURE TO COMPLY WARRANT OR IMMEDIATE ARREST AND INCARCERATION FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT AND/OR BAIL
REVOCATION. FOR FURTIffiR INFORMA TION, CONTACT ll1E SENTENCE COMPLIANCE WINDOW LOCATED ON THE FIRST
FLOOR OF THll RENO MUNICIPAL COURT, ONE SOU11I SIERRA ST, RENO, NY (775) 334-2290.
TIiB DEFENDANT SHALL APPEAR AS ORDERED FOR ALL REVIEWS AND SHALL COOPERATE FULLY WITH THE
BAILIFFSiMARSHALS AND ALL COURT STAFF.
TIiE DEFENDANT SHALL ATTEND ALL REVIEWS, COURT APPEARANCES AND COURT-ORDERED PROGRAMS ON TIME AND
TIiE DEFENDANT SHALL KNOW HIS/HER COURT DATE AND MAINTAIN CONTACT WITH HIS/HER A lTORNEY.
PRIOR TO CHANGING HIS/HER ADDRESS OR PHONE NUMBER, llfE DEFENDANT SHALL NOTIFIY THE COURT OF SUCH
CHANGE.
OBEY ALL LAWS.

0510812011 ADDITiONAL CASE INFORMATION: NO MOTIONS WILL BE NOT ACCEPTED BY FAX FROM DEFENDANT OR CITY
ATIURNEY. ALL PRE TRIAL MOTIONS MUST BE FILED 15 DAYS PRIOR TO TRIAL DATE OF 6-18-12 IN PERSON BY ALL
PARTIES.
0510812011 ADDmONAL CASE INFORMATION: PROCEEDINGS NO LONGER SUSPENDED, DEFENSE ATTORNEY TO OBTAIN
WRITTEN ORDER FROM DISTRICT COURT FINDING DEFENDANT COMPE1ENT PRIOR TO TRIAL DATE
03/0511012 MISe NOTES: SENDING MOTION UP TO 0-2 VIA BLACK FOLDER. TinS IS HIS 2ND REQUEST FOR SAME MOTION
TODAY.
0411012012 ADDmONAL CASE INFORMATION: PROCEEDINGS SUSPENDED UNTIL COMPETENCY EV AL HAS BEEN COMPLETED
IN DISlRICT COURT MATTER
03/0512012 MISC NOTES: D-2 HAS FILE. SENDING MOTION UP TO DEPT VIA BLACK FOLDER.
THE HONORABLE
JUDGE'S SIGNATURE:
DATE:
You are ordered by the Court to alTive drug/alcohol fill. and on time for all COUl1 hearings and Court related programs. Failure to
appear in Court will result in the issuance of a warrant for your arrest. Any violation of this instant order may result in contempt
proceedings and the filing of additional criminal charges. In accordance with NRS 22.010, it is a misdemeanor for any person to fail,
refuse or neglectto comply with the terms of any order issued by the Municipal Court Judge. This order will remain in effect until the
Court issues another order superseding it.
I UNDERSTA D AND PROMlSE TOOBEY TIDS ORDER.
, _ _____ TlME: ___ _
I. THE SWORN INTPRETER HAVE FULLY INTERPRETED THIS ORDER TO THE
DEFENDANT: DATE: ______ TIME: ____ _
RECEIVED BY DEPUTY: ____ --,oo;:-_____________ DATE: TIME: ____ _

I>EF : COUGHLIN, ZACHARY BARKER
'ltfendant Initials:
----------------------
Agency#: 11-22185
Print Date: 51812012
COURT CASE N: 11 CR 26405 21
Dat. Date: 51812011
Page 3 .f3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Document Code:
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
PO BOX 3961
eno, NV 89505
ele: 775-338-8118
Fax: 949-667-7402
Attorney for Pro Se Attorney Plaintiff
2
r. ' ? "!" -<:; t'r: 8: 1 1
IJ ! " . . . ; l ; : ~ ..J I " Ii
. _ , I
IN THE RENO MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
lTV OF RENO;
PLAINTIFF,
vs.
ACH COUGHLIN;
DEFENDANT.
)
)
)
) Case No: 11 CR 26405
)
)
) Dept No: 2
)
)
)
)
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS COUNSEL; MOTION TO DISMISS; MOTION TO
SUPPRESS; MOTION FOR A CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL AND TRANSFER TO MENTAL
HEALTH COURT
COMES NOW, Defendant, Zach Coughlin, by and through himself as co-counsel to
Defendant and files the above title document on his own behalf. RMC Judge Nash Holmes, in
conjunction with materials provided to Hon. RMC Judge William Gardner by his sister, Hon. WDC
Judge Linda Gardner has request the State Bar of Nevada to perform a competency evaluation or
disability petition of some sort, utilizing copies of motions submitted by the undersigned in the
instant case. As such, a continuance is appropriate pending the outcome of that State Bar inquiry,
and further, preserved for appeal here, a respectfill request is made that this Honorable Court
- I -
Motion to Dismiss. Motion to Su.nnress, Motion for Continuance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
consider ?hether a recusal might >e in order given the 1amilial relationshi= it has ?ith a Audge ?hose
!rder 1or 2anctions ?as su>mitted to Bar Counsel 1or consternation, liCel0, >0 ?a0 o1 this 4onora>le
CourtDs delivering it to @udge Nash 4olmes, and she deliver0ing it to Bar Counsel.
LE!AL AR!UMENT
Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss the Complaint, Motion to
Suppress, and Motion for Continuance
Introduction
The defendant, Zach Coughlin ("Coughlin") is charged with criminal trespass under
the Reno Municipal Code (RMC) 8.1.1 . The factual allegations in the complaint are
insufficient to support such a charge, as such this matter should !e dismissed.
A" T#e Compa$int fai$s to esta%$is# pro%a%$e ause %eause it fai$s to a$$e&e t#at t#ere 'as
suffiient ('arnin&( not to remain at t#e propert) after %ein& to$* not to *o so an* or t#at
Cou&#$in *i* not #a+e a ri&#t to %e t#ere"
*he summar0 eviction order ?as not a==ro=riatel0 served under N%C #, ?hich is e-=ressl0
made a==lica>le to civil landlord tenant eviction matters, commercial or residential, in N%2 4).4)):
N%2 4).4)): %ules o1 =ractice. *he =rovisions o1 N%2, Nevada %ules o1 Civil
rocedure and Nevada %ules o1 /==ellate rocedure relative to civil actions,
a==eals and ne? trials, so 1ar as the0 are not inconsistent ?ith the =rovisions o1
N%2 4)...) to 4).4.), inclusive, a==l0 to the =roceedings mentioned in those
sections.
,urther, there e-ists a ?ealth o1 =recedent in su==ort o1 the =osition that an eviction is not a
E?arningE su11icient to su==ort a criminal tres=ass charge. ,urther, 9ashoe Count0 2heri11Ds !11ice
2u=ervisor 7iB 2tuchell has admitted in ?riting that 9C2! De=ut0 5achem signed his a11idavit o1
service, attesting that he =ersonall0 served Coughlin the 2ummar0 Eviction !rder, ?hen in 1act he
onl0 allegedl0 =laced a co=0 o1 it on the door o1 the la? o11ice. /s such, an0 locCout occurring on
+ . +
Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Suppress, Motion for Continuane
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Novem>er $, .)$$ as done =rior to the constructive service required >0 N%C #Fe< >eing e11ectuated,
and ?as a ?rong1ul locCout. ,urther, the 1act that, the %eno @ustice Court ?as still holding on to
some G.,.7( o1 CoughlinDs mone0, ?hen N%2 $$'/.3'( =rovides that Coughlin, as a tenant ?hose
rent ?as less than G$,))), should get a sta0 o1 eviction u=on de=ositing a mere G.() ?ith the %@C.
4ere, nearl0 ten times that amount ?as, at 1irst, im=ro=erl0 required as a Erent escro?E de=ositing,
des=ite the 1act that @C%C '4 and N%2 4)..(3F#< 1or>ids the %@C 1rom so doing a>sent the %@C
=u>lishing and getting a==roved a corollar0 to @C%7& 44, ?hich does =rovide 1or such rent escro?
de=osits in the conte-t o1 a summar0 eviction =roceeding. 9C2! 2tuchell has admitted in ?riting
that 5achem and her o11ice inter=ret the legal =hrase E=ersonall0 servedE to >e something other than
giving the =erson to >e served the documents ?hile that =erson is in the =resence o1 the =rocess
server. *his is contrar0 to longstanding =recedent in legal circles.
%ichard ;. 4ill, Esq. liCes to argue that 3 ?as EservedE in com=liance ?ith all time related rules >ecause it ?as
done in the Eusual custom and =ractice o1 the 9C2!. 9hat, e-actl0, is the Eusual custom and =ractice o1 the 9C2!H 3
hear a lot a>out this E?ithin .4 hoursE stu11.
*his ?hole >usiness a>out I*he court ma0 thereu=on issue an order directing the sheri11 or consta>le o1 the
count0 to remove the tenant ?ithin .4 hours a1ter recei=t o1 the order...J is ina==lica>le to this situation, ?here an !rder
;ranting 2ummar0 Eviction ?as signed >0 !cto>er .7th, .)$$. *hat language is onl0 1ound in situations ina==lica>le to
the current one. N%2 4)..(3F3<F><F.<, and N%2 4)..(3F(<Fa< are the onl0 sections o1 N%2 4) ?here this I?ithin .4
hoursJ language occurs, and those situations onl0 a==l0 ?here, in:
4)..(3F3<F><F.<: I 3. / notice served =ursuant to su>section $ or . must: ...F>< /dvise the tenant: K. F.< *hat i1 the court
determines that the tenant is guilt0 o1 an unla?1ul detainer, the court ma0 issue a summar0 order 1or removal o1 the tenant
or an order =roviding 1or the nonadmittance o1 the tenant, directing the sheri11 or consta>le o1 the count0 to remove the
tenant ?ithin .4 hours a1ter recei=t o1 the orderJ
and,
4)..(3F(<Fa<: I(. 6=on noncom=liance ?ith the notice: Fa< *he landlord or the landlordLs agent ma0 a==l0 >0 a11idavit o1
com=laint 1or eviction to the Austice court o1 the to?nshi= in ?hich the d?elling, a=artment, mo>ile home or commercial
=remises are located or to the district court o1 the count0 in ?hich the d?elling, a=artment, mo>ile home or commercial
=remises are located, ?hichever has Aurisdiction over the matter. *he court ma0 thereu=on issue an order directing the
sheri11 or consta>le o1 the count0 to remove the tenant ?ithin .4 hours a1ter recei=t o1 the order.J
+ 3 +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
*he ?a0 these summar0 eviction =roceedings are >eing carried out in %eno @ustice Court =resentl0 shocCs the conscience
and violates Nevada la?. *here is not >asis 1or e11ectuating a locCout the ?a0 9C2!Ds De=ut0 5achem did in this case.
*he a>ove t?o sections containing the I?ithin .4 hours o1 recei=tJ language are ina==lica>le, as those situations do not
invoCe the =resent circumstances, ?here the *enant did 1ile an /11idavit and did contest this matter. ,urther, as the
/nvui case sho?s, ?here it ?as dis=uted ?hether the 7ease /greement had EterminatedE or Eautomaticall0 rene?edE
there is su==ort 1or the =osition that a ( da0 sta0 =eriod is required >0 la?.
*o require NevadaDs tenants to get u= and get out I?ithin .4 hoursJ o1 Irecei=t o1 the orderJ F?hat does that
even meanH *he use o1 terms liCe IrenditionJ, IrenderedJ, Inotice o1 entr0J, I=ronouncedJ, is a>sent here, and this
Irecei=t o1 the orderJ language is something rarel0 1ound else?here in Nevada la?+see attached D5& statutor0 citations,
and in em=lo0ment la? litigations ?here one must 1ile a Com=laint ?ithin 9) da0s o1 Irecei=tJ o1 a %ight *o 2ue 7etter,
a situation ?hich 1ollo?s N%C (F><, and N%C #Fe< in im=uting recei=t o1 such a letter, ?hen actual recei=t is not
sho?n, >0 a==l0ing a Iconstructive noticeJ standard that relies u=on the da0s 1or mailing e-tension o1 time 1or items
served in the mailing, etc.<. ,or the saCe o1 analog0, in />raham v. 9oods 4ole !ceanogra=hic 3nstitute, ((3 ,.3d $$4
F$st Cir. .))9<, the record did not re1lect ?hen the =lainti11 received his right+to+sue letter. *he letter ?as issued on
Novem>er .4, .))#. *he court calculated that the 9)+da0 =eriod commenced on Novem>er 3), .))#, >ased on three da0s
1or mailing a1ter e-cluding 2aturda0s and 2unda0s. 3n order to >ring a claim under either *itle &33 or the /D/, a =lainti11
must e-haust administrative remedies and sue ?ithin 9) da0s o1 recei=t o1 a right to sue letter. 2ee 4. 6.2.C. M .)))e+(F1<
F$<. 2ee Bald?in Count0 9elcome Center v. Bro?n, 4## 6.2. $47, $4' n.$, $)4 2.Ct. $7.3, ') 7.Ed..d $9# F$9'4<
Fgranting =lainti11 an additional three da0s 1or mailing =ursuant to %ule #<....J ...
hoe Count0 2heri11Ds !11ice,
*hese state s=onsored locCouts under color o1 state la? should not >e >eing done so 1ast, unless the 9C2!
E=ersonall0 serveE the tenant, 3 1eel the la? is quite clear, 0ou have to e11ect Esu>stituted serviceE ?hich, under N%C
#Fa< and N%C #Fe< and N%C (F><F.< Fand N%C, not @C%C is a==lica>le to eviction matters according to N%2 $$'/<
the tenant cannot >e deemed to have received or constructivel0 received the !rder until the 3 da0s 1or mailing has =assed.
ersonal service >0 =rocess server: =ersonal service is service o1 =rocess directl0 to the For a< =art0 named on the
summons, com=laint or =etition.
/nd even i1 something indicates Coughlin ECne?E a>out the !rder, much liCe in the case o1 CoughlinDs that ?as
dismissed ?here the 9ashoe Count0 2heri11Ds didnDt manage to get the E=ersonal serviceE o1 the 2ummons and Com=laint
+ 4 +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
done in time, or Esu11icientl0E, o==osing counsel in that matter could tell 0ou that Eactual noticeE is not a su>stitute 1or
com=liance ?ith the service requirements.
9hich is 1ortunate in that those liCe 4ill, ?ouldnDt have such an o==ortunit0 to game the s0stem and s?oo= in
?ith locCout then assert an argument >ased u=on N%2 $$'/.4#) Ereasona>le storage, moving, and inventor0ing
e-=ensesE su>Aecting the tenantDs =ersonal =ro=ert0 to a lien. %ichard ;. 4ill insisted on thro?ing a?a0 the last thing
CoughlinDs >eloved grandmother gave me >e1ore she died . 0ears ago in the to?n dum=. 4e and his contractor lied a>out
so man0 things, including the 1act that the0 used CoughlinDs o?n d =l0?ood to >oard u= the >acC =orch o1 the =ro=ert0,
then su>mitted a >ill to the court in an e-hi>it 1or G$,)#) 1or EsecuringE the =ro=ert0 F?hich doesnDt reall0 a==l0 to N%2
$$'/.4#)Ds Ereasona>le storage moving and inventor0ing e-=ensesE liCe it is required to...1urther, 4ill charged Coughlin
G9)) a month 1or storage and sent Coughlin a >ill 1or such =rior to CoughlinDs arrest 1or tres=assing at the $.$ %iver %ocC
location. /dditionall0, 4ill has admitted on video ta=e that he su>mitted a >ill to Coughlin, =rior to the tres=assing arrest,
?herein 4ill =ur=orts to charge Coughlin the same G9)) 1or EstorageE on a monthl0 >asis that the landlord had =reviousl0
charged 1or the 1ull use and occu=anc0 o1 the d?elling... ,urther, even i1 4illDs charge ?ere 1or storage situations, there
are sections o1 N%2 $$'/ devoted to evicting someone 1rom a storage 1acilit0, not arresting them 1or tres=ass, and
certainl0 not conducting a custodial. 3n the videos that ?ere =ro=ounded >0 the %eno Cit0 /ttorne0 and taCen >0 4ill
%D !11icer Carter and 2argent 7o=eB admit the0 never issued a ?arning to me or asCed me to leave =rior to conducting
a custodial arrest F?hich required G')) o1 >ail and 3 da0s in Aail, no less<. D,urther, in a su>sequent video ta=ed intervie?
o1 %D 2argent 7o=eB, she admits that neither she nor !11icer Carter announced ?ho the0 ?ere =rior to the door >eing
CicCed in >0, allegedl0, Dr. 5erliss. *his is in marCed contrast to !11icer CarterDs ?ritten Narrative, ?herein on =age 3
o1 3 he ?rites E2gt 7o=eB and 3 CnocCed ont he >asement door and announced loudl0 E%eno oliceE and called out 1or
Zachar0 to o=en the door. 9e ?ere met ?ith no res=onse. 5atthe? decided he ?oudl CicC the door o=en, and did so. 3
entered the door?a0 o1 the >asement and 1ound Zachar0 standing...E. !11icer Carter goes on to ?rite Fseemingl0
=roviding a legal o=inion< E3 tried to e-=lain to HZachar0 that he ?as served eviction =a=ers and he asCed....E. !11icer
Carter seems to >ase his arrest u=on his legal o=inion as to ?hat EserviceE o1 these Eeviction =a=ersE required. *he
videos shot >0 4ill do reveal Coughlin asCing !11icer Carter and 2argent 7o=eB ?h0 a ?arning or citation ?as not issued
rather than a custodial arrest. 2uch statements maCe less =lausi>le !11icer CarterDs ?ritten Narratives assertion on =age 3
that EDue to Zachar0 not >elieving he has done an0thing ?rong that the 1act he >elieves he still has standing there is
reasona>le grounds to >elieve Zachar0 ?ill return to the house. *here1ore he did not quali10 1or a misdemeanor citation.E
+ ( +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4illDs associate BaCerDs =re=ared the 2ummar0 Eviction !rder, ?hich read E>ut the G.,.7( ?onDt >e released to
the neurosurgeon 0et, Einstead that sum shall serve as securit0 1or CoughlinDs cost on a==eal, =ursuant to Nevada @C%C
73...E. But ?ait, doesnDt that mean Coughlin then gets a 2ta0 o1 Eviction during the =endenc0 o1 the /==ealH 3sntD that ?as
a securit0 that large must >e 1orH Because the E/==eal BondE is set >0 statute at onl0 a mere G.()....so holding on to $)
times that much o1 CoughlinDs cash must have >een 1or the E2u=ersedeas BondE mentioned a 0ielding one a 2ta0 o1
Eviction in N%2 4).3') and 4).3'(.
*hose N%2 sections 1orce the landlord, his attorne0s and the %@C to choose >et?een vie?ing Coughlin as a
residential tenant ?hose rent is less than G$,))), and ?hom there1ore is onl0 required to =ost a measl0 su=ersedeas >ond
o1 G.() Fand remem>er, a su=ersedeas >ond equals a sta0 o1 eviction equals not tres=assing< or the the other choice is to
vie? Coughlin as a commercial tenant, ?hich ?ould allo? charging a higher su=ersedeas >ond Fe-ce=t 1or that =esC0 =art
a>out his rent >eing under the G$,))) required >0 the statute to do so, his rent >eing onl0 G9))<, e-ce=t, %ichard ;. 4ill,
Esq. and Case0 BaCer, Esq. elected to =ursue this summar0 eviction =roceeding under a No Cause Eviction Notice, ?hich
is not allo?ed against a commercial tenant Fie, 0ou canDt evict a commercial tenant using the summar0 eviction
=rocedures set 1orth in N%2 4)..(3 unless 0ou alllege non =a0ment o1 rent and serve a 3) Da0 Non a0ment o1 %ent
Notice *o Nuit.
olice %es=onse in 3llegal Eviction and !ther *ennantO7andlord 2ituations *he ,ollo?ing Document is E-cer=ted ,rom:
&E%5!N* 2*/*E !73CE *%/3N3N; B677E*3N N65BE% + 93+$ %67E2 P %E;67/*3!N2 !E%/*3!N/7
!73C3E2P %!CED6%E2 *%/3N3N; B677E*3N N65BE% + 93+$ 7/ND7!%DO*EN/N* 7/9 +9 &.2./.
M44($+ M44#' 2ummar0 *he 6.2. 2u=reme Court has recentl0 ruled that the =resence o1 la? en1orcement o11icers,
together ?ith their inaction during an illegal eviction violated the ,ourth /mendmentLs =rohi>ition against unreasona>le
seiBures and ma0 lead to lia>ilit0 under 1ederal civil rights la?. that is the motion to su==ress all the ?itness statements
and =olice re=orts here and an0 other materials gathered. 3n this case, la? en1orcement o11icers ?ho ?ere =resent at an
eviction at the request o1 the landlord, re1used to taCe the tenantLs com=laint 1or criminal tres=ass or other?ise inter1ere
?ith the eviction. *he o11icers in1ormed the tenant that Iit ?as >et?een the landlord and the tenantJ. 2oldal v. CooC
Count0, 3llinois, 6.2. 2u=reme Court, #$ 79 4)$9 F$993<. 3n maCing the ruling, the 2u=reme Court e-=ressed con1idence
that I=olice ?ill not o1ten choose to 1urther an enter=rise Cno?ing that it is contrar0 to state la?.J No?, it is more
im=ortant than ever, that o11icers res=onding to landlordOtenant dis=utes have a >asic understanding o1 the state la? ?hich
controls this relationshi=. *he 1ollo?ing guidelines should >e used ?hen res=onding to landlordOtenant com=laints. /
num>er o1 reoccurring questions arise ?hich surround the issue o1 landlordOtenantsL rights and =olice duties. ,requentl0
the landlord or the tenant ?ill call a =olice agenc0 during a dis=ute and 0ou are then =ut in the unenvia>le =osition o1
determining ?hat course o1 action, i1 an0, to 1ollo?. *he rights and res=onsi>ilities o1 landlords and tenants are
s=eci1icall0 set out in &ermont statutes: there1ore violation o1 these statutes ma0 result in criminal violations o1 *itle $3.
5erel0 >ecause it is a IlandlordOtenant dis=uteJ does not al?a0s mean that it is a Icivil matterL and that 0ou should not
>ecome involved. 3n 1act, 1ailure to act ma0 result in civil lia>ilit0. Evictions &ermont la? =rohi>its a landlord, under an0
circumstances, 1rom entering an a=artment and evicting the tenant. 9 &.2./. 44#' states that i1 a tenant remains in
=ossession o1 an a=artment against the ?ishes o1 the landlord, the landlord must >ring an action 1or a ?rit o1 =ossession
under $. &.2./. Cha=ter $#9, M 4'($+4'(#. !nce a ?rit o1 =ossession is granted to the landlord, $. &.2./. M4'(4
mandates that Ithe ?rit shall direct the sheri11 o1 the count0 in ?hich the =ro=ert0 or a =ortion thereo1 is located to serve
the ?rit u=on the de1endant and, no sooner than 1ive da0s a1ter the ?rit is served, to =ut the =lainti11 into =ossession.J
6nder this =rocedure, a landlord ma0 not enter an a=artment and move a tenant out. /n eviction must =roceed through the
court s0stem and the ?rit allo?ing 1or eviction must >e served >0 the sheri11: 1urthermore, the tenant must >e actuall0
+ # +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
moved out o1 the a=artment >0 the sheri11. />andonment *he onl0 e-ce=tion allo?ing 1or the landlord to enter the
a=artment ?ithout going through the =rocedure outlined a>ove occurs ?hen the a=artment has >een Ia>andonedJ >0 the
tenant. &.2./. M44#.Fa< states that a tenant has a>andoned a d?elling unit i1: Q *here are circumstances ?hich ?ould lead
a reasona>le =erson to >elieve that the d?elling unit is no longer occu=ied as a 1ull+time residence: Q %ent is not current:
and Q *he landlord has made reasona>le e11orts to ascertain the tenantLs intentions. %ule o1 *hum> 31 the sheri11 is not
=artici=ating in the eviction, it is most liCel0 an illegal eviction, a violation o1 *itle $3 and 0ou should not allo? it to
=roceed. 31 a landlord, ?ithout the assistance o1 a sheri11, enters an a=artment in order to evict a tenant, the landlord is in
violation o1 $3 &.2./., M37)(Fd<, unla?1ul tres=ass. 2uggested Course o1 /ction ,reeBe the scene, maintain the Istatus
quoJ, do not allo? the landlord to remove an0 =ro=ert0 or to enter the tenantLs a=artment. E-=lain the requirements
necessar0 1or an eviction to the landlord and re1er >oth the landlord and the tenant to the a==ro=riate re1errals contained in
the 2u==ort 2ervices Director0. 31 this is not an IinnocentJ mistaCe on the =art o1 the landlord, issue a citation. 31 the
landlord =ersists contrar0 to 0our directions, maCe an arrest. I7ocC !utJ o1 the *enant 3n addition to the =rohi>ition o1 an
actual eviction >0 the landlord, unless the ste=s noted a>ove have >een taCen, &ermont la? also =revents a landlord 1rom
turning o11 utilit0 services to an a=artment or =adlocCing or changing the locC to an a=artment in order to =revent a tenant
1rom entering the a=artment or gaining access to their =ro=ert0. 9 &.2./. M44#3 states as 1ollo?s: Fa< No landlord ma0
?ill1ull0 cause, directl0 or indirectl0, the interru=tion or termination o1 an0 utilit0 service >eing su==lied to the tenant,
e-ce=t 1or tem=orar0 interru=tions 1or emergenc0 re=airs. F>< No landlord ma0 directl0 or indirectl0 den0 a tenant access
to and =ossession o1 the tenantLs rented or leased =remises, e-ce=t through =ro=er Audicial =rocess. Fc< No landlord ma0
directl0 or indirectl0 den0 a tenant access to and =ossession o1 the tenantLs =ro=ert0, e-ce=t through =ro=er Audicial
=rocess. %ule o1 *hum> Q Because it is illegal 1or a landlord to IlocC outJ a tenant ?ithout Audicial authoriBation, a tenant
?ho is required to use reasona>le 1orce to re+enter the a=artment has not committed a crime under *itle $3. 2uggested
Course o1 /ction Q ,reeBe the scene, e-=lain the =rohi>itions o1 2ec. M44#3 to the landlord: i1 the landlord does not relent
and allo? the tenant to enter the a=artment, then 0our dut0 is to maintain the =eace and allo? the tenant to gain entr0 to
the a=artment. Entr0 >0 the 7andlord in a Non+Emergenc0 2ituation 9 &.2./. M44#) states as 1ollo?s: Fa< / landlord ma0
enter the d?elling unit ?ith the tenantLs consent, ?hich shall not >e unreasona>l0 ?ithheld. F>< / landlord ma0 also enter
the d?elling unit 1or the 1ollo?ing =ur=oses >et?een the hours o1 9:)) /.5. and 9:)) .5. on no less than 4' hoursL
notice: F$< ?hen necessar0 to ins=ect the =remises: F.< to maCe necessar0 or agreed re=airs, alterations or im=rovements:
F3< to su==l0 agreed services: or F4< to e-hi>it the d?elling unit to =ros=ective or actual =urchasers, mortgagees, tenants,
?orCers or contractors. Fc< / landlord ma0 onl0 enter the d?elling unit ?ithout consent or notice ?hen the landlord has a
reasona>le >elie1 that there is imminent danger to an0 =erson or to =ro=ert0. %ule o1 *hum> Q Because a landlord ma0
not, ?ithout the consent o1 a tenant, enter an a=artment e-ce=t as outlined a>ove, an entr0 in violation o1 this section
meets the criteria 1or violation o1 $3 &.2./. M37)(Fd< + 6nla?1ul *res=ass. 2uggested Course o1 /ction Q 3n res=onse to a
tres=ass com=laint 1rom a tenant, =roceed in the same manner as an0 other criminal com=laint. 3ntervie? the com=lainant
and the accused and re1er the case to 0our 2tateLs /ttorne0 1or =rosecution. *he1t or Destruction o1 the %ental ro=ert0 >0
the *enant 9 &.2./. M44(#Fc< states: *he tenant shall not deli>eratel0 or negligentl0 destro0, de1ace, damage, or remove
an0 =art o1 the =remises or its 1i-tures, mechanical s0stems or 1urnishings, or deli>eratel0 or negligentl0 =ermit an0
=erson to do so. /lthough a securit0 de=osit ma0 >e used to o11set the loss o1 the =ro=ert0 to the landlord, intentional
destruction o1 =ro=ert0 or removal o1 =ro=ert0 >0 the tenant is not necessaril0 a Icivil matterJ. 3ntentional destruction o1
rental =ro=ert0 meets the criteria 1or violation o1 $3 &.2./, M37)$ + 6nla?1ul 5ischie1. F=ro=ert0 is de1ined under this
section as >oth real and =ersonal =ro=ert0. 2ec. 37) $Fe<.< %emoving 1i-tures or 1urnishings 1rom the a=artment ?ith the
intent to =ermanentl0 de=rive the o?ner o1 =ossession meets the criteria 1or a violation o1 $3 &.2./. M.()$ or M.(). +
7arcen0.
N%2 4).3') rovisions governing a==eals. Either =art0 ma0, ?ithin $) da0s, a==eal 1rom
the Audgment rendered. But an a==eal >0 the de1endant shall not sta0 the e-ecution o1 the
Audgment, unless, ?ithin the $) da0s, the de1endant shall e-ecute and 1ile ?ith the court or
Austice the de1endantLs undertaCing to the =lainti11, ?ith t?o or more sureties, in an amount to
>e 1i-ed >0 the court or Austice, >ut ?hich shall not >e less than t?ice the amount o1 the
Audgment and costs, to the e11ect that, i1 the Audgment a==ealed 1rom >e a11irmed or the a==eal
>e dismissed, the a==ellant ?ill =a0 the Audgment and the cost o1 a==eal, the value o1 the use
and occu=ation o1 the =ro=ert0, and damages Austl0 accruing to the =lainti11 during the
=endenc0 o1 the a==eal. 6pon ta,in& t#e appea$ an* fi$in& t#e un*erta,in&, a$$ furt#er
proee*in&s in t#e ase s#a$$ %e sta)e*"
N%2 4).3'( 2ta0 o1 e-ecution u=on a==eal: dut0 o1 tenant ?ho retains =ossession o1 =remises
to =a0 rent during sta0. 6=on an a==eal 1rom an order entered =ursuant to N%2 4)..(3:
+ 7 +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
$. E-ce=t as other?ise =rovided in this su>section, a sta0 o1 e-ecution ma0 >e o>tained >0
1iling ?ith the trial court a >ond in the amount o1 G.() to cover the e-=ected costs on a==eal. /
suret0 u=on the >ond su>mits to the Aurisdiction o1 the a==ellate court and irrevoca>l0 a==oints
the clerC o1 that court as the suret0Ls agent u=on ?hom =a=ers a11ecting the suret0Ls lia>ilit0
u=on the >ond ma0 >e served. 7ia>ilit0 o1 a suret0 ma0 >e en1orced, or the >ond ma0 >e
released, on motion in the a==ellate court ?ithout inde=endent action. / tenant o1 commercial
=ro=ert0 ma0 o>tain a sta0 o1 e-ecution onl0 u=on the issuance o1 a sta0 =ursuant to %ule ' o1
the Nevada %ules o1 /==ellate rocedure and the =osting o1 a su=ersedeas >ond in the amount
o1 $)) =ercent o1 the un=aid rent claim o1 the landlord.
.. / tenant ?ho retains =ossession o1 the =remises that are the su>Aect o1 the a==eal during the
=endenc0 o1 the a==eal shall =a0 to the landlord rent in the amount =rovided in the underl0ing
contract >et?een the tenant and the landlord as it >ecomes due. 31 the tenant 1ails to =a0 such
rent, the landlord ma0 initiate ne? =roceedings 1or a summar0 eviction >0 serving the tenant
?ith a ne? notice =ursuant to N%2 4)..(3.
N%2 4).4)) %ules o1 =ractice. *he =rovisions o1 N%2, Nevada %ules o1 Civil rocedure and
Nevada %ules o1 /==ellate rocedure relative to civil actions, a==eals and ne? trials, so 1ar as
the0 are not inconsistent ?ith the =rovisions o1 N%2 4)...) to 4).4.), inclusive, a==l0 to the
=roceedings mentioned in those sections.
*he language in N%2 4) a>out ho? the 2heri11 ma0 Eremove tenant 1rom the =ro=ert0 ?ithin .4 hours o1 recei=t
o1 the !rderE does not a==l0 ?here the *enant 1iled a *enantDs /ns?er and sho?ed u= to the 4earing and litigated the
matter. Es=eciall0 ?here, as here the lease had not terminated, >0 its terms, >ut ?as rather rene?ed. *his is =articularl0
true ?here N%2 $$'/ =revents so terminating a holdover tenantDs lease 1or a retaliator0 or discriminator0 =ur=ose.
N%C 4: EFd< 2ummons: ersonal 2ervice. *he summons and com=laint shall >e served together. *he =lainti11
shall 1urnish the =erson maCing service ?ith such co=ies as are necessar0. 2ervice shall >e made >0 delivering a co=0 o1
the summons attached to a co=0 o1 the com=laint as 1ollo?s:...F#< 2ervice 6=on 3ndividuals. 3n all other cases to the
de1endant =ersonall0, or >0 leaving co=ies thereo1 at the de1endantLs d?elling house or usual =lace o1 a>ode ?ith some
=erson o1 suita>le age and discretion then residing therein, or >0 delivering a co=0 o1 the summons and com=laint to an
agent authoriBed >0 a==ointment or >0 la? to receive service o1 =rocess. R/s amended: e11ective @anuar0 $, .))(.S Fe<
2u>Aect: %E: 9C2! De=ut0 5achemDs E=ersonall0 servedE /11idavit o1 $$O$O.)$$
Belo? is a true and accurate re=roduction 1o the email 1rom 9C2! 2u=ervisor 7iB 2tuchell clari10ing ?hat E=ersonall0
servedE means to here and 9C2! De=ut0 5achem in his /11idavit o1 2ervice o1 the 2ummar0 Eviction !rder:
Date: *ue, 7 ,e> .)$. $$:4):39 +)'))
,rom: 72tuchellT?ashoecount0.us *o: BachcoughlinThotmail.com
CC: mCandarasTda.?ashoecount0.us
5r. Coughlin,
!ur records indicate that the eviction conducted on that da0 ?as =ersonall0 served >0 De=ut0 5achen >0 =osting a co=0
o1 the !rder to the residence. *he residence ?as unoccu=ied at the time.
7iB 2tuchell, 2u=ervisor
9C2! Civil 2ection
+ ' +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
,urther, the la? in our 2tate does not seem e-ce=tionall0 clear ?ith regard to the service and
=rocess requirements and timelines, and manner o1 calculating time ?ith res=ect to the Erecei=tE o1
7ocCout !rders. *he /11idavit o1 2ervice >0 5achen states that he E=ersonall0 served the descri>ed
documents u=onE m0, Zach Coughlin...4o?ever, 3 can attest >0 /11idavit that 3 ?as not E=ersonall0
servedE to the e-tent that E=ersonall0 servedE means or im=lies that 3 ?as there, that 5achen sa? me
or identi1ied me, or an0 o1 the other indicators o1 something, such as a Com=laint, >eing E=ersonall0
servedE such as 3 understand the =hrase to me. N%C (F><F.<F/<Fi+iii<. ,urther, as BaCer and 4ill
have so o1ten =ointed out, 3 cannot, according to them, receive an0 attorne0Ds 1ee a?ard 1or a==earing
as =ro se attorne0, as such, N%C (F><F.<F/<Fi+iii<, should a==l0 to me onl0 as a =art0, and not as a
=art0Ds attorne0, and, there1ore, according to N%C (, 2ervice: EF.< 2ervice under this rule is made
>0: F/< Delivering a co=0 to the attorne0 or the =art0 >0: Fi< handing it to the attorne0 or to the =art0:
Fii< leaving it at the attorne0Ls or =art0Ls o11ice ?ith a clerC or other =erson in charge, or i1 there is no
one in charge, leaving it in a cons=icuous =lace in the o11ice: or Fiii< i1 the o11ice is closed or the
=erson to >e served has no o11ice, leaving it at the person-s *'e$$in& #ouse or usua$ p$ae of a%o*e
'it# some person of suita%$e a&e an* *isretion resi*in& t#ere...E 2o, either it ?as m0 o11ice, in
?hich case a No Cause Eviction Notice maCes im=ermissi>le a 2ummar0 Eviction roceeding under
N%2 4)..(3, and there1ore, the !rder o1 2ummar0 Eviction is void 1or lacC o1 Aurisdiction, or, the
/11idavit o1 2ervice ?as on m0 home, and ?as not EhandedE to me, or E=ersonall0 servedE Fdes=ite
the /11idavit attesting to having E=ersonall0 servedE me<, nor ?as the !rder o1 2ummar0 Eviction
served in accordance ?ith N%C (F><F.<F/<Fiii<, ?hich requires: Ei1 the o11ice is closed or the =erson
to >e served has no o11ice, leaving it at the person-s *'e$$in& #ouse or usua$ p$ae of a%o*e 'it#
some person of suita%$e a&e an* *isretion resi*in& t#ere..E
,urther, 3 >elieve =osting an !rder on oneDs residence door, =articularl0 in the conte-t o1
+ 9 +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
serving a No Cause Notice o1 Eviction or 6nla?1ul Detainer, is onl0 valid i1 the document >eing
served is also =laced in the mail and 3 non Audicial da0s are accorded 1or service to >e com=lete. 2ee
N%C #Fe<. 3 do not >elieve the0 can =rove that at all, not even close.
3nterestingl0, the signor o1 the Criminal Com=laint here, 4ill, Cno?s his case is trou>led under N%C (F><F.<F/<Fi+
iii<, N%C #Fe<, in addition to N%C $$. *hat is ?h0 in %ichard 4illDs Novem>er .$, .)$$ 5otion 1or !rder *o 2ho?
Cause, on =age ., 4ills resorts to literall0 gras=ing at stra?s, imagining that ?hat the 9ashoe Count0 2heri11Ds !11ice
customaril0 does is someho? automaticall0 codi1ied into mandator0 =recedent >lacC letter la?. *o ?it, %ichard 4ill
?rote in his 5otion ,or !rder *o 2ho? Cause that: I,/C*2 24!93N; C!N*E5* !, C!6%* #. E"43B3* $ ?as
served on Coughlin on Novem>er E .)$$ >0 the 9ashoe Count0 2heri11s De=artment, >0 =osting same on the 1ront door
o1 the =ro=ert0 in the manner customar0 1or evictions in 9ashoe Count0. *he locCs to the =remises ?ere changed at that
time, there>0 eAecting and dis=ossessing Coughlin o1 =ossession o1 the ro=ert0.J
/. re+*rial 3ne11ective /ssistance o1 Counsel Claims
De1endant here>0 claims >e1ore trial that all three o1 the %5C a==ointed de1ense counsel
rendered ine11ective assistance o1 counsel, the trial court must, >e1ore trial, conduct an inquir0
su11icient to determine the truth and sco=e o1 the de1endantLs allegations. !n =ost+conviction revie?,
i1 no =retrial 1indings ?ere made, the government must =rove >0 clear and convincing evidence that
the de1endant ?as accorded re=resentation at trial >0 counsel ?ho ?as =re=ared ?ithin the requisite
range o1 com=etence. /nders v. Cali1ornia, 3'# 6.2. 73', $' 7.Ed..d 493, '7 2.Ct. $39# F$9#7<, and
6nited 2tates v. Cronic, 4## 6.2. #4', ') 7.Ed..d #(7, $4) 2.Ct. .)39 F$9'4<. 2ee, lumlee v. Del
a=a, 4.#. ,.3d $)9(, $$)3 F9th Cir. .))(<. 3n cases ?hich Icounsel entirel0 1ails to su>Aect the
=rosecutionLs case to meaning1ul adversarial testing,J ine11ectiveness ?ill >e =resumed under Cronic.
CounselLs 1ailure to 1ile a motion to su==ress evidence can =rovide the >asis 1or a claim o1
ine11ectiveness, >ut in order to sho? =reAudice the de1endant must sho? that he ?ould have =revailed
on the su==ression motion, and that there is a reasona>le =ro>a>ilit0 that the success1ul motion ?ould
+ $) +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
have a11ected the outcome. &an 3ran v. 7indse0, .$. ,.3d $$43, $$4( F9th Cir. .)))<. *aitel should
have never acce=ted this case in the 1irst =lace given a =atent con1lict. 7oomis and uentes 1latl0
re1used to 1ile essential motions and su>=oena material ?itnesses or other?ise conduct a meaning1ul
de1ense, in addition to re1using to maCe arguments 1ounded in 1act and la?, rather deeming them
E1rivolousE. Counsel 4as Constitutional Dut0 to 3nvestigate
ICounsel has a constitutional dut0 to maCe reasona>le investigations or to maCe reasona>le
decisions that maCe =articular investigation unnecessar0 .J 2tricCland v. 9ashington, 4## 6.2. #'',
#9$, ') 7.Ed..d #74, $)4 2.Ct. .)(. F$9'4<. *he 2i-th /mendment requires investigation and
=re=aration, not onl0 to e-onerate, >ut also to secure and =rotect the rights o1 the accused. such
constitutional rights are granted to the innocent and guilt0 aliCe, and 1ailure to investigate and 1ile
a==ro=riate motions is ine11ectiveness. Uimmelman v. 5orrison, 477 6.2. 3#(, 9$ 7.Ed..d 3)(, $)#
2.Ct. .(74 F$9'#<. 7oomis and uentes re1used to inquire as to ?hether 4ill et al has asserted a >ill
1or the 1ull rental value o1 the =ro=ert0 in lieu o1 storage costs.
Counsel has the constitutional and =ro1essional o>ligation to conduct an investigation into =otential
mitigating evidence. 31 counsel conducts an inadequate investigation Ithat 1act ?ould have no e11ect
on the de1icient conduct =rong o1 2tricCland >ecause counsel had alread0 demonstrated
ine11ectiveness >0 1ailing to thoroughl0 investigate the e-istence o1 mitigating 1actors.J 2ummerlin v.
2chriro, 4.7 ,.3d #.3 F9th Cir. .))(<.
AFFIRMATION PURSUANT TO NRS ./01"2/2
*he undersigned does here>0 a11irm that the =receding document does not contain the social
securit0 num>er o1 an0 =erson.
Dated at %eno, Nevada, this 4th da0 o1 @une, .)$.,
+ $$ +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7/9 !,,3CE2 !, Zachar0 BarCer Coughlin
Counsel 1or the De1endant
B0:VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
+ $. +
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PROOF OF SER3ICE
ursuant to N%C (F><, 3 certi10 that 3 served a co=0 o1 the 1oregoing document u=on the
1ollo?ing =art0 >0 1a-ing, emailing, dro==ing o11 at their o11ice, and =lacing a true and correct co=0
o1 the 1oregoing document in the us mail addressed to:
Christo=her 4aBlett+2tevens, Esq.
%eno Cit0 /ttorne0Ds !11ice + Criminal Divison
.!. Bo- $9))
%eno , N& '9()(
hone Num>er: 77(+334+.)() ,a- num>er: 77(+334+.4.)
haBlett+stevenscTreno.gov
/ttorne0 1or Cit0 o1 %eno
Dated this 4th da0 o1 @une, .)$.,:
O2O Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, De1endant
Counsel 1or De1endant
+ $3 +
1
2
3
4
5
6
.,
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
28

INDEX TO EXffiBITS
I. Exhibit: not e eclualc des ite or
faJ eJ a serted in C O's Ma m's Affi vi erv m
November 7 2011 along wi mission from WCSO Civil Service Division Supervisor
iz Stuchell that Mathern only of Summary Evidion on tbe door ofthe
former home law office, rath "personally served' I a . ard Hill Esq's own Proof 0
rvice of Notice of Entry the Order for Summary Eviction showing a mailed on date of
ovember 1,2011 (and e RJC n,ever mailed a copy of that Rder ace ,ding the to Record on
ppeal in CVll03628) three (3) lPages. " !
.-Le #
(Po- !z::
-- - ' ..,
14
Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Sunpress, Motion for Continuance
101

AELE Home Page --- Publications Menu --- Seminar Information

Cite as: 2009 (6) AELE Mo. L. J. 101
ISSN 1935-0007
Civil Liability Law Section J une 2009

Landlords, Tenants, and Police Civil Liability

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Landlords, Tenants, and Police Civil Liability
3. Resources

1. Introduction
The relationship between landlords and tenants is often a volatile one, with disputes
arising over a wide variety of issues, including money, the condition of the premises (and
whose fault any defects are), the presence of pets (authorized or not), landlord entry into
the rented premises, noise, the number of persons living in the apartment, lead paint, safety
hazards, crime and drug or gang activity on and near the premises, and of course, eviction
and tenant lockouts, both legal and illegal. On occasion, police officers are summoned to a
rented premises by either a landlord (or their agent) or a tenant (or both). Sometimes the
officers have arrived on the scene in response to a complaint by a third person about a noisy
or violent disturbance between landlord and tenant.
Disputes arising from the landlord-tenant relationship literally hit home, and can get
emotional, with the resolution sometimes determining whether the tenant will continue to
have a place to live or access to their possessions, or whether the landlord will receive the
rent which is the basis of his or her livelihood and the ability to pay for and maintain the
building. Frequently, officers are asked by one of the parties to take action, sometimes
without knowledge of the origin of the dispute or some of the essential facts.
This article takes a brief look at some of the cases in which police officers or agencies
faced possible civil liability for their response to such disputes. It does not pretend to
summarize landlord-tenant law, which may vary vastly between jurisdictions in its
particulars. At the conclusion, there are a few useful resources listed.
102

2. Landlords, Tenants, and Police Civil Liability
The case of Soldal v. Cook County, Illinois, #91-6516, 506 U.S. 56 (1992) involved a
family that lived in a mobile home that they owned, which stood on rented land in a trailer
park. While formal eviction proceedings were pending, the owners of the land and their
agent proceeded to forcibly evict the tenants.
At the request of the landlords agent, deputies from the Sheriffs Department were
there at the eviction. The family claimed that the deputies knew that the eviction was illegal
and that there was no eviction order from a court, but that they refused to take their
complaint for criminal trespass or interfere with the eviction process. They allegedly told
the family that it was between the landlord and the tenant.
A state court judge in the pending eviction case ruled that the eviction was improper,
and the familys trailer, which was damaged during the incident, was taken back to the
park. The family filed a federal civil rights lawsuit, claiming that the property owner and its
agent conspired with the deputies to carry out the unreasonable seizure and removal of
their mobile home, in violation of their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the seizure and removal of the mobile
home implicated the familys Fourth Amendment rights. A seizure of property, for
Fourth Amendment purposes, the Court noted, happens when there is any meaningful
interference with the owners possessory interests in that property. Property is protected
against such seizures being carried out unreasonably even when no privacy or liberty is
involved, and even when no search has been carried out.
The officers presence during the illegal eviction together with their inaction, could,
therefore, violate Fourth Amendment rights and lead to civil liability. Repossessions or
attachments of property, if they involve entering a home, intruding on the residents
privacy, or interfering with their liberty, also implicate the Fourth Amendment. The
Court rejected the argument that its ruling would lead to a new wave of litigation in
federal courts.
Many such seizures, the Court reasoned, would be found constitutional under a
reasonableness standard. The Court also stated that police will not often choose to
further an enterprise knowing that it is contrary to state law.
In a later case in which officers assisted a landlord in a dispute with a tenant, the court
found that they were not entitled to qualified immunity on a false arrest claim. In
Radvansky v. Olmsted Falls, #03-3798, 395 F.3d 291 (6
th
Cir. 2005), police arrested a man
103

for burglary of a home. The arrestee had been living as a tenant at that residence, but had a
dispute with his landlord. The landlord had previously called the police department after
the tenant left for Florida for a period of time. He told police that the tenant owed him $100
in rent and that the tenant still had keys. The landlord was advised that he could simply
change the locks and lock the tenant out, which was incorrect under state law, which
required the use of legal process to evict a tenant.
When the tenant returned, and found a note indicating that the locks had been changed,
he broke in for the purpose of retrieving some of his property, including his guns. Officers
placed him under arrest, despite his possession of the note, which allegedly made it clear
that he was a tenant at the house and had been locked out by the landlord over a rent
dispute. The officers found his driver's license, which gave the house as his residence, and
one of the officers ran his social security number and a dispatcher responded with the
house's address as the arrestee's residence. The officers allegedly refused to look at the
landlord's note, which the arrestee claimed made it clear that he was a renter at the home.
The burglary charges were later dropped after the arrestee entered an agreement to pay
the landlord $400 in restitution. He then sued the officers for violation of civil rights and
false arrest.
A federal appeals court found that there was a genuine dispute of material fact that
would permit a reasonable jury to find that the officers lacked probable cause to arrest the
plaintiff for burglary. Under the terms of a rental agreement, a tenant is entitled to entry and
use of the premises, and cannot be a trespasser, a necessary element of burglary.
State law expressly forbids self-help evictions of tenants by landlords. His tenancy
was therefore only ended if he had vacated the apartment of his own accord, abandoning
the tenancy. In this case, the evidence showed, viewed in the most favorable light, that the
plaintiff had paid most of the rent for that month, and was using the residence at that time to
house his personal possessions, clothing and furniture, making him a current tenant with
the right to enter and occupy the premises, who could not, therefore, be found liable for
either criminal trespass or burglary.
In this case, a reasonable jury could find that the officers relied solely on the landlord's
representations concerning the plaintiff and his status as a burglar, and ignored
substantial exculpatory evidence, including their own prior knowledge of the existence of a
dispute between the tenant and landlord, and his valid driver's license giving the house as
his address.
Following a trial, however, a jury resolved the factual disputes in favor of the officers,
determining that they had probable cause for the arrest after all. The appeals court upheld
104

that result on further appeal. Radvansky v. City of Olmsted Falls, #06-3357, 496 F.3
rd
609
(6
th
Cir. 2007). While the officers ultimately prevailed, it was not until after a complicated
litigation process.
There may be emergency circumstances where the law authorizes the removal of a
tenant from premises without the usual court-based eviction process. In one such case, the
court ruled that city code enforcement officers were not liable for federal civil rights
violations for evicting two elderly residents from their home without a pre-eviction
hearing. The officers had the legal authority to issue emergency vacate orders, and had
grounds to do so in light of the residents keeping 33 dogs and four birds in the two bedroom
house, which was allegedly in an unsanitary condition. Sell v. City of Columbus,
#03-4654, 127 Fed. Appx. 754 (Unpub. 6th Cir. 2005).
Other surrounding circumstances may also have an impact on the reasonableness of an
officers actions in a landlord-tenant dispute. In White v. City of Markham, #01-2034, 310
F.3d 989 (7th Cir. 2002), the court reasoned that even if an officer seized a tenant in
ordering him to vacate his home upon threat of arrest after a landlord told the officer that he
wanted the individual removed, the seizure was reasonable under circumstances where the
tenant had no written lease and did not pay rent, the house was under construction at the
time, and the level of the dispute between the landlord and tenant was serious enough that
the tenant had called the police. Even if the officer acted unreasonably, however, he was
entitled to qualified immunity.
What about when the shoe is on the other foot, i.e., the landlord seeks but is refused an
officers assistance? In Trask v. City of Chicago, #06-4237, 2007 U.S. App. Lexis 21051
(Unpub. 7th Cir.), a federal appeals court ruled that a landlord's rights were not violated by
the alleged refusal of police officers to enforce a court order she obtained to oust a squatter
from her property. The landlord did not show that she was legally entitled to police
assistance in enforcing an eviction order issued by the courts, and she could not show a
violation of equal protection, as there was no claim that the officers refused to carry out the
eviction on the basis of her race or gender.
Sometimes particular persons may not have the type of possessory interest in a premises
to qualify as tenants as defined by state law. In Thomas v. Cohen, #05-5072, 453 F. 3
rd
657
(6th Cir. 2006), the court found that three homeless women, evicted from a homeless
shelter by police without legal process at the request of the shelter's director were not
tenants under Kentucky law. They had no property interest in the premises, and,
therefore, the officers' actions did not violate their due process rights. This was the case
even though the women asserted that they paid rent, since a state statute governing tenants
rights expressly excluded residence at an institution, public or private, if incidental to
105

detention or the provision of medical, geriatric, educational counseling, religious, or
similar service.
The shelter's programs were designed to help homeless women become financially
independent members of mainstream society, the appeals court stated, and the plaintiffs
resided there only as a result of their participation in the shelter's programs. The
environment at the shelter and its location in a residential neighborhood did not diminish
the primary social services character of the shelter. The shelter did not provide housing
to the general public who would not participate in, or benefit from, its primary social
service program, the court concluded.
The fact that a landlord-tenant dispute may be present does not alter the applicability of
general criminal law. Police can proceed to make arrests for criminal acts of violence, theft
of property, trespass, and other crimes, given the proper circumstances, and based, at times,
simply on a complaint from a purported victim, including a landlord or tenant. In Fielding
v. Tollaksen, #06-5393, 2007 U.S. App. Lexis 28939 (Unpub. 2nd Cir.), police officers
who arrested a tenant on the basis of signed complaints from landlords had probable cause
for the arrest, and were properly granted qualified immunity. Prosecutors in the case were
entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity, and the landlords, who were private persons,
did not act under color of state law, so they could not be defendants in a federal civil rights
lawsuit.
Similarly, on search and seizure issues involving law enforcement access to a premises,
the power to consent or object depends on who has privacy rights. In Vincennes v.
Emmons, #42S02-0504-CV-131, 817 N.E. 2
nd
155 (Ind. 2006), the court stated that a city's
ordinance authorizing warrantless inspections of rental units unless tenants object did not
violate the constitutional rights of landlords, as landlords had no reasonable expectation of
privacy in units rented to either residential or commercial tenants. In instances where the
landlords are themselves the tenants, the ordinance would be interpreted as also requiring
their consent or a warrant.
In Harvey v. Plains Township, #04-1148, 421 F. 3rd 185 (3d Cir. 2005), the court held
that a police officer who ordered a landlord to open a door to an apartment so that a
woman's ex-boyfriend could retrieve his possessions was not entitled to qualified
immunity on a woman's claim that he violated her Fourth Amendment rights by becoming
actively involved in an ex parte private repossession.
In this case, after a woman's relationship with her boyfriend deteriorated, she obtained
an order of protection granting her exclusive right of possession of their apartment.
Pursuant to that order, the boyfriend was required to immediately retrieve all of his
106

belongings. The trial court denied a request that he be allowed to return to pick up
furnishings and other items that would be difficult to remove during his first trip.
The man's attorney sent a letter to the woman informing her that he would go to the
apartment at a particular time to retrieve his remaining belongings. A copy of the letter was
sent to the woman's landlord and to the local police department. A police officer was sent
to the apartment at the time designated in the letter in order to keep the peace at the
repossession, and the landlord was also present at that time. The woman, who claimed
never to have received the letter, was not there.
The officer allegedly directed the landlord to unlock the door so that the man could
retrieve his property. After this was done, and when the woman returned, she found the
apartment in disarray, and claimed that many items were missing, including some not
included in the ex-boyfriend's list of his property.
On appeal, the federal appeals court reversed the summary judgment in favor of the
officer, holding that a police officer actively involved in an ex parte private repossession of
property may be engaged in state action in violation of the Fourth Amendment. It agreed,
however, that the landlord, who opened the door at the direction of the officer, was not
engaged in state action, and upheld the result as to the remaining defendants.
The appeals court rejected the officer's argument that his conduct was not state action
and that he was merely present at a private repossession. There was evidence, including
the testimony of the landlord, that the officer directed the opening of the door, and that she
never would have opened it without the officer's instructions. If this was true, the officer
played a principal role in the entry and seizure of the property, and a reasonable jury
could conclude that he used his public authority to help the ex-boyfriend gain entry and
take the property from the apartment. The record supported a finding that he was not a
mere spectator.
Additionally, the law was unquestionably clear at the date of the incident, September
1999, that the Fourth Amendment prohibited unreasonable searches and seizures of a
person's home by the police without a warrant. The court also found that if the officer
concluded that the woman had consented to the repossession merely on the basis of a copy
of the letter, to which the woman did not respond (and which she claimed she never got)
that was not reasonable. A reasonable officer at least would have refused to assist with
opening the door until he was satisfied that consent was given.
In some instances, cities have attempted to make use of the landlord-tenant relationship
for crime control and prevention purposes. In one case, however, the court found that the
city had gone too far. In Cook v. City of Buena Park, #G031326, 2005 Cal. App. Lexis 105
107

(Cal. 4th App. Dist. J anuary 28, 2005), the court ruled that a city's ordinance requiring a
landlord to institute eviction proceedings against a tenant when the chief of police has a
suspicion that the tenant engaged in or permitted illegal drug or gang activity was an
unconstitutional violation of procedural due process rights.
The case involved a landlord who filed a lawsuit challenging a city ordinance which
requires the commencement of eviction proceedings against all occupants of a rental unit
when the chief of police suspects that the tenant has engaged in or permitted illegal drug
activity, gang-related crime, or a drug-related nuisance in or near the rented property.
The court found that the ordinance exposed landlords to a substantial risk of the
erroneous deprivation of property rights through compelled eviction litigation,
unwarranted fines and penalties, and counter-suits by tenants, violating procedural due
process.
The court found that the ordinance's procedures were constitutionally infirm in three
ways. First, in that the notice requiring the landlord to institute the eviction proceedings
provided landlords with insufficient information to successfully prosecute such a case.
Second, the ten-day period stated within which the landlord is required to begin the
eviction proceedings was found to be too short. And finally, the ordinance improperly
required the landlord to prevail in the eviction action or else face fines, penalties, a lien on
his or her property, or even punishment for a misdemeanor offense.
The plaintiff landlord had rented an apartment to an individual, and after three years of
tenancy, city police cited the tenant's roommate for possession of drug paraphernalia. The
roommate subsequently participated in a drug treatment diversion program under the terms
of which his plea of guilty is not considered a criminal conviction for any purpose.
Following that, the landlord received a letter from the city's police chief giving him ten
business days to institute eviction proceedings against the tenant, and to diligently
prosecute the eviction, as required by the city's ordinance, the Narcotics and
Gang-Related Crime Eviction Program.
The landlord appealed the notice to the city manager within ten days of receiving it, as
provided by the notice. The city manager denied the landlord's appeal, and the landlord
filed suit in state court challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance.
In upholding the injunction against the enforcement of the ordinance, the appeals court
acknowledged both the landlord's important property interests in collecting rent, and the
city's interest in combating criminal activity, especially drug and gang related crimes.
But in this case, the court found, the notices required to be sent did not contain enough
specific information to aid the landlord in the eviction action, but instead only the alleged
108

offender's identity, apartment number, and the mere dates and times of the alleged criminal
activity or arrest.
The court stated that it was not suggesting that due process required that the city's
allegation of illegal conduct had to be documented by the observations of a law
enforcement officer, but rather, the documented observations of any witness willing to
testify, such as a neighbor or an informant, would supply probable cause for the landlord's
unlawful detainer action and give the landlord a chance at success in the action.
The ten-day time period in which to initiate the eviction proceeding was not nearly
enough time for the landlord to bolster his evidence or otherwise investigate the matter
and develop his case.
Further, under the ordinance, if the landlord fails to prevail in the eviction action, even if
this is the result of inadequate documentation provided by the city, the penalties under
the ordinance included fines of up to $500, misdemeanor punishment for a fourth violation,
and a lien against the property and a civil penalty if court action is required to enforce the
ordinance.
The court rejected the city's defense of its procedures, which was based on the fact that
the landlord is allowed to appeal to the city manager the police chief's determination that
the ordinance applies. But the ordinance provides no guidance to the city manager
regarding the adequacy of the police chief's notice and, in any event, the landlord who does
not succeed in a court of law would take little comfort from the city manager's contrary
assessment of the merits.
A concurring opinion by one judge on the three judge panel agreed that the ordinance
violated procedural due process but he expressed his misgivings that the ordinance might
also suffer from other, more fundamental constitutional problems, including its
sweeping requirement that all occupants of the premises must be evicted for the sins of one,
its disparate treatment of property owners and renters (our record reflects no nuisance
abatement efforts against the owners of property for similar crimes), and the Damoclean
substantive due process issue which hangs over this statutory scheme.
Other cases of interest include:
Grimm v. Sweeney, #01-431, 249 F. Supp. 2d 571 (E.D. Pa. 2003), in which a fire chief
was held entitled to qualified immunity for issuing a citation against the owner of rental
properties for refusal to consent to a warrantless inspection of tenants' apartments. The
alleged right of the owner, under the Fourth Amendment, to refuse to consent to the
warrantless inspection intended to protect the tenants' safety, was not clearly established,
109

so that a reasonable building or fire code enforcement official could have believed that the
landlord had no right to refuse entry, so that he could be cited for obstructing access.
* Loudes v. City of Minneapolis, Minn., #00-1210, 233 F.3d 1109 (8th Cir. 2000),
finding that an officer was not liable for the detention of a landlord, which allegedly caused
his collapse because he needed access to his oxygen and medical equipment to prevent
reoccurrence of a recent stroke, when the officer had no information concerning the
landlord's medical condition when she detained him while attempting to resolve a
landlord-tenant dispute over tenant property.
* Ryan v. Mary Immaculate Queen, #98-3849, 188 F.3d 857 (7th Cir. 1999), ruling that
apartment tenants had standing to challenge an allegedly unconstitutional search of a
rented premises when their landlord, who wanted to evict the tenants, did not have a valid
order granting him exclusive possession at the time deputy sheriffs allegedly engaged in a
search.
* Kalmas v. Wagner, #64206-1, 943 P.2d 1369 (Wash. 1997), stating that a deputy
sheriff's brief, invited entry into the tenants' residence to assist a landlord's agent in
showing the premises to potential new tenant, even if it constituted a search, was
reasonable, based on the deputy's community caretaking function. The deputy acted with
a motive to keep the peace in a dispute between tenant and landlord.
* Osipova v. Dinkins, #92 Civ. 8959, 907 F. Supp. 94 (S.D.N.Y. 1995), concluding that
a police officer was entitled to qualified immunity for a warrantless entry into an apartment
when the landlord told him that water was leaking into the premises below, interfering with
the provision of heat and hot water for whole building.
* Craig v. Krzeminski, #88-159764 F. Supp. 248 (D. Conn. 1991), in which a mere
denial by a landlord that he had harassed a tenant did not eliminate the officer's probable
cause to arrest him based on the tenant's complaint.
In summary, some points to remember:
Do not carry out or aid in carrying out an eviction unless there is a verifiable court
order. Doing so without an order may be a Fourth Amendment violation. Even when
a lease states that a landlord has the right to retake the premises under certain
conditions, almost every jurisdiction requires legal process and an eviction order.
There are some particular rules that apply to Section 8 federally subsidized housing
concerning evictions, drug activities in the rented premises, etc. Before taking any
action, you may want to check with the local agency administering the program
concerning how these apply.
110

When officers respond to a complaint about the presence of a trespasser, they should
inquire as to the reason the person is there. The answer to that question may provide
probable grounds for an arrest. Many laws concerning trespass, however, require
that, prior to an arrest, a person is asked to leave and is given an opportunity to
comply. Make sure officers are familiar with state statutes and/or local ordinances
bearing on this question.
It is not the job of an officer to resolve landlord tenant disputes. Whether the rent
was fully paid, or whether the landlord broke a promise to paint the living room, are
civil disputes, and the parties can be reminded that there are courts to resolve those
disputes. Officers can, of course, stand by while landlord-tenant disputes are going
on, but should not take part on either side. They may, of course, take appropriate
action if an offense occurs.
In emergency situations, such as indications of a person in danger or distress,
officers can make warrantless entry into premises without consent,

3. Resources
The following are some online resources related to the topic of this article. Inclusion
does not necessarily imply agreement with the views expressed.
City of Chicago Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance.
City of Philadelphia, Pa, Police Department Citizen Information Bulletin on
Landlord-Tenant Disputes.
New York Police Department Patrol Guide Procedure No. 117-11, Illegal Evictions.
Website of the International Crime Free Association, an organization working to
keep illegal activity off rental property.
Police Response in Illegal Eviction and Other Tenant/Landlord Situations.
Excerpted From:
Vermont State Police Training Bulletin 93-1.
Basalt, Colorado Police Department page on landlord-tenant disputes.
Suffolk County, N.Y. Police Order Number 88-19 Willful Eviction Violations.
Description of Hollywood, Florida Police Departments Landlord Workshop.

111

AELE Monthly Law Journal
Bernard J. Farber
Civil Liability Law Editor
P.O. Box 75401
Chicago, IL 60675-5401 USA
E-mail: bernfarber@aele.org
Tel. 1-800-763-2802

2009, by the AELE Law Enforcement Legal Center
Contents may be downloaded, stored, printed or copied,
but may not be republished for commercial purposes.

AELE Home Page --- Publications Menu --- Seminar Information
, . I'-'--U

012
1 Case No. 11 CR 26405
Reno - Dept. 2
BY---'H/-U;:---::,,---
Deputy OerJc;
2 Dept. No.2
3
4
5
6
7
8 THE CITY OF RENO,
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiff,
vs.
Defendant.
--------------------- ,
0I1N:ER DENYING MOTION
F R NEW TRIAL & FOR
OTHER RELIEF
On June 18, 2012, the defendant was found guilty after trial on one count of
trespassing. The defendant was sentenced to time served in jail and was fined $310.00. On June 26,
2012, the defendant filed a hand-written Motion for New Trial and for other relief the extent ofwhich
is difficult to discern.
This motion filed by the defendant does not establish or support any legal or equitable
grounds fcc relief and is without merit. Accordingly, the defendant's Motion filed June 26,2012, is
hereby denied.
Dated this 11 th day of July, 2012
1
JUDGEdNER
Department Two
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
....,
a.lUHICl1ALCOOitf

PUrsuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of the Reno Municipal Court,
ORDER on the party(ies) set forth below.
_x_
Placing said docUlllent in a sealed envelope placed fOr collecting and mailing
business practices.
Facsimile (FAX).
Reno/Carson Messenger Selvice.
Inner-office mail following ordinary business practices.
Personal Delivery to City Attorney
_x_ Electronic mail to City Attorney
Deputy City Attomey
Zachary Coughlin.
P.O. Box 3961
Reno, NV 89505
DATED this 11th day ofJuly,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
UNO
28
1l.IWtOI'Al. rouaT
'.0."'_

(7021 ))t-tQ

Case No(s). ! C I!.-. 26t((;;;-
R FILEO
END M!JNICIP
Ai COllI? r
Dept. L 2012 JUL 23 PH 2: 43
< . .
IN THE MUNICIPAL COURT OF THE CITY OF J,,-
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA ..
******
CITY OF RENO, A Municipal Ulrporation,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Co vGHL,',-J
'3961
V\ Q "89 ,
AddR:e
City, State, Zip Code
Defendant in the above-entitled action, do hereby appeal to the Second Judicial District Cowt
for final judgment of the Reno Municipal Cowt in this action, wherein the Defendant was
found guilty of the charge(s) of cr (M( brft;j4 5'$
and sentenced as follows: Pc J '1310
1
2
3
4

Document Code:
Zach Coughlin,Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
POBOX 3961
Reno, NV 89505
tel: 775 338 8118
fax: 949 667 7402

Reno
Byl rt Dept. 2
PiJty Cl9rfI
5 Pro Se Defendant
6
7
8
9
10
11
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF W ASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
STATE OF NEVADA;
Plaintiff,
)
)
) Case No: II CR 26405
)
12 vs.
)
)
)
)
)
13 ZACHARY COUGHLIN;
14
Defendant.
15
16 Notice of Appeal. Motion to vacate and or Set Aside. JCRCP 59. JCRCP 60. Motion for
Reconsideration: Motion (or Reeusal: Motion For Publication Of Transcript at Public Expense.
17 Petition (or In Forma Pauperis Status
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FACTS
I. Richard G. Hill, Esq. (opposing counsel in the civil eviction case from which this criminal trespass
trial stems) testified, under oath, that the Reno Police Department identified themselves prior to
entering the door that Hill's client Merliss had kicked down.
2. HilI also testified that Merliss had not been at the 121 River Rock property in the week preceding
the arrest, despite Officer Carter's report indicating otherwise. rmc II cr 26405 reno attorney zach
coughlin, esq. charged with criminal trespass incident to civil eviction by Dr. Matthew Joel Merliss,
MD, nuerosurgeon and his attorney Richard G. Hill, Esq. and Casey Baker, Esq. whom allege the
- 1 -
MotiOn {or New Trial. Motion to Alter or Amend: Motion for ReCOnsideratiOn. MotiOn to Set
Aside Convictjon
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
charged ?erliss D#)E <a;;ro+imatelB, *rom start through current a;;eal: to evict attorneB Coughlin
*rom his commerical tenancB, Aased u;on a No Cause Eviction notice, even though N%- 4).,(3
e+;resslB *orAids using summarB evictions against commercial tenants unless the nonF;aBment o*
rent is alleged and a NonFaBment eviction notice is served.
3. 3urther 4ashoe CountB -heri**>s !**ice *iled *alse a**idavit, AB De;utB ?achem, alleging
Coughlin =as G;ersonallB servedG eviction order, ho=ever 4C-! .5 -u;ervisor 9iC -tuchell has
admitted in =riting <see her email to Coughlin in E+hiAit $: that G;ersonallB servedG, to the 4C-!
civil division, means Hust ta;ing a notice to a door =hen no one is home, and -tuchell con*irmed in
=riting that 4C-! De;utB ?achem indicated to her that no one =as home at $,$ %iver %oc@ =hen,
on NovemAer $, ,)$$, he ;er*ormed a loc@out on Coughlin>s la= o**ice and alleges he ;osted the
!rder *or -ummarB Eviction on Coughlin>s door.
4. /he CitB *ailed to ;ut on anB evidence that anBAodB <not the %eno 1ustice Court, not the 4C-!,
not o;;osing counsel 0ill or Ba@er, etc: actuallB mailed Coughlin a co;B o* the !rder o* -ummarB
Eviction ;rior to the illegal loc@out o* NovemAer $, ,)$$, there*ore ma@ing anB such loc@out a legal
nullitB, and void, and a tres;ass, actuallB, done under color o* state la= 4, 2-C -ec $9'3, see 9Bnn v
Desiderio....ho=ever, N%C is made a;;licaAle to landlord tenant matters in Nevada, and there*ore,
suAstituted or constructive service is required <ie, 3 daBs *or mailing =here ;ersonal service is not
done:. /here*ore, %ichard 0ill and ?erliss =ere the tres;assers, in addition to the %eno olice
De;artment !**icer Chris Carter and -argent ?onica 9o;eC.
1udge 4illiam 8ardner o* the %eno ?unici;al Court re*used to recuse himsel* des;ite having =or@ed
*or the %eno CitB 5ttorneB>s !**ice Hust , Bears ;rior to this case, and des;ite his o=n sister, -econd
1udicial District Court 3amilB 1udge 0on. 9inda 8ardner Aeing involved in a -tate Bar grievance
- 2 -
Motion for Ne' "rial, Motion to Alter or A&end; Motion for Reconsideration, Motion to Set
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
against Coughlin Aased u;on her !rder *or -anctions against Coughlin three Bears ;rior in a divorce
trial. Coughlin *iled a etition *or 4rit o* ?andamus challenging 1udge 9inda 8ardner>s !rder *or
-anctions. Coughlin =as *ired *rom his HoA at 4ashoe 9egal -ervices, according to 49- E+ecutive
Director aul Elcano, strictlB Aecause o* 1udge 9inda 8ardner>s sanctions against Coughlin.
htt;:IIcasein*o.nvsu;remecourt.usI;uAlicIcase&ie=.doJcs..DK,,74#
/he %eno olice De;artment also arrested attorneB Coughlin *or HaB=al@ing and Gmisue o* 9$$G
des;ite Coughlin Aeing granted t=o ;rotection orders *rom his roommates at the time. 3urther, the
%eno 1ustice Court order Coughlin to de;osit D,,,7( in a Grent escro=G account to maintain his right
to litigate haAitaAilitB issues in a summarB eviction ;roceeding, des;ite there e+isting no corollarB to
1C%9&44 in the %1C, and des;ite 1C%C '4 e+;resslB *orAidding the %1C *rom a;;lBing anB such
rules =here N%- 4).,(3<#: e+;resslB *orAids such a rent escro= de;osit Aeing required. -o, the %1C
did not give Coughlin a -taB o* Eviction, des;ite N%- $$'.3') onlB requiring D,() to get one, =hile
at the same time, the %1C converted to its co**ers D,,,7( o* Coughlin>s moneB, in direct violation o*
the la=. /hen the %D suAHects Coughlin to a custodial arrest, =ithout =arning him to leave the
;ro;ertB or issuing a citation, then %D !**icer Carter lies in his ;olice re;ort AB alleging that
Coughlin re*used to leave, and there*ore =as not eligiAle *or a citation, des;ite the videos ta@en AB
%ichard 0ill, during the N!vemAer $,th, ,)$$ arrest clearlB sho=ing Coughlin as@ing %D !**icer
Carter =hB a =arning or citation =ould not Ae given in lieu o* a custodial arrest. 3urther, !**icer
Carter>s statements at the scene o* the arrest and in his re;ort clearlB sho= Carter maintaining that
Coughlin had Aeen GservedG the eviction order, des;ite Carter>s clear lac@ o* understanding as to =hat
such GserviceG entails.
!.N/- 5ND 52/0!%./.E-
- 3 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
N%- 4).7#) -ummarB eviction o* ;erson using s;ace in *acilitB *or storage as residence.
$. 4hen a ;erson is using a storage s;ace at a *acilitB as a residence, the o=ner or the o=nerLs agent shall serve or have
served a notice in =riting =hich directs the ;erson to cease using the storage s;ace as a residence no later than ,4 hours
a*ter receiving the notice. /he notice must advise the ;erson that:
<a: N%- $)'.47( requires the o=ner to as@ the court to have the ;erson evicted i* the ;erson has not ceased using the
storage s;ace as a residence =ithin ,4 hours7 and
<A: /he ;erson maB continue to use the storage s;ace to store the ;ersonLs ;ersonal ;ro;ertB in accordance =ith the rental
agreement.
,. .* the ;erson does not cease using the storage s;ace as a residence =ithin ,4 hours a*ter receiving the notice to do so,
the o=ner o* the *acilitB or the o=nerLs agent shall a;;lB AB a**idavit *or summarB eviction to the Hustice o* the ;eace o*
the to=nshi; =herein the *acilitB is located. /he a**idavit must contain:
<a: /he date the rental agreement Aecame e**ective.
<A: 5 statement that the ;erson is using the storage s;ace as a residence.
<c: /he date and time the ;erson =as served =ith =ritten notice to cease using the storage s;ace as a residence.
<d: 5 statement that the ;erson has not ceased using the *acilitB as a residence =ithin ,4 hours a*ter receiving the notice.
3. 2;on recei;t o* such an a**idavit the Hustice o* the ;eace shall issue an order directing the sheri** or constaAle o* the
countB to remove the ;erson =ithin ,4 hours a*ter recei;t o* the order. /he sheri** or constaAle shall not remove the
;ersonLs ;ersonal ;ro;ertB *rom the *acilitB.
4. 3or the ;ur;oses o* this section:
<a: M3acilitBN means real ;ro;ertB divided into individual storage s;aces. /he term does not include a garage or storage
area in a ;rivate residence.
<A: M-torage s;aceN means a s;ace used *or storing ;ersonal ;ro;ertB, =hich is rented or leased to an individual occu;ant
=ho has access to the s;ace.
<5dded to N%- AB $9'9, ,$37 5 ,)$$, $'3):
sim;lB ;ut to =hatever e+tent Coughlin =as not alreadB legallB entitled to Ae =here he =as at
the time o* the arrest in vie= o* the lease agreement =herein his commercial use o* the ;remises =as
e+;resslB a;;roved, a criminal tres;ass charge =as still not a;;ro;riate here given the dictates o*
N%- 4).7#) %ichard 0ill testi*ied that he e+;ressed to Coughlin Aoth in =riting and verAallB and in
*act a video e+ists o* this see E+hiAit $ that he noti*ied Coughlin that 0ill and ?arlBs =ould Ae
see@ing to chart Coughlin the same rent theB =ere charging him ;rior to anB alleged eviction ta@ing
;lace some D9)) a month 0ill no= alleges that that =as the *ull rental value o* the ;ro;ertB at trial
0ill seeminglB made a 3reudian sli; and announced that he =as charging that much in vie= o*
Coughlin Aeing at the ;ro;ertB the later attem;ted to saB he miss;o@en that he meant in vie= o*
Coughlin>s ;ro;ertB Aeing at the ;ro;ertB such a sli; =as telling Aecause even someone li@e 0ill
- 4 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
@no=s that its =rong to charge someone the same amount *or the *ull use and occu;ancB o* a
;ro;ertB as one is charging *or quote unquote storage o* someone>s materials at the ;ro;ertB hillsides
to N%- $$'5.4') as allo=ing him to charge such storage. 4ell to the e+tent 0ill =as charging *or
storage N%- 4).7#) clearlB ;rovides that a criminal tres;ass charge and conviction is not a;;ro;riate
and that this court did not have the Hurisdiction to so enter given that a summarB eviction o* ;erson
using s;ace in *acilitB *or storage is a residence ;reem;ts anB aAilitB to ma@e a criminal tres;ass
charge *urther des;ite the citB attorneBs chortling at the notion o* actuallB a;;lBing some ;uAlic
;olicB rather than Hust generating revenue *or the citB in the %eno ?unici;al Court is clearlB and verB
verB Aad taste *or the %eno ?unici;al Court the %eno olice De;artment and the citB attorneB to Ae
see@ing to glom criminal tres;ass charges on the civil evictions ;articularlB =here the 4ashoe
CountB -heri**>s o**ice has admitted to *iling *alse a**idavits under oath attesting to ;ersonal service
o* eviction orders =here in *act no such ;ersonal service =as actuated. ClearlB in the videos %ichard
0ill too@ *ound in E+hiAit $ even 0ill struggles to e+;lain this as does !*c. Carter in the video !*c.
Carter e+claims to Coughlin that he =as served the eviction order Aut then !*c. Carter has trouAle in
de*ining =hat service actuallB means that he does ta@e care to @no= to Coughlin that quote Bou>re not
the victim here unquote at =hich ;oint 0ill can Ae heard chortling in the Aac@ground. 0ill has
struggled in the ;ast to e+;lain the Aases *or his ;osition that Coughlin =as served the summarB
eviction order as 0ill is onlB aAle to cite to the usual custom and ;ractice o* the 4ashoe CountB
-heri**>s o**ice as though that =ere someho= Alac@ letter la= =ith res;ect to the requirements service
o* the eviction order. 0o=ever Bou =ould thin@ *or the D#),))) 0ill and Ba@er charge Dr. ?arlBs
theB =ould>ve Aothered to notice that N%- 4). 4)) ma@es a;;licaAle the Nevada %ules o* Civil
rocedure and Nevada rules o* a;;ellate ;rocedure to the summarB eviction ;roceeding *rom =hich
this criminal tres;ass matter stems.
- 5 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
N%- 4).4)) %ules o* ;ractice. /he ;rovisions o* N%-, Nevada %ules o* Civil rocedure and Nevada
%ules o* 5;;ellate rocedure relative to civil actions, a;;eals and ne= trials, so *ar as theB are not
inconsistent =ith the ;rovisions o* N%- 4).,,) to 4).4,), inclusive, a;;lB to the ;roceedings
mentioned in those sections.
/here*ore there is a Aases *or setting aside altering or amending or other=ise nulli*Bing this
course conviction =hether under rule (9 a rule #) the conviction is not su;;orted AB the evidence the
Aurden o* ;roo* is not Aeen met, and there =ere clear errors o* la=, reversiAle errors as =ell as
con*licts o* interest and ;rocedural and suAstantive irregularities it =as clear error *or Hudge 4illiam
8ardner not to recuse and sel* =here his sister Hudge 9inda 8ardner>s order sanctions is a suAHective
o;inion grievance *or the -tate Bar o* Nevada and 4are Hudge DorothB Nash 0olmes sus;ended
another matter involving Coughlin in the %eno ?unici;al Court ;ending the resolution o* a
com;etencB evaluation *urther it =as clear error *or the court to sua s;onte collect a /iAuron ;rintout
to hel; out the citB attorneB and ?r. 9oomis and getting this case moving *or=ard des;ite Hudge Nash
0olmes is ;rotestation that Coghlan>s com;etencB =as clearlB in question li@e=ise recusal =as in
!regon Coughlin *iled a etition *or 4rit o* ?andamus against 1udge 9inda 8ardner, the sister o* the
Hudge ;residing over this criminal tres;ass case, 1udge 4illiam 8ardner. 3urther the order should Ae
undone given the a;;arent *raud incident to the testimonB AB %ichard Dale =herein the videos and
evidence *ound in E+hiAit $ =hich are ,4 to some e+tent =here on o* the laAel to the de*endant andIor
made unreasonaAlB di**icult to ;resent to the court given the misconduct o* Nevada court services
0ill %eno olice De;artment the citB o* %eno marshals division and others in attem;ting to
im;ermissiAlB leverage state ;o=er including attem;ted Area@Fins AB Nevada court services =ho
share o**ices =ith one o* the a;;ointed de*enders em;loBed AB the %eno ?unici;al Court , 9e=
/aitel, Esq., =ho at one time re;resented Coughlin in this matter and =ho *ailed to aAide AB %eno
- 6 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
?unici;al Court rules e+;laining via =ritten motion the reason *or his =ithdra=al Coghlan>s case
=as then ;assed to %oAerta ;ointed to admitted he =or@ed on Cagle>s cam;aign and his a close
;ersonal *riend o* titles and =hom also has a Ausiness relationshi; =ith Nevada court services *urther
the conviction should Ae.undone given the a;;arent ;erHurB or *raud AB the 4ashoe CountB -heri**>s
o**ice as de;utB match them and that he *iled an a**idavit dated NovemAer 7, ,)$$ =herein he s=ore
that he ;ersonallB served the eviction order. ?atch them su;ervisor at the =ashed . -heri**>s o**ice
civil division 9iC -tuchell <see her email to Coughlin in E+hiAit $: has admitted in =riting that
mansion did not M;ersonallB serveN Coughlin, Aut rather merelB ;osted the eviction order on Coghlan
store and therea*ter *ailed to mail Coghlan co;B o* the order at a time =hen Coughlin =as not at the
$,$ %iver roc@ address. 0ill testi*ied under ;enaltB o* ;erHurB that the %eno olice De;artment
identi*ied itsel* ;rior to Dr. ?arlBs @ic@ing do=n the door to the Aasement.
it is not tres;assing i* one has a right to Ae there. 5nB =arnings not Ae there =hen one has a
right to Ae there are not =arnings at all theB are Hust idle chatter the citB could not estaAlish the
requisite intent necessarB *or conviction under the one la= mentioned in the criminal com;laint i.e.
%eno munici;al code section '. $). )$). /he case cited AB the citB attorneB is com;letelB ina;;licaAle
here and *urther that case does not cite to the %eno munici;al code section in question *urther that
case does not even cite to anB corollarB section o* the Nevada revised statutes rather anB discussion
o* addiction and service requirements indicate a state the ?cNichols $)# Nevada #($, 79) 9. ,D
(() <$99): =as ;urelB dicta and should not o* Aeen relied u;on AB this court in reaching its decision
to issue a conviction here that case, ?cNichols, dealt =ith the la=*ulness o* a search AB the state and
involve a criminal conviction *or ;ossession o* a controlled suAstance it sim;lB did not involve
tres;ass incident to a civil eviction o* a tenant AB landlord anB discussion o* addiction and ?cNichols
related to a *oreclosure =as dicta no actual tres;assers statute =as cited to and use o* the term
- 7 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
tres;ass =as as a term o* art there =as no distinction =hether it =as a civil tres;asser criminal
tres;ass and ?cNichols and no real discussion AB the court as to =hether the service requirements are
met and =hether or not theB e**ectuated it morning incident to an evaluation o* the elements o* some
;articular eviction statute *urther the citB attorneB *ailed to *ill his dutB to disclose contrarB authoritB
=hile ;erha;s this dutB does not e+tend to merelB ;ersuasive authoritB it>s telling o* the ;ractices AB
the citB attorneB and the e+tent =hich theB =ill go to increase revenues. .t =as ;atentlB dishonest to
the citB attorneB to re;resent that the Nichols case re;resents an inter;retation o* %?C eight. $). )$)
%?C -ec. '.$).)$). F /res;assing.
<a:
EverB ;erson =ho goes u;on the land or into anB Auilding o* another =ith intent to ve+ or annoB the o=ner or occu;ant
thereo*, or to commit anB unla=*ul act, or =il*ullB goes or remains u;on anB land or in anB Auilding a*ter having Aeen
=arned AB the o=ner or occu;ant thereo* not to tres;ass, is guiltB o* a misdemeanor. .* the ;remises =ere at the time o;en
to the ;uAlic, the =arning must have Aeen given =ithin the ;revious si+ months. /he meaning o* this suAsection is not
limited AB suAsections <A:, <c:, <d: and <e: o* this section.
<A:
EverB o=ner or other occu;ant o* anB land shall Ae deemed to have given a su**icient =arning against tres;assing, =ithin
the meaning o* this section, =ho ;osts in a cons;icuous manner on each side thereo*, u;on or near the AoundarB at
intervals o* not more than 7)) *eet, signs, legiAlB ;rinted or ;ainted in the English language, =arning ;ersons not to
tres;ass, or =ho *ences the area.
<c:
.t is ;rima *acie evidence o* tres;ass *or anB ;erson to Ae *ound on ;rivate or ;uAlic ;ro;ertB =hich is ;osted or *enced as
;rovided in suAsection <A: =ithout la=*ul Ausiness =ith the o=ner or occu;ant o* the ;ro;ertB.
<d:
5n entrBman on land under the la=s o* the 2nited -tates is an o=ner =ithin the meaning o* this section.
<e:
5s used in this section, G*enceG means a Aarrier su**icient to indicate an intent to restrict the area to human ingress,
including, Aut not limited to, a =all, hedge or chain lin@ or =ire mesh *ence.
9Bnn v. Desiderio, 3rd 2.-. Circuit Court o* 5;;eals, No. )4F4)7) <,))(: /he 3rd 2.-.
Circuit has Hurisdiction over Dela=are, Ne= 1erseB, ennsBlvania, and the 2.-. &irgin .slands. 5n
accrual o* a;;ro+imatelB D4)) in Aac@ rent ;rom;ted the Bethlehem <a.: 6?C5 to =rite 9Bnn a
letter in 3eAruarB ,)),. /hat letter stated that the 6?C5 =ould evict 9Bnn i* he did not ;aB the Aac@
- 8 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
rent AB ?arch ,, ,)),. 9Bnn did not ;aB the Aac@ rent, and 6?C5 sta** memAers and ;olice o**icers
came to his room to demand that he move out. 9BnnLs re*usal to leave ;rom;ted the o**icers to enter
the room and arrest him on a charge o* de*iant tres;ass. 9BnnLs inaAilitB to ma@e Aail resulted in his
incarceration until his ;reliminarB hearing () daBs later. /he magistrate =ho ;resided over the
;reliminarB hearing dismissed the de*iant tres;ass charge, charged 9Bnn =ith disorderlB conduct, and
sentenced him to time served. 9Bnn then *iled a civil rights la=suit that included a claim that the
arresting o**icer and the 6?C5 sta** had violated rights that 4, 2.-.C.-. -ection $9'3 ;rotected.
/he trial court granted the arresting o**icerLs request to dismiss the la=suit. /he trial court concluded
that 9Bnn had not stated a claim *or =hich relie* could have Aeen granted Aecause dismissing the
de*iant tres;ass charge =as not a reversal o* a conviction or a sentence on direct a;;eal that granting
the requested relie* required. ConsequentlB, 9Bnn *iled an a;;eal that challenged the grant o* the
request to dismiss the la=suit. DEC.-.!N: 5**irmed. /he a;;ellate court determined that 9Bnn could
not have ;revailed Aecause a Hudgment in his *avor =ould have necessarilB im;lied that he =as
im;ro;erlB convicted o* disorderlB conduct. /hat im;lication =ould have Aeen im;ro;er Aecause
there =as no conviction that =as reversed on a;;eal, e+;unged, declared invalid, or questioned.
3urther Coughlin si+th amendment right to s;eedB trial =as violated additionallB it =as clear error
not to love Coughlin to ;ut on argument or evidence in su;;ort o* his contention that Hust *or arises
eviction order =as illegal nullitB given the %eno Hustice court =as to vest Hurisdiction u;on the *iling
o* a notice o* a;;eal has argued and ;resented AB Coughlin *ormer de*ense attorneB limits at a
;revious hearing ;articularlB un*air to not consider this =ord the court clearlB relied u;on eFmails
never introducing the evidence that the citB attorneB re*erenced in his closing argument in *act courts
order as rendered *rom the Aeen cited to those verB eFmails =hile at the same time re*using to
- 9 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
consider the arguments related to the divestiture Hudge Aro=ses Hurisdiction under the eviction order
and it consequent e**ect that =ould have on the *ine anB criminal tres;ass charge.
/he !rder allo=ing uentes =ithdr=as *its under G .rregularitB in the ;roceedings o* the court, HurB, master, or
adverse ;artB, or anB order o* the court, or master, or aAuse o* discretion AB =hich either ;artB =as ;revented *rom having
a *air trialG as uentes =as at least ommitting @eB in*ormation to the court, i* not misleading it as to his rationale *or
=ithdra=ing. lus 1udge 8ardner>s !rder, res;ect*ullB contains GError in la= occurring at the trial and oAHected to AB the
;artB ma@ing the motion. !n a motion *or a ne= trial in an action tried =ithout a HurB, the court maB o;en the Hudgment i*
one has Aeen entered, ta@e additional testimonB, amend *indings o* *act and conclusions o* la= or ma@e ne= *indings and
conclusions, and direct the entrB o* a ne= Hudgment.G /he la= sim;lB does not allo= *or such an unsu;;orted AB *acts or
s;eci*ics ?otion to 4ithdra= to Ae granted.
/he !rder or 1udgment is void as it e+tends to matters *or =hich the Court cannot rule, ie, an !rder allo=ing
=ithdra= =here not good *aith Aasis *or requesting a =ithdra=al e+ists.
;rosecutorial misconduct <such as the D.5. =ithholding Ge+cul;atorBG evidence that couldLve hel;ed Bour de*ense:
Hudicial errors <such as the Hudge ;ermitting evidence that shouldLve Aeen e+cluded or vice versa:
erroneous a;;lication o* a la= or regulation im;ro;er HurB instructions
ine**ective assistance o* counsel or other mal;ractice the evidence did not ;rove Bour guilt AeBond a reasonaAle douAt
35.92%E /! 533!%D -."/0 5?END?EN/ %.80/ /! C!2N-E9 !% 8%5N/ DE?5ND 3!% 12%6 /%.597
another DE?5ND 3!% 12%6 /%.59 0E%EB6 ?5DE .N E&EN/ !3 NE4 /%.59, -.?.95%96 %EO2E-/ 3!%
.N 3!%?5 52E%.- -/5/2- 0E%EB6 ?5DE 5ND -2!%/ED B6 5//5C0ED .3 E/./.!N
3urther, here 0aClettF-tevens did as am %oAerts did in $$ cr ,,$7# AB ;utting on ;erHured testimonB AB %ichard 0ill and
doing ni*ong, er, nothing to distance the citB o* reno *rom it or other=ise see@ to correct =hat =as ;resented to the court
AB 0ill>s testimonB that =as in direct contravention to that conveBed in the CitB o* %eno>s o=n discoverB ;ro;ounded,
s;eci*icallB , the videos shot AB 0ill and ?erliss and the entired contents o* the ;olice re;ort.
C!NC92-.!N
De*endantI5;;elant Coughlin hereAB res;ect*ullB requests all !rders, Convictions,
1udgments, Contem;t 3indings, etc, Ae amended, set aside, etc. and soon Aecause -C% $$$ maB
require Coughlin re;ort this conviction <more research is required to determine i* this Mtres;assN is a
Mserious o**enseN under -C% $$$<#:...=ithin 3) daBs, unless, a;;arentlB, this court sets aside,
vacates, or other=ise nulli*ies the !rder it entered in res;onse to the 1une $', ,)$, trial in this matter.
. /o saB a crime =as ;roven AeBond a reasonaAle douAt here, or that Coughlin intended to ve+ and
annoB the o=nere =hile also, allegedlB Aeing verB surre;titious aAout everBthing, Hust doesn>t add u;
and in comAination =ith all the other irregularities in the ;olice =or@, ;rosecution, *ilign o**ice
reHections, smart ;hone seiCures and data =i;ing, ArotherFsister 1udicial con*licts o* interest,
grievances *iled AB other %?C Hudge and the instant 1urist>s sister =ith the -tate Bar o* Nevada, and
;rosecutorial misconduct, =ell....this is -oldal v Coo@ CountB, %eno -tBle.
- 10 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
533.%?5/.!N ursuant to N%- ,39B.)3)
/he undersigned does hereAB a**irm that the ;receding document does not contain
the social securitB numAer o* anB ;erson.
D5/ED this ,7
th
daB o* 1une ,)$,
PIsI Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin
De*endant
- 11 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
%!!3 !3 -E%&.CE
., Zach Coughlin, declare:
!n H2NE ,7/0, ,)$,, ., ?r. Zach Coughlin served the *oregoing Motion for Ne' "rial,
Motion to Alter or A&end; Motion for Reconsideration, Motion to Set Aside Con(iction AB
emailing and *a+ing and or ;lacing in the mail, 5ND E%-!N5996 DE9.&E%.N8 /! /0E
!33.CE !3 /0E %EN! C./6 5//!%NE6 a true co;B thereo* to:
C0%.-/!0E% 05Z9E//F-/E&EN-, E-O.
1!0N E5D..C E-O.
Com;anB: %eno CitB 5ttorneB>s !**ice F Criminal Divison 5ddress: .!. Bo+ $9)) %eno , N&
'9()( hone NumAer: 77(F334F,)() 3a+ numAer: 77(F334F,4,)
D5/ED /0.- $12NE ,7, ,)$,
B6:
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
Zach Coughlin
De*endant
- 12 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.nde+ to E+hiAits
$. E+hiAit $: D&D !3 %E9E&5N/ ?5/E%.59- 5ND &.DE!-
- 13 -
Aside Con(iction
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
E"0.B./ $
E"0.B./ $
- 14 -
Aside Con(iction

7 25 12 0204 62337 242 Pages 61901 26405 ROA From RMC To 2JDC CR12-1262-3049796 (Appeal From Municipal's Court) Digitized Ocr A9 Digitized

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

7 25 12 0204 62337 242 Pages 61901 26405 ROA From RMC To 2JDC CR12-1262-3049796 (Appeal From Municipal's Court) Digitized Ocr A9 Digitized

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7

You might also like