Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
News ticker
  • Staff Applications: OPEN
  • Bans issued on or after 01 Oct 19 may only be appealed if made in error
  • Bug reports are to be lodged in game via /bugreport
  • IC - Applications for Honours & Awards are open
New Standalone Support Portal Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)


TOPIC TITLE - Ensure the topic title is appropriately filed
PLAINTIFF/DEFENDANT DETAILS - If either the plaintiff or defendant involves an organisation (i.e if the application is made on behalf of, or against an organisation, put the organisation name in)

All images should be uploaded to imgur.com or another image hosting website, then copy and paste the actual image directly under evidence

Contact Details - Applicant/Plaintiff
First Name: Hughe
Last Name: Chenis
Mobile: 2435069
Discord: Chillies#5322
Organisation Name (If applicable): Gencorp

Contact Details - Applicant/Plaintiff
First Name: Zyzz 
Last Name: Shavershain
Mobile: 8881012
Discord: MagicP#3333

Contact Details - Lawyer
First Name: Dr.
Last Name: Drakken
Mobile: 106674
Discord: Steev#2839
Organisation Name (If applicable): Horacio & Co Legal Services

Contact Details -  Co-Counsel 
First Name: Emrys
Last Name: Barlowe
Mobile: 1466084
Discord: Divinemadnes1#5111

(Copy and paste the client contact details for any additional plaintiffs)

Defendant Name: The Queen
Defendant Organisation (If available): San Andreas Police Force

(Copy and paste the defendant contact details for additional defendants)

Statement of Claims:

  1. On the 17th of June 2022, Mr. Hughe Chenis & Zyzz Shavershain were arrested by AFP for the charges of breaching the Gencorp Outlaw and sentenced to 360 months imprisonment and $2,000,000 in fines.
  2. Mr. Chenis was doing his usual thing, hanging with a friend Mr Shavershain, who wasn’t a member of Gencorp. Mr Shavershain retired from Gencorp on roughly the 9th of June 2022.
  3. Mr Shavershain left on good terms, due to other commitments, Mr. Shavershain wanted to turn a new leaf for his newfound love in the city, Mr Shavershain didn’t want to be a criminal any longer, while Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain stayed good friends, Mr Shavershain was not a part of anything within the organisation of Gen Corp since the 9th of June 2022.
  4. AFP had proceeded to do a Traffic Stop on a Local car being driven by Mr Chenis, AFP approached the 2 civilians and asked for their details and names. At which point they proceed to provide a fake name to AFP. AFP then said to both gentlemen they would be back in a moment. To where a Code-5 Stop was ordered and both Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain were surrounded by multi police cars and 2 handers aimed at them. At NO POINT were either hostile and both complied with police. 
  5. AFP had no reasonable grounds or Identify features for said individuals and using the local car, we suspect their voices had been used in the leadup to their arrest. Before the Traffic Stop was issued, they had already been on the side of the radio talking.
  6. CIB Officer DX-06 | Jamal Snow proceeded to fine both Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain for Breaching of the Organisation Restriction Order, Section 1. 
    1. Members of the Organisation are not permitted to gather with other members of the Organisation in groups of any numbers or size
  7. Mr Chenis told multiple officers that Mr Shavershain was no longer a member of Gencorp and that he had finished his time within the Organisation days before the outlaw was issued. Officers ignored this information and charged both individuals as per the “Out Law Order” for $2,000,000 and 6 Hours Imprisonment. We argue how Mr Chenis supposed to know about what information is displayed on someone’s profile on COPS where this information is private and confidential.
  8. CIB officers told Mr Chenis that it was his own fault and that it was his own job and responsibility to inform the SAPF when members are no longer a part of the organisation.
  9. After spending 6 hours imprisonment, Mr Chenis took off to MRPD, where he spoke to TAC officer Jeriko Jerrik to remove Mr Shavershain information from his profile, to which Mr Chenis has no idea what was even written or noted on Mr Shavershain profile.  
  10. We seek the following remedies:
    1. The charges of Violation of Organisation Restriction Order be stricken from both Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain records.
    2. Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain to be compensated for time served and fines paid.
    3. Mr Chenis and Mr Shavershain legal fees to be paid for by the defendant.



  • Mr Chenis
  • Mr Shavershain


Acknowledgement: Failure to acknowledge the following will result in penalties
1. I acknowledge that under section 22 of the Crimes Act 2018 and section 8 of the Judicial Procedures Act 2019 that it is an offence to provide falsified statements or evidence and may result in harsh penalty if convicted.
2. I acknowledge that under section 15 of the Judicial Procedures Act 2019 that there will be a fee associated with the court proceedings of this case, per person in each party. Yes
3. I authorise the Government of San Andreas to deduct any fees set out in point 2 above from my bank account automatically. 
(Attach evidence of consent from additional applicants to this case). Yes

Edited by Dr. Drakken | Dr. Danger

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


Shavershain & Chenis v The Queen 
[2022] SADC 34

[1] The District Court accepts the appellant's writ of appeal against conviction.

[2] As the appeal to summary conviction has been filed within five days of that conviction being recorded, these proceedings will be heard on a de novo basis, with the respondent bearing the burden of proof.

[3] The respondent is directed to file an appearance and a response within five days, effective from receiving notice of these proceedings being accepted by the Court. Failure to provide a response or appearance will result in the proceedings being heard without the respondent and may result in a judgment in the favour of the appellant by default.

[4] The Court will contact the parties to give directions about how these proceedings will be conducted.

[5] Whilst presided over by a Supreme Court Justice, this case is being heard at a District Court level. 

CASE TITLE: Simmons v The Queen [2022] SADC 28




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.