Ray Davis Stuff

Electronically Filed
Mar 06 2020 02:04 p.m.

Elizabeth A. Brown
Clerk of Supreme Court
Docket 80746 Document 2020-09036

3/5/2020 9:10 AM
Steven D. Grierson
CLERK OF THE COURT
1 ASTA
6 IN THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE

7 STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR
8 THE COUNTY OF CLARK
9
STATE OF NEVADA,
10 Case No: C-19-342946-1
Plaintiff(s),
11 Dept No: VI
vs.
12
13 RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS,
14 Defendant(s),
15
16
17 CASE APPEAL STATEMENT

18 1. Appellant(s): Raymond Davis
19 2. Judge: Jacqueline M. Bluth

20 3. Appellant(s): Raymond Davis
21
Counsel:
22
Raymond Davis #1943160
23 330 S. Casino Center Blvd.
Las Vegas, NV 89101
24
4. Respondent: The State of Nevada
25
26
Counsel:
27 Steven B. Wolfson, District Attorney

200 Lewis Ave.
28 Las Vegas, NV 89101
C-19-342946-1 -1-
Case Number: C-19-342946-1

(702) 671-2700
1
2
5. Appellant(s)'s Attorney Licensed in Nevada: N/A
Permission Granted: N/A
3
Respondent(s)’s Attorney Licensed in Nevada: Yes
4 Permission Granted: N/A
5 6. Has Appellant Ever Been Represented by Appointed Counsel In District Court: Yes
6
7. Appellant Represented by Appointed Counsel On Appeal: N/A
7
8. Appellant Granted Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis: N/A
8
9. Date Commenced in District Court: August 29, 2019
9
10. Brief Description of the Nature of the Action: Criminal
10
Type of Judgment or Order Being Appealed: Misc. Order
11
12
11. Previous Appeal: Yes
13 Supreme Court Docket Number(s): 80454, 80455, 80456, 80501, 80534, 80569
14 12. Child Custody or Visitation: N/A
15 Dated This 5 day of March 2020.
16 Steven D. Grierson, Clerk of the Court

17
18 /s/ Amanda Hampton

19
Amanda Hampton, Deputy Clerk
200 Lewis Ave
20 PO Box 551601
Las Vegas, Nevada 89155-1601
21
(702) 671-0512
22
23
24
cc: Raymond Davis
25
26
27
28
C-19-342946-1 -2-
EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
State of Nevada § Location: Department 6
vs § Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.
Raymond Davis § Filed on: 08/29/2019
§ Cross-Reference Case C342946
§ Number:
§ Defendant's Scope ID #: 1943160
§ Grand Jury Case Number: 18BGJ207X
§ ITAG Case ID: 2092225
§ Supreme Court No.: 80454
§ 80455
§ 80456
§ 80501
§ 80569
CASE INFORMATION
Offense Statute Deg Date Case Type: Felony/Gross Misdemeanor

1. SEXUAL ASSAULT WITH A MINOR 200.366.3c F 01/01/2014
UNDER FOURTEEN YEARS OF AGE Case
08/29/2019 Open
Arrest: 08/29/2019 Status:
UNDER FOURTEEN YEARS OF AGE
UNDER FOURTEEN YEARS OF AGE
4. OPEN OR GROSS LEWDNESS 201.210.1a G 01/01/2014
5. LEWDNESS WITH A CHILD UNDER THE 201.230.2 F 01/01/2014
AGE OF 14
AGE OF 14
AGE OF 14
Bonds
Surety #2019-CC-013590 $25,000.00
10/16/2019 Surrendered
5/6/2019 Active
Counts: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Comments: Transfer Bail from case C340075 per minute order 9/4/19
DATE CASE ASSIGNMENT
Current Case Assignment

Case Number C-19-342946-1
Court Department 6
Date Assigned 08/29/2019
Judicial Officer Bluth, Jacqueline M.
PARTY INFORMATION
Lead Attorneys
Defendant Davis, Raymond Tyrone Mueller, Craig A
Retained
702-382-1200(W)
Plaintiff State of Nevada Wolfson, Steven B

702-671-2700(W)
DATE EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT INDEX
PAGE 1 OF 17 Printed on 03/05/2020 at 9:14 AM

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
EVENTS
08/29/2019 Indictment
08/29/2019 Summons
Summons (Indictment)
09/04/2019 Reporters Transcript

Filed By: Plaintiff State of Nevada
Reporter's Transcript of Proceedings - Grand Jury - Hearing - August 28, 2019
09/05/2019 Notice of Witnesses and/or Expert Witnesses

STATE S NOTICE OF WITNESSES AND/OR EXPERT WITNESSES
09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

Defendants Motion to Dismiss




09/10/2019 Motion
Remove Ankle Bracelet
09/10/2019 Motion
Dismss Due to Lack of Evidence

Motion to Dismiss
09/10/2019 Motion for Change of Venue

Change of Venue

(Dismissal Due to Pretrial Delay)
09/11/2019 Jury List
09/12/2019 Audiovisual Transmission Equipment Appearance Request

AUDIOVISUAL TRANSMISSION EQUIPMENT APPEARANCE REQUEST
09/13/2019 Amended Jury List

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
09/13/2019 List of Witnesses
Witness List
09/16/2019 Motion
Filed By: Defendant Davis, Raymond Tyrone
Dismisal Due to Prosecutorial Misconduct

Dismissal Due to Gran Jury Indigment is Beyond the Statue of Limits
09/16/2019 Motion
Motion to Throw Out Witness Vannesa Robintson Grand Jury Testimony

Dismissal Due to Double Jepordy
09/16/2019 Motion
Motion to Call a Mistrial
09/16/2019 Motion
Motion to Recuse Judge Jacqueline Bluth
09/16/2019 Audiovisual Transmission Equipment Appearance Request

AUDIOVISUAL TRANSMISSION EQUIPMENT APPEARANCE REQUEST
09/16/2019 Answer (Criminal)

Answer to Oral Request to Disqualify Judge Jacqueline M. Bluth From Case #C-19-342946-1
09/16/2019 Affidavit
Affidavit of Judge Bluth in Support of Answer to Oral Request to Disqualify Judge Jacqueline
M. Bluth From Case #C-19-342946-1
10/09/2019 Bail Bond

Bail Bond # 2019-CC-013590 $25,000.00 Transfer per minute order 9/4/19 from case
C340075.
10/10/2019 Competency Evaluations

Competency evaluations
10/21/2019 Motion
Motion to Withdraw Due to Conflict
10/29/2019 Motion for Own Recognizance Release/Setting Reasonable Bail

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reinstatement Of Own Rcognizance Release
10/30/2019 Clerk's Notice of Hearing

Notice of Hearing

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
11/04/2019 Opposition to Motion

State's Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Reinstatement of Own Recognizance Release
11/06/2019 Order
Order Denying Motion for Own Recognizance Release and Setting Bail
11/07/2019 Errata
Errata to Order Denying Motion for Own Recognizance Release and Setting Bail
11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Jury Trial - Day 1 09/10/2019

Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Jury Trial - Day 2 - 09/11/2019




11/25/2019 Order
Order for Transcript

Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Confirmation of Counsel (P.D.) and Custodial Status and
Bail 10/21/2019
11/25/2019 Motion
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Recuse Judge

Notice of Hearing
11/27/2019 Notice of Change of Hearing

Notice of Change of Hearing
12/05/2019 Answer (Criminal)

Answer to Motion to Recuse Judge Jacqueline M. Bluth from Case #C-19-342946-1
12/05/2019 Affidavit
Affidavit of Judge Bluth in Support of Answer to Motion to Recuse Judge Jacqueline M. Bluth
From Case #C-19-342946-1

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
12/09/2019 Media Request and Order

Media Request And Order Allowing Camera Access To Court Proceedings
12/26/2019 Motion to Dismiss Counsel

Party: Defendant Davis, Raymond Tyrone
01/13/2020 Supplemental Witness List

State's Supplemental Notice of Witnesses and/or Expert Witnesses
01/16/2020 Notice of Appeal (criminal)

Notice of Appeal

Notice of Appeal

Notice of Appeal


Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Defendant's Notice of Motion and Motion for
Reinstatement of Own Recognizance Release 11/04/2019
01/17/2020 Case Appeal Statement

Case Appeal Statement


01/23/2020 Request for Attendance of Out-Of-State Witness

State's Request for Attendance of Out-of-State-Witness Custodian of Records/PMK for
Facebook or Kendall Finley
01/24/2020 Certificate for Attendance of Out-Of-State Witness

Certificate for Attendance of Out-of-State Witness Custodian of Recores/PMK for Facebook or
Kendall Finley

Notice of Appeal

01/28/2020

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
Decision and Order
Decision and Order


Notice of Appeal


01/31/2020 Supplement
Filed by: Defendant Davis, Raymond Tyrone
SUPPLEMENT TO DEFENDANT S MOTION TO DISMISS HEARING REQUESTED
01/31/2020 Notice of Witnesses

Notice of Witness
02/03/2020 Addendum
Addendum to Defendant's Supplement to Motion to Dismiss
02/04/2020 Opposition
State's Opposition to Defendant's Second Motion to Dismiss and Supplemental Motion to
Dismiss
02/05/2020 Certificate
CERTIFICATE FOR ATTENDANCE OF OUT-OF-STATE WITNESS CUSTODIAN OF
RECORDS/PMK FOR FACEBOOK OR KENDALL FINLEY

Motion to Dismiss Counsel
02/06/2020 Order Denying Motion

Order

Notice of Appeal


CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
Recorders Transcript of Hearing Re: Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 02/05/2020
02/13/2020 Motion for Own Recognizance Release/Setting Reasonable Bail

Motion and Notice of Motion for Reinstatement of Own Recognizance

Notice of Hearing
02/18/2020 Opposition to Motion

State's Opposition to Defendant's Notice of Motion and Second Motion for Reinstatement of
Own Recognizance Release

Notice of Appeal


HEARINGS
08/29/2019 Grand Jury Indictment (11:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bell, Linda Marie)
MINUTES
Matter Heard;
Journal Entry Details:
Raymond Jatkowski, Grand Jury Foreperson, stated to the Court that at least twelve members
had concurred in the return of the true bill during deliberation, but had been excused for
presentation to the Court. State presented Grand Jury Case Number 18BGJ207X to the Court.
COURT ORDERED, the Indictment may be filed and is assigned Case Number C-19-342946-
1, Department VI. State requested a summons and advised Deft is not in custody. COURT
ORDERED, INDICTMENT SUMMONS ISSUED, matter SET for Arraignment. Upon Court's
inquiry, the State advised there are no material witness warrants to quash. COURT FURTHER
ORDERED, Exhibits 1-3 to be lodged with the Clerk of the Court. NIC (SUMMON) 09/04/19
9:30 A.M. INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT (DEPT VI) ;
SCHEDULED HEARINGS
Initial Arraignment (09/04/2019 at 9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
09/04/2019 Initial Arraignment (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
09/04/2019 Motion (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)

09/04/2019, 09/09/2019
State's Notice of Motion and Motion To Admit Evidence of Other Crimes, Wongs or Acts
Matter Heard;

Defendant's Notice of Motion And Motion To Withdraw As Attorney of Record
Granted;
09/04/2019 All Pending Motions (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ADMIT EVIDENCE OF OTHER
CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS...DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD...CALENDAR CALL Also present, Attorney Jay
Maynard. Colloquy regarding new Indictment and Faretta canvass. After arraignment,
Defendant requested to represent himself. Defendant DAVIS ARRAIGNED, PLED NOT
GUILTY AND INVOKED THE SIXTY (60) DAY RULE. COURT ORDERED, trial setting
STANDS. Faretta canvas administered by the Court. Defendant requested standby counsel.
Ms. Kollins argued Defendant's not entitled to it. Colloquy regarding standby counsel.
COURT ORDERED, request for standby counsel GRANTED; waiver of right to counsel
ACCEPTED; matter SET for appointment of standby counsel. Concerns with Defendant's
competency noted by Ms. Kollins. Upon conferring with Defendant in regards to counsel,
COURT ORDERED, case to trial. Colloquy regarding Defendant's allegations of being framed
by the State and black mailed by the victim. Defendant advised the Court of misconduct on
behalf of the State and that he's spoken with attorney Kelsey Bernstein. Record made by Mr.
Maynard, advising he has no information in regards to the Defendant speaking with Ms.
Bernstein. Argument in support of State's motion by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, matter SET for hearing. Argument in opposition of setting of hearing by
Defendant. Colloquy regarding witness availability and discovery. Defendant stated he would
like a motion to suppress. Court directed the motion be filed in writing. Ms. Kollins stated the
Defendant's not an active member of the military and objected to his attire under the Stolen
Valor Act. Court stated it will be reviewed and addressed September 6th. BOND(MLEM). 9-6-
19 9:00 AM APPOINTMENT OF STANDBY COUNSEL 9-9-19 1:00 PM EVIDENTIARY
HEARING: STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ADMIT EVIDENCE OF
OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS 9-10-19 1:30 PM JURY TRIAL ;
09/06/2019 Hearing (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)

Appointment of Standby Counsel
Matter Heard;
Mr. Claus accepted the appointment as standby counsel and advised if the Defendant would
like to be represented by counsel he cannot take over the trial at this point as he has zero
familiarity with the case. Court stated the Defendant has been spoken with and has been
informed should he not longer wish to proceed that's not an option, depending on the
circumstances; one option being to stop, declare a mistrial and then formally appoint counsel;
counsel would not be forced to take over mid trial. Upon the inquiry of the Court Defendant
acknowledged he's ok with Mr. Claus a standby counsel and that he can help with procedural
issues, but does not have facts and knowledge of the trial. Ms. Kollins stated duplicated
discovery has been given to Mr. Claus to provide to the Defendant; the only thing missing is a
transcript of a witness, the audio will be provided. Argument by Defendant regarding his
custody status. Court stated findings, noting the Defendant's custody status was previously
addressed and ORDERED, request to change custody status DENIED to be placed in writing
for consideration if there's something new. Defendant advised he'll be filing several motions
moving for dismissal. Ms. Kollins stated it seems like a writ and her position is it waives
speedy trial; State should not be required to respond. Court informed the Defendant the Court
is happy to consider the writ on the merits but speedy trial must be waived. Continued
argument by Defendant in regards to filing of motions. Colloquy regarding duties of standby
counsel. BOND(EM);
09/09/2019 Evidentiary Hearing (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
09/09/2019 All Pending Motions (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
EVIDENTIARY HEARING...STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ADMIT

EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS Colloquy regarding witness
availability for trial. Defendant moved for the recusal of the Court and dismissal of the case
and presented argument in support thereof. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motions
DENIED. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding motion to recuse should
Defendant wish to further pursue it. Defendant stated he will roll the dice, go with this Court
and withdraw the motion. COURT ORDERED, motion to dismiss and recuse WITHDRAWN.
Argument in support of Motion To Dismiss Due to Prosecutorial Misconduct by Defendant and
in opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. Upon the

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
inquiry of the Court, Defendant stated he's not seeking to wear a military uniform at trial.
Colloquy regarding procedures for Petrocelli Hearing. Defendant moved to dismiss the case
and presented argument in support thereof. Argument in opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court
stated findings and ORDERED, Motion To Dismiss in regards to speedy trial DENIED.
Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding ruling, proceedings and whether camera's
are allowed. Defendant moved for the removal of his ankle bracelet. Argument in opposition
by Ms. Kollins. COURT ORDERED, request DENIED; custody status will not change. Mr.
Claus argued he's never been in a situation with someone going to Court with bracelet on
before. Defendant argued the prosecutor is withholding evidence and requested to be allowed
to file a motion to dismiss. Colloquy regarding trial and discovery. COURT ORDERED,
motion WITHDRAWN. Witness Erica Munoz and Halley Farris sworn and testified. Argument
in support of State's motion by Ms. Kollins and in opposition by Defendant. Court stated
findings and ORDERED, State's motion GRANTED. Argument in objection to Court's ruling
by Defendant. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding ruling. Record made by Ms.
Kollins in regards to offer extended. Defendant requested the offer be in writing, not verbal.
Court stated that's not how it works. Ms. Kollins noted the offer which was rejected requires
registration as a sex offender. Upon the inquiry of the Court Defendant stated the offer was
rejected; he does not know what it is and would like a chance to look at the offer and rules of
it. Ms. Kollins stated she's ok allowing the offer to be reviewed by counsel. MATTER
RECALLED: Upon review of the offer with counsel, Defendant stated the offers rejected. Ms.
Kollins stated the offers now revoked. ;
09/10/2019 Jury Trial (1:30 PM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
09/10/2019-09/13/2019, 09/16/2019-09/17/2019
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court noted the receipt of documentation
regarding an independent mental health evaluation the Defendant received from Seven Hills
Hospital, noted it's content and referral to out patient group therapy 3 times per week.
Statement by Defendant in regards to his emotions and anger with the proceedings and how
they've pushed him to a breaking point; advised he's not asking for a mistrial and requested a
continuance to get help to get his head straight. Court stated findings and ORDERED, request
for continuance DENIED. Colloquy regarding discovery. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY:
Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE
JURY: Court admonished the Defendant in regards to his behavior and stated if he does not
follow the rules, action will be taken. Colloquy regarding National Crime Information Center
(N.C.I.C.) and Las Vegas Justice Court record discrepancies as to Defendant's prior arrest. IN
THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet).
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court admonished the Defendant that should his
behavior continue he will forfeit his ability to cross examine witnesses. IN THE PRESENCE
OF THE JURY: Testimony & Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court instructed the Defendant to read NRS 22.010 and NRS
22.030 and stated 25 days consecutively in the Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) will be
imposed for contempt for each outburst moving forward. Defendant stated he didn't think he
was capable of not having more outbursts and requested counsel be appointed. Court stated
findings and ORDERED, request DENIED. Argument by Defendant in regards denial of
request for counsel. Upon the inquiry of the Court if he's mentally incompetent to stand trial,
Defendant responded "yes". COURT ORDERED, Defendant REMANDED WITHOUT BAIL;
matter REFERRED to Department VII for competency evaluation due to the representations of
the Defendant; after competency is addressed the Defendant will come back for a bail hearing
in regards his custody status. COURT ORDERED, MISTRIAL MATTER RECALLED:
Defendant not present. COURT ORDERED, Mr. Claus is RELIEVED of Standby Counsel
duties at this time. Record made by the Court.;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Defendant advised the Court of his missing
documents that will prove his innocence and requested a mistrial. Colloquy regarding
Defendants alibi witnesses, missing documentation. Continued argument in support of mistrial
by Defendant. Argument in opposition of mistrial by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, request for mistrial DENIED. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding
motions. Defendant requested the case be dismissed due to double jeopardy and for a mistrial.
Court so noted for the record. Record made by Ms. Kollins. Colloquy regarding Defendants
need for additional time for opening statements, denial of the request and the Defendant's
behavior. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY. Testimony and Exhibits Presented. (See
Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Mr. Claus advised he's spoken with
the Defendant and answered all questions. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY. Testimony
and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Record
made by the Court. Defendant requested a mistrial. Colloquy regarding questioning of witness.
Argument in opposition of mistrial by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED,
mistrial DENIED; limiting instruction to be given. Court admonished the Defendant in regards
to his behavior. Colloquy regarding procedural matters, adherence to rules, scheduling and
limiting instruction. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and Exhibits Presented
(See Worksheet). COURT ORDERED, matter CONTINUED; Jury admonished and released.
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Colloquy regarding scheduling. Record made by
the Court in regards to motions. Colloquy regarding Defendant's morning psychological
appointment. Unless the Defendant is involuntarily committed, Court stated he's to be here
tomorrow at 10 AM;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court noted it received correspondence
regarding Defendant's psychological state. Court exhibit presented (see worksheet). Court
read the findings from the nurse practitioner. Mr. Davis apologized to the Court for his
behavior. Court noted one juror has become ill and would be excused from the jury. Colloquy
regarding Mr. Davis's house arrest bracelet. Discussions regarding State's offer to Defendant.
Ms. Kollins placed the offer on the record. Mr. Davis rejected the offer. Further colloquy
regarding Defendant's legal papers. Sergeant Coleman now present. Sergeant Coleman made
representations as to retrieving Defendant's documentation. INSIDE PRESENCE OF THE
JURY: Information read by Clerk of the Court. INSIDE PRESENCE OF JUROR NO. 6:
Colloquy regarding his health and financial hardship. COURT ORDERED, Juror 6
EXCUSED from the jury. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Discussion regarding
using an alternate. Mr. Davis indicated Juror No. 9 was shaking his head and making bad
faces during the reading of the information. INSIDE PRESENCE OF JUROR NO. 9: Court
questioned Juror No. 9 regarding his demeanor during the reading of the indictment. Juror
No. 9 expressed that he could hear the testimony and evidence without bias. OUTSIDE THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Mr. Davis argued to remove Juror No. 9. COURT NOTED the
charges were difficult to hear; however, it felt confident in the juror's answer. Defense Witness
List FILED IN OPEN COURT. INSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Jury SWORN.
Opening statements by counsel. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Discussions
regarding instructions. Court noted Defense was entitled to a limiting instruction. Court cited
Frank's Case. Arguments by counsel regarding the Propensity and Bad Acts. COURT NOTED
it made no findings that Defendant was in violation of House Arrest. Statement by Mr. Davis
requesting to dismiss the case as he was not properly prepared. Ms. Kollins stated the Court
had made many accommodations for Mr. Davis's requests. COURT ORDERED, trial to
proceed. COURT ORDERED, Defendant placed back on OWN RECOGNIZANCE with
HOUSE ARREST and to RESTART MEDIUM LEVEL EMP. INSIDE THE PRESENCE OF
THE JURY: Testimony and exhibits presented (see worksheet). COURT ORDERED, trial
CONTINUED. EVENING RECESS. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Colloquy
regarding remaining trial testimony. COURT ADMONISHED Mr. Davis about making
statements during examination. Mr. Davis indicated he understood. CONTINUED
TO:09/16/19 12:45 PM;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Judge Tierra Jones presiding. Judge Jones noted
the affidavit filed by Judge Bluth and informed the Defendant nothing other than the Motion
To Recuse Judge Bluth can be addressed. Argument by Defendant. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, motion DENIED. Defendant requested a mental evaluation. Court stated the issue
is for Judge Bluth to resolve. MATTER RECALLED: Judge Jacqueline Bluth presiding. Court
noted the denial of the motion to recuse and the Defendant's request for a mental health
evaluation. Argument in support of request for mental health evaluation by Defendant.
Statement by Ms. Kollins regarding concerns with Defendant's competency and behavior and
requested the Defendant be remanded if a competency evaluation is wanted. Colloquy between
Court and Defendant. Court noted concerns and ORDERED, Defendant REMANDED for an
evaluation. Colloquy. Record made by Marshall in regards to statements made by the
Defendant. Record made by the Court in regards to proceedings and Defendant's behavior.;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL. Colloquy regarding
scheduling and additional panel of new prospective jurors. Defendant advised he attempted to
file motions and set a hearing date with the Clerk's Office; but the line and stated he would like
to get in a couple of motions. Court admonished the Defendant in regards to the rules of the
filings of motions and stated the motions cannot be considered an affidavit of good cause as to
the late filings. Good cause argument as to the late filing of motions by Defendant. Colloquy
regarding witness/alibi witness, rules in regards to witnesses. Defendant argued not having a
black male on the jury is unconstitutional. Argument in opposition of Batson challenge by Ms.
Kollins. Court noted the makeup of the prospective jury and stated a Batson challenge cannot
be made now as the juror just left. Defendant argued he's challenging the procedure used to
select the jury. Batson Challenge argument by Mr. Claus. Argument by Defendant challenging
the make up of the jury. COURT ORDERED, objection OVERRULED and noted. Record made
by Ms. Kollins in regards to another witness list provided by Defendant. Colloquy regarding
rules of witnesses and alibi witness list. Argument in regards to witness list by Defendant.
Court informed the Defendant his right to call witnesses is not being denied and that all that's
being asked is to file motions pursuant to statute as to good cause for the late notice.
Continued argument by Defendant alleging being rail roaded by this Court. Record made by
Ms. Kollins regarding jury selection process. Record made by the Court regarding witnesses
and NRS 174.234. Defendant requested the recusal of the Court, advising he's willing to waive.
COURT ORDERED, proceedings will be handled by Judge Villani tomorrow morning at 9:00
AM. Colloquy regarding scheduling. BOND(EM);
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Trial Continues;
Mistrial;
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Colloquy regarding jury
selection and Defendant's house arrest ankle monitor. Defendant advised the Court regarding
motions to be filed. Court admonished Defendant regarding procedures for filing of motions.
Argument by Defendant and Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, Motions
DENIED. Colloquy regarding scheduling, sealed records and motions. IN THE PRESENCE
OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Introductory comments by the Court. Introductory
comments on behalf of the State by Ms. Kollins and by Defendant. Roll of Prospective Jurors
called and sworn. Voir Dire. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY
PANEL: Court admonished the Defendant to not make comments or converse with prospective
jurors. Defendant orally motioned to challenge the jury pool. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, motion DENIED. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL:
Voir Dire. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Colloquy
regarding Prospective Jurors #430 and #473. COURT ORDERED, Prospective Jurors #430
and #473 EXCUSED. Court directed the Defendant to familiarize himself with EDCR 3.20 in
regards to rules of filing motions. Colloquy regarding Defendant's pending surgery and House
Arrest bracelet. At the request of Ms. Kollins, Court admonished the Defendant not to have
any contact with the Jurors. ;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
09/18/2019 Minute Order (3:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Minute Order - No Hearing Held;
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Witness Lied to
Grand Jury is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not
less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based
upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10,
2019 and the motion was filed on September 9, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good
cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss State s
Complaint is Flawed of is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served
and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late
motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on
September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on September 9, 2019 without an affidavit
demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to
Dismiss Speedy Trial is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served
and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late
demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to
Dismiss Prosecutorial Misconduct is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must
be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only
consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in this
matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on September 9, 2019 without an
affidavit demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's
Motion to Dismiss Removal of Ankle Monitor is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all
motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court
will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in
this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on September 9, 2019
without an affidavit demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond
Davis's Motion to Remove Ankle Bracelet is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all
Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Lack of Evidence is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that
all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The
court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The
trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on September 10,
2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants
Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Defective Charging Documents is hereby DENIED. EDCR
3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set
for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good
cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on
September 10, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20,
Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion for Change of Venue is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20
states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for
trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating good
Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Pretrial Delay is hereby DENIED.
EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the
date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit
demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the
motion was filed on September 10, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause.
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Prosecutorial
Misconduct is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not
less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based
upon an affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10,
2019 and the motion was filed on September 16, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good
cause. Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Grand
Jury Indictment Beyond Statute of Limitations is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
Davis's Motion to Throw Out Witness V.R.'s Grand Jury Testimony is hereby DENIED. EDCR
3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set
Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Double Jeopardy is hereby DENIED.
EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the
date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Call a Mistrial is hereby
DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days
before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit
motion was filed on September 16, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause. ;
10/11/2019 Further Proceedings: Competency (10:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bell, Linda Marie)
Found Competent;
Appearances Continued: Denise Baker of the Specialty Courts also present. Statement by Deft.
regarding feeling he is doing great. There being no challenge by Defense Counsel, COURT
FINDS Defendant COMPETENT pursuant to the Dusky Standard as Defendant is capable of
understanding the nature of the charges against him / her and is able to assist counsel in his /
her defense and ORDERED, pursuant to 178.420, matter TRANSFERRED back to the
originating court for further proceedings. Upon Deft's inquiry, State indicated Deft. had been
remanded in the originating department and the Court declined to address the issue. CASE
CLOSED. CUSTODY 10/14/19 9:30 AM FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: RETURN FROM
COMPETENCY COURT - DC 6;
10/14/2019 Further Proceedings: Return from Competency Court (9:30 AM) (Judicial
Officer: Becker, Nancy)
Appointment of Counsel
Matter Heard;
Court noted the Defendant's been found competent and that based upon issues at trial that
resulted in a mistrial and looking back on the laws in regards to self representation, Judge
Bluth has indicated the Defendant will no longer be allowed to represent himself and
ORDERED, Public Defender APPOINTED and is to determine if there's any conflict. Deputy
Public Defender (P.D.) Ashley Sisolak advised the P.D. cannot confirm at this time, requested
a couple of days to confirm, advised a speciality team will handle the case and requested
access to the competency reports in case they seek to challenge them. Court stated it cannot be
challenged at this time, but counsel is entitled to the reports. Ms. Kollins requested
proceedings be calendared next Monday. COURT ORDERED, proceedings SET for
confirmation of counsel and to address bail. Argument by Defendant regarding bail. Court
stated the matter will he be heard by Judge Bluth. Defendant stated he can pay for his own
attorney. Court stated the Defendant can still hire private counsel if that's what's desired.
Continued argument/statement by Defendant. Court stated the bail issue will not be gone into,
which was explained to the Defendant and ORDERED, proceedings CONTINUED for matters
to be heard by Judge Bluth; no other issues will be discussed and should the Defendant desire
to hire private counsel, he's to make those arrangements and have them in Court Monday.
CUSTODY 10-21-19 9:30 AM FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: CUSTODIAL
STATUS/BAIL...CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL (P.D.)...STATUS CHECK: BAIL;
10/21/2019 Further Proceedings (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Further Proceedings: Custodial Status and Bail
Matter Heard;
10/21/2019 CANCELED Status Check (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated - On in Error
Status Check: Bail
10/21/2019 Confirmation of Counsel (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Confirmation of Counsel (P.D.)

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
Matter Heard;
10/21/2019 All Pending Motions (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL...FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: CUSTODIAL STATUS AND
BAIL Motion To Withdraw Due To Conflict FILED IN OPEN COURT. Appearing on behalf of
the Public Defender, Attorney Violet Radosta. Ms. Radosta advised the P.D. has a conflict and
that the Office of Appointed Counsel has sent over Mr. Sanft. Court noted Defendant was to
have counsel from a different State. Defendant concurred and argued the attorney came to the
Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) and was not allowed to see him. Terry King
addressed the Court on behalf of the Defendant and advised the Defendant's Attorney is
Sebastian Lewis, who's licensed here, came from out state and they would not let him see the
Defendant; it's not certain if he will confirm; he's been paid for investigative work to meet with
the Defendant. COURT ORDERED, Michael Sanft APPOINTED as counsel. Upon the inquiry
of the Defendant, Court stated any custody motions are to be in writing. Ms. Radosta informed
the Court of the new policies of the CCDC in regards to new attorney's trying to visit
Defendants if they've not previously visited them before. COURT ORDERED, matter
TRAILED. MATTER RECALLED: Attorney Michael Sanft present. Court informed Mr. Sanft
of what transpired in his absence. Upon the request of the Defendant to meet with Mr. Sanft,
Mr. Sanft stated he will speak with the Defendant at the CCDC. Argument in support of
release by Defendant. COURT ORDERED, request is to be placed in writing. Colloquy
between Court and Defendant regarding proceedings, Defendant's mental state and custody
status leading to today. Colloquy between Court and Mr. Sanft regarding trial setting and
speedy trial. Court stated it's believed appropriate for the Defendant to be placed on the next
stack; technically speedy trial is waived, although the Defendants never really agreed to it.
William Rowles appeared on behalf of the State and advised that Ms. Kollins would like the
trial setting after the new year. Colloquy regarding trial setting. COURT ORDERED, matter
SET for trial with a FIRM setting. Mr. Sanft stated he'll meet with the Defendant today.
CUSTODY 2-3-20 9:30 AM CALENDAR CALL 2-1-020 10:00 AM JURY TRIAL;
10/23/2019 Further Proceedings (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
Ms. Kollins advised she listened to the Defendant's jail calls and is concerned that the
Defendant in his mind removed Mr. Sanft as counsel, and wanted to update the Court on that
the Defendant's hired someone else and there's no substitution of counsel. Mr. Sanft stated a
call was received from the Defendant's employee Monday night indicating his services are no
longer required, and advised he doesn't believe this rises to a level of him being taken off of
the case . Upon the inquiry of the Court, Defendant stated he never hired Mr. Sanft, does not
want him as counsel, he'll not use a state appointed attorney or Public Defender and that he
can pay for counsel. Defendant further stated he always wanted his own attorney that he can
pay for and advised he's hired Craig Mueller to represent him. COURT ORDERED, matter
SET for confirmation of counsel; Mr. Sanft is to be present to make certain Mr. Mueller is
hired. Colloquy regarding history of case, Defendant's request for release and concerns with
the Defendant's behavior. Ms. Kollins requested transcripts and video to respond to the
motions, noted concerns with Mr. Mueller as counsel that are on the record in regards to
Defendant's concerns with Mr. Mueller and his associates not adequately representing him
and requested Mr. Mueller be canvassed in that regard. Defendant informed the Court of why
he fired Mr. Mueller and his associates and that he's hired Mr. Mueller to represent him, not
his associates. CUSTODY 10-28-19 9:30 AM CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL (C.
MUELLER) CLERK'S NOTE: Office of Attorney Craig Mueller (Nancy) notified of calendared
proceedings. kar 10/24/19;
10/28/2019 Confirmation of Counsel (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Confirmation of Counsel (C. Mueller)
Confirmed;
Mr. Mueller stated he's been retained and moved to substitute as counsel. COURT ORDERED,
Craig Mueller CONFIRMED as counsel. Colloquy regarding Defendant's custody status,
behavior during prior proceedings and representation by counsel. COURT ORDERED,
proceedings STAND. CUSTODY 2-3-20 9:30 AM CALENDAR CALL 2-10-20 10:00 AM JURY
TRIAL;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
11/04/2019 Motion for Own Recognizance Release/Setting Reasonable Bail (9:30 AM) (Judicial
Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Defendant's Notice Of Motion And Motion For Reinstatement Of Own Rcognizance Release
Denied;
Mr. Mueller requested bail of $25,000.00 be reinstated, advised he will not ask for an own
recognizance release and requested a trial setting in the ordinary course. Argument in
opposition of bail request by Ms. Kollins. Continued argument by Mr. Mueller. Court stated
findings and ORDERED, motion for reinstatement of bail DENIED; bail SET at $500,000.00
with House Arrest and High Level Monitoring; written decision to be issued. Record made by
Mr. Mueller, inquiring if it would not be better if the case was transferred to another
department. Court stated absolutely not. Colloquy regarding prior request for recusal of this
Court. Defendant requested he be allowed to address the Court. COURT ORDERED, request
DENIED. CUSTODY 2-3-20 9:30 AM CALENDAR CALL 2-10-20 10:00 AM JURY TRIAL;
12/10/2019 Motion (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bell, Linda Marie)

12/10/2019, 12/17/2019
Defendant's Notice Of Motion And Motion To Recuse Judge
Continued;
Denied;
Following extensive argument by Mr. Mueller COURT ORDERED, motion DENIED. Court to
prepare the order.;
Continued;
Denied;
Ms. Kollins advised she has spoken to Mr. Mueller who advised he is court in North Las Vegas
and is unable to appear today. Statement by Defendant. COURT ORDERED, matter
CONTINUED. CUSTODY CONTINUED TO: 12/17/19 9:00 AM;
01/17/2020 Motion to Dismiss (9:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
See 1/14/20 correspondence between chambers and counsel advising of date for Motion to
Dismiss
Motion Denied;
MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL Mr. Mueller submitted on the briefs. Defendant made a
statement regarding dismissing his case pursuant to double jeopardy. Court advised the
Defendant that today s hearing was about his Pro Per Motion to Dismiss Counsel. Defendant
argued that Mr. Mueller had only been in contact with him one time for twenty minutes and it
was to hire a private investigator. Furthermore, he did not request Mr. Mueller to file a motion
to recuse the Judge or for bail. Colloquy between the Court and the Defendant about his
behavior during the last trial and use of profanity. Colloquy between the Court and Defendant
about the Defendant s competency and why there was a mistrial. Colloquy between the Court
regarding the Defendant s bail and the Defendant indicating that he did not have a problem
with his bail. Court advised the Defendant that Mr. Mueller was deemed appropriate to file the
necessary motions on his behalf. Court finds that the Defendant has displayed a failure to
behave or follow procedures and the Court has an obligation to control it s proceedings.
COURT ORDERED, Defendant s Pro Per Motion to Dismiss Counsel, DENIED. Trial date
STANDS.;
01/23/2020 Minute Order (3:00 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Minute Order - No Hearing Held;
This matter came on the Court's calendar on January 17, 2020 after Defendant filed two
Motions to Dismiss Counsel on December 26, 2019 and January 16, 2020 respectively. The
January 16, 2020 motion sought to dismiss counsel as well as the case as a whole. As
Defendant is represented by counsel, the Court heard the motions only in regards to whether
or not counsel should be dismissed or remain on the case. The other substantive issues were
not argued due to this being a fugitive document as to those points. Should counsel deem it
appropriate to file any motions having to do with arguments Defendant brought up in the

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
fugitive portion of the motion, counsel is free to do so. After hearing argument in regards to
the performance of counsel, the Court ordered the December 26, 2019 Motion to Dismiss
Counsel denied. As such, the Court also orders the January 16, 2020 Motion to Dismiss
Counsel denied and the proceedings regarding the motion scheduled for February 10, 2010
are hereby vacated. If either party believes there are outstanding matters that this Court has
not addressed please contact chambers and the matter will be placed on calendar. CLERK'S
NOTE: The above minute order has been distributed to: Chief Deputy D.A. Stacey L. Kollins
and Attorney Craig A. Mueller (Mueller & Associates);
02/03/2020 Calendar Call (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Matter Heard;
Upon the inquiry of the Court, Defendant stated no new Motion To Dismiss Counsel has been
filed. Mr. Mueller stated he's prepared to proceed with the Motion To Dismiss. Court noted the
matter is not on calendar. Upon the inquiry of the Court, Ms. Kollins stated the Defendant's
motion was filed 5 PM Friday; they called about 3:30 PM to ask if it'd been received. Court
stated the motion can be addressed orally. Colloquy regarding scheduling of Defendant's
Motion To Dismiss, Inzunza case and trial readiness. Mr. Mueller stated he can be ready for
trial next week if the Defendant's motion is not granted. Ms. Kollins stated the State will be
ready and noted the defense filed a witness notice at 5 PM with no phone numbers and
requested the contact information. Mr. Mueller stated all he has will be given to the State.
COURT ORDERED, case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1:00 PM; proceedings SET for
Defendant's Motion To Dismiss. Mr. Mueller requested the transcripts from the Evidentiary
Hearing and for the Court to order the Clerk to provide a copy of JAV's. Court stated the
transcript is in Odyssey. CUSTODY 2-5-20 9:30 AM Defendant's Motion To Dismiss 2-10-20
1:00 PM Jury Trial;

Defendant's Motion To Dismiss
Denied;
Argument in support of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss by Mr. Mueller and Defendant, and in
opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. Motion To
Dismiss Counsel FILED IN OPEN COURT. Defendant moved to dismiss counsel and
presented argument in support thereof. COURT ORDERED, Defendant's Motion To Dismiss
Counsel DENIED; case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1 PM. Defendant stated he has a couple
of other motions to file. Court informed the Defendant he cannot file motions as he does not
represent himself. Mr. Mueller stated he will be filing a Widdis Motion. Ms. Kollins advised
she's waiting on the phone numbers of the witnesses and that she gave counsel a new return
from Facebook on a disk. Mr. Mueller stated it's believed the Court's ruling is in error and
moved for a stay of proceedings for an appeal. COURT ORDERED, stay DENIED; counsel
may file an emergency stay. Exhibit Presented (See Worksheet) CUSTODY 2-10-20 1:00 PM
JURY TRIAL;
02/10/2020 CANCELED Motion to Dismiss (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated - per Judge
02/10/2020 CANCELED Jury Trial - FIRM (1:00 PM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated
02/19/2020 CANCELED Motion to Dismiss (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
Vacated - Previously Decided

02/19/2020, 02/24/2020
Defendant's Motion and Notice of Motion for Reinstatement of Own Recognizance Release
Continued;
Denied;
Continued;
Denied;

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. C-19-342946-1
Ms. Ramsey advised Mr. Mueller is in Henderson, Ms. Kollins is in Grand Jury and requested
a continuance until the 24th. COURT SO ORDERED. CUSTODY 2-24-20 9:30 AM
DEFENDANT'S MOTION AND NOTICE OF MOTION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF OWN
RECOGNIZANCE RELEASE ;
03/18/2020 Motion to Dismiss (9:30 AM) (Judicial Officer: Bluth, Jacqueline M.)
DATE FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Defendant Davis, Raymond Tyrone

Total Charges 49.50
Total Payments and Credits 49.50
Balance Due as of 3/5/2020 0.00

2/6/2020 2:17 PM
Steven D. Grierson
CLERK OF THE COURT
Case Number: C-19-342946-1

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES August 29, 2019
C-19-342946-1 State of Nevada

vs
Raymond Davis
August 29, 2019 11:00 AM Grand Jury Indictment
HEARD BY: Bell, Linda Marie COURTROOM: RJC Courtroom 17A
COURT CLERK: Kimberly Estala
RECORDER: Renee Vincent
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: Kollins, Stacey L. Attorney
State of Nevada Plaintiff
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Raymond Jatkowski, Grand Jury Foreperson, stated to the Court that at least twelve members had
concurred in the return of the true bill during deliberation, but had been excused for presentation to
the Court. State presented Grand Jury Case Number 18BGJ207X to the Court. COURT ORDERED,
the Indictment may be filed and is assigned Case Number C-19-342946-1, Department VI.
State requested a summons and advised Deft is not in custody. COURT ORDERED, INDICTMENT
SUMMONS ISSUED, matter SET for Arraignment. Upon Court's inquiry, the State advised there are
no material witness warrants to quash. COURT FURTHER ORDERED, Exhibits 1-3 to be lodged with
the Clerk of the Court.
NIC (SUMMON)
09/04/19 9:30 A.M. INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT (DEPT VI)
PRINT DATE: 03/05/2020 Page 1 of 39 Minutes Date: August 29, 2019

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES September 04, 2019

vs
Raymond Davis
September 04, 2019 9:30 AM All Pending Motions
HEARD BY: Bluth, Jacqueline M. COURTROOM: RJC Courtroom 10C
COURT CLERK: Keith Reed

Shannon Reid
RECORDER: De'Awna Takas
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: Davis, Raymond Tyrone Defendant
Kollins, Stacey L. Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ADMIT EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES,

WRONGS OR ACTS...DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS
ATTORNEY OF RECORD...CALENDAR CALL
Also present, Attorney Jay Maynard. Colloquy regarding new Indictment and Faretta canvass. After
arraignment, Defendant requested to represent himself. Defendant DAVIS ARRAIGNED, PLED NOT
GUILTY AND INVOKED THE SIXTY (60) DAY RULE. COURT ORDERED, trial setting STANDS.
Faretta canvas administered by the Court. Defendant requested standby counsel. Ms. Kollins argued
Defendant's not entitled to it. Colloquy regarding standby counsel. COURT ORDERED, request for
standby counsel GRANTED; waiver of right to counsel ACCEPTED; matter SET for appointment of
standby counsel. Concerns with Defendant's competency noted by Ms. Kollins. Upon conferring with
Defendant in regards to counsel, COURT ORDERED, case to trial. Colloquy regarding Defendant's
allegations of being framed by the State and black mailed by the victim. Defendant advised the Court
of misconduct on behalf of the State and that he's spoken with attorney Kelsey Bernstein. Record
made by Mr. Maynard, advising he has no information in regards to the Defendant speaking with
C-19-342946-1
Ms. Bernstein. Argument in support of State's motion by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, matter SET for hearing. Argument in opposition of setting of hearing by Defendant.
Colloquy regarding witness availability and discovery. Defendant stated he would like a motion to
suppress. Court directed the motion be filed in writing. Ms. Kollins stated the Defendant's not an
active member of the military and objected to his attire under the Stolen Valor Act. Court stated it
will be reviewed and addressed September 6th.
BOND(MLEM).
9-6-19 9:00 AM APPOINTMENT OF STANDBY COUNSEL
9-9-19 1:00 PM EVIDENTIARY HEARING: STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO

ADMIT EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS
9-10-19 1:30 PM JURY TRIAL

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 06, 2019 9:00 AM Hearing

Shannon Reid
Shannon Reid
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: Claus, T. Augustus Attorney
Davis, Raymond Tyrone Defendant
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Mr. Claus accepted the appointment as standby counsel and advised if the Defendant would like to
be represented by counsel he cannot take over the trial at this point as he has zero familiarity with the
case. Court stated the Defendant has been spoken with and has been informed should he not longer
wish to proceed that's not an option, depending on the circumstances; one option being to stop,
declare a mistrial and then formally appoint counsel; counsel would not be forced to take over mid
trial. Upon the inquiry of the Court Defendant acknowledged he's ok with Mr. Claus a standby
counsel and that he can help with procedural issues, but does not have facts and knowledge of the
trial. Ms. Kollins stated duplicated discovery has been given to Mr. Claus to provide to the
Defendant; the only thing missing is a transcript of a witness, the audio will be provided. Argument
by Defendant regarding his custody status. Court stated findings, noting the Defendant's custody
status was previously addressed and ORDERED, request to change custody status DENIED to be
placed in writing for consideration if there's something new. Defendant advised he'll be filing several
motions moving for dismissal. Ms. Kollins stated it seems like a writ and her position is it waives
C-19-342946-1
speedy trial; State should not be required to respond. Court informed the Defendant the Court is
happy to consider the writ on the merits but speedy trial must be waived. Continued argument by
Defendant in regards to filing of motions. Colloquy regarding duties of standby counsel.
BOND(EM)

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 09, 2019 1:00 PM All Pending Motions

Shannon Reid
RECORDER: Trisha Garcia
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- EVIDENTIARY HEARING...STATE'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO ADMIT

EVIDENCE OF OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS OR ACTS
Colloquy regarding witness availability for trial. Defendant moved for the recusal of the Court and
dismissal of the case and presented argument in support thereof. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, motions DENIED. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding motion to recuse
should Defendant wish to further pursue it. Defendant stated he will roll the dice, go with this Court
and withdraw the motion. COURT ORDERED, motion to dismiss and recuse WITHDRAWN.
Argument in support of Motion To Dismiss Due to Prosecutorial Misconduct by Defendant and in
opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. Upon the inquiry
of the Court, Defendant stated he's not seeking to wear a military uniform at trial. Colloquy
regarding procedures for Petrocelli Hearing. Defendant moved to dismiss the case and presented
argument in support thereof. Argument in opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, Motion To Dismiss in regards to speedy trial DENIED. Colloquy between Court and
C-19-342946-1
Defendant regarding ruling, proceedings and whether camera's are allowed. Defendant moved for
the removal of his ankle bracelet. Argument in opposition by Ms. Kollins. COURT ORDERED,
request DENIED; custody status will not change. Mr. Claus argued he's never been in a situation with
someone going to Court with bracelet on before. Defendant argued the prosecutor is withholding
evidence and requested to be allowed to file a motion to dismiss. Colloquy regarding trial and
discovery. COURT ORDERED, motion WITHDRAWN. Witness Erica Munoz and Halley Farris
sworn and testified. Argument in support of State's motion by Ms. Kollins and in opposition by
Defendant. Court stated findings and ORDERED, State's motion GRANTED. Argument in objection
to Court's ruling by Defendant. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding ruling. Record
made by Ms. Kollins in regards to offer extended. Defendant requested the offer be in writing, not
verbal. Court stated that's not how it works. Ms. Kollins noted the offer which was rejected requires
registration as a sex offender. Upon the inquiry of the Court Defendant stated the offer was rejected;
he does not know what it is and would like a chance to look at the offer and rules of it. Ms. Kollins
stated she's ok allowing the offer to be reviewed by counsel.
MATTER RECALLED: Upon review of the offer with counsel, Defendant stated the offers rejected.
Ms. Kollins stated the offers now revoked.

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 10, 2019 1:30 PM Jury Trial

Shannon Reid
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Colloquy regarding jury
selection and Defendant's house arrest ankle monitor. Defendant advised the Court regarding
motions to be filed. Court admonished Defendant regarding procedures for filing of motions.
Argument by Defendant and Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, Motions DENIED.
Colloquy regarding scheduling, sealed records and motions. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE
PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Introductory comments by the Court. Introductory comments on
behalf of the State by Ms. Kollins and by Defendant. Roll of Prospective Jurors called and sworn. Voir
Dire. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Court admonished the
Defendant to not make comments or converse with prospective jurors. Defendant orally motioned to
challenge the jury pool. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. IN THE PRESENCE
OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Voir Dire. OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE
PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL: Colloquy regarding Prospective Jurors #430 and #473. COURT
ORDERED, Prospective Jurors #430 and #473 EXCUSED. Court directed the Defendant to familiarize
himself with EDCR 3.20 in regards to rules of filing motions. Colloquy regarding Defendant's
C-19-342946-1
pending surgery and House Arrest bracelet. At the request of Ms. Kollins, Court admonished the
Defendant not to have any contact with the Jurors.

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 11, 2019 1:00 PM Jury Trial
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE PROSPECTIVE JURY PANEL. Colloquy regarding scheduling
and additional panel of new prospective jurors. Defendant advised he attempted to file motions and
set a hearing date with the Clerk's Office; but the line and stated he would like to get in a couple of
motions. Court admonished the Defendant in regards to the rules of the filings of motions and stated
the motions cannot be considered an affidavit of good cause as to the late filings. Good cause
argument as to the late filing of motions by Defendant. Colloquy regarding witness/alibi witness,
rules in regards to witnesses. Defendant argued not having a black male on the jury is
unconstitutional. Argument in opposition of Batson challenge by Ms. Kollins. Court noted the
makeup of the prospective jury and stated a Batson challenge cannot be made now as the juror just
left. Defendant argued he's challenging the procedure used to select the jury. Batson Challenge
argument by Mr. Claus. Argument by Defendant challenging the make up of the jury. COURT
ORDERED, objection OVERRULED and noted. Record made by Ms. Kollins in regards to another
witness list provided by Defendant. Colloquy regarding rules of witnesses and alibi witness list.
Argument in regards to witness list by Defendant. Court informed the Defendant his right to call
witnesses is not being denied and that all that's being asked is to file motions pursuant to statute as to
C-19-342946-1
good cause for the late notice. Continued argument by Defendant alleging being rail roaded by this
Court. Record made by Ms. Kollins regarding jury selection process. Record made by the Court
regarding witnesses and NRS 174.234. Defendant requested the recusal of the Court, advising he's
willing to waive. COURT ORDERED, proceedings will be handled by Judge Villani tomorrow
morning at 9:00 AM. Colloquy regarding scheduling.
BOND(EM)

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 12, 2019 9:00 AM Jury Trial
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: Claus, T. Augustus
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Judge Tierra Jones presiding. Judge Jones noted the
affidavit filed by Judge Bluth and informed the Defendant nothing other than the Motion To Recuse
Judge Bluth can be addressed. Argument by Defendant. Court stated findings and ORDERED,
motion DENIED. Defendant requested a mental evaluation. Court stated the issue is for Judge Bluth
to resolve.
MATTER RECALLED:
Judge Jacqueline Bluth presiding. Court noted the denial of the motion to recuse and the Defendant's
request for a mental health evaluation. Argument in support of request for mental health evaluation
by Defendant. Statement by Ms. Kollins regarding concerns with Defendant's competency and
behavior and requested the Defendant be remanded if a competency evaluation is wanted. Colloquy
between Court and Defendant. Court noted concerns and ORDERED, Defendant REMANDED for an
evaluation. Colloquy. Record made by Marshall in regards to statements made by the Defendant.
Record made by the Court in regards to proceedings and Defendant's behavior.
C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
COURT CLERK: Natalie Ortega

Shannon Reid
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court noted it received correspondence regarding
Defendant's psychological state. Court exhibit presented (see worksheet). Court read the findings
from the nurse practitioner. Mr. Davis apologized to the Court for his behavior. Court noted one juror
has become ill and would be excused from the jury. Colloquy regarding Mr. Davis's house arrest
bracelet. Discussions regarding State's offer to Defendant. Ms. Kollins placed the offer on the record.
Mr. Davis rejected the offer. Further colloquy regarding Defendant's legal papers. Sergeant Coleman
now present. Sergeant Coleman made representations as to retrieving Defendant's documentation.
INSIDE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Information read by Clerk of the Court.
INSIDE PRESENCE OF JUROR NO. 6: Colloquy regarding his health and financial hardship. COURT
ORDERED, Juror 6 EXCUSED from the jury.
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Discussion regarding using an alternate. Mr. Davis
C-19-342946-1
indicated Juror No. 9 was shaking his head and making bad faces during the reading of the
information.
INSIDE PRESENCE OF JUROR NO. 9: Court questioned Juror No. 9 regarding his demeanor during
the reading of the indictment. Juror No. 9 expressed that he could hear the testimony and evidence
without bias.
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Mr. Davis argued to remove Juror No. 9. COURT NOTED
the charges were difficult to hear; however, it felt confident in the juror's answer. Defense Witness
List FILED IN OPEN COURT.
INSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Jury SWORN. Opening statements by counsel.
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Discussions regarding instructions. Court noted Defense
was entitled to a limiting instruction. Court cited Frank's Case. Arguments by counsel regarding the
Propensity and Bad Acts.
COURT NOTED it made no findings that Defendant was in violation of House Arrest. Statement by
Mr. Davis requesting to dismiss the case as he was not properly prepared. Ms. Kollins stated the
Court had made many accommodations for Mr. Davis's requests. COURT ORDERED, trial to
proceed. COURT ORDERED, Defendant placed back on OWN RECOGNIZANCE with HOUSE
ARREST and to RESTART MEDIUM LEVEL EMP.
INSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and exhibits presented (see worksheet). COURT
ORDERED, trial CONTINUED. EVENING RECESS.
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Colloquy regarding remaining trial testimony. COURT
ADMONISHED Mr. Davis about making statements during examination. Mr. Davis indicated he
understood.
CONTINUED TO:09/16/19 12:45 PM

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
COURT CLERK: Natalie Ortega

Shannon Reid
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Defendant advised the Court of his missing documents
that will prove his innocence and requested a mistrial. Colloquy regarding Defendants alibi
witnesses, missing documentation. Continued argument in support of mistrial by Defendant.
Argument in opposition of mistrial by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, request for
mistrial DENIED. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding motions. Defendant requested
the case be dismissed due to double jeopardy and for a mistrial. Court so noted for the record. Record
made by Ms. Kollins. Colloquy regarding Defendants need for additional time for opening
statements, denial of the request and the Defendant's behavior. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY.
Testimony and Exhibits Presented. (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Mr.
Claus advised he's spoken with the Defendant and answered all questions. IN THE PRESENCE OF
THE JURY. Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE
JURY: Record made by the Court. Defendant requested a mistrial. Colloquy regarding questioning of
witness. Argument in opposition of mistrial by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED,
mistrial DENIED; limiting instruction to be given. Court admonished the Defendant in regards to his
C-19-342946-1
behavior. Colloquy regarding procedural matters, adherence to rules, scheduling and limiting
instruction. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet).
COURT ORDERED, matter CONTINUED; Jury admonished and released. OUTSIDE THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Colloquy regarding scheduling. Record made by the Court in regards to
motions. Colloquy regarding Defendant's morning psychological appointment. Unless the Defendant
is involuntarily committed, Court stated he's to be here tomorrow at 10 AM

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis

Shannon Reid
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court noted the receipt of documentation regarding an
independent mental health evaluation the Defendant received from Seven Hills Hospital, noted it's
content and referral to out patient group therapy 3 times per week. Statement by Defendant in
regards to his emotions and anger with the proceedings and how they've pushed him to a breaking
point; advised he's not asking for a mistrial and requested a continuance to get help to get his head
straight. Court stated findings and ORDERED, request for continuance DENIED. Colloquy regarding
discovery. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet).
OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court admonished the Defendant in regards to his
behavior and stated if he does not follow the rules, action will be taken. Colloquy regarding National
Crime Information Center (N.C.I.C.) and Las Vegas Justice Court record discrepancies as to
Defendant's prior arrest. IN THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony and Exhibits Presented (See
Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court admonished the Defendant that
should his behavior continue he will forfeit his ability to cross examine witnesses. IN THE
PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Testimony & Exhibits Presented (See Worksheet). OUTSIDE THE
C-19-342946-1
PRESENCE OF THE JURY: Court instructed the Defendant to read NRS 22.010 and NRS 22.030 and
stated 25 days consecutively in the Clark County Detention Center (CCDC) will be imposed for
contempt for each outburst moving forward. Defendant stated he didn't think he was capable of not
having more outbursts and requested counsel be appointed. Court stated findings and ORDERED,
request DENIED. Argument by Defendant in regards denial of request for counsel. Upon the inquiry
of the Court if he's mentally incompetent to stand trial, Defendant responded "yes". COURT
ORDERED, Defendant REMANDED WITHOUT BAIL; matter REFERRED to Department VII for
competency evaluation due to the representations of the Defendant; after competency is addressed
the Defendant will come back for a bail hearing in regards his custody status. COURT ORDERED,
MISTRIAL
MATTER RECALLED:
Defendant not present. COURT ORDERED, Mr. Claus is RELIEVED of Standby Counsel duties at this
time. Record made by the Court.

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
September 18, 2019 3:00 AM Minute Order
RECORDER:
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT:
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Witness Lied to Grand
Jury is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15
days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit
demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was
filed on September 9, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause.
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss State s Complaint is
Flawed of is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less
than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an
affidavit demonstrating good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Speedy Trial is hereby
DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the
date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an affidavit demonstrating
good cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on
September 9, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause.

C-19-342946-1
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Prosecutorial Misconduct
is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Removal of Ankle Monitor
is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Remove Ankle Bracelet is hereby
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Lack of Evidence is
hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Defective Charging
Documents is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion for Change of Venue is hereby
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Pretrial Delay is
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Prosecutorial
C-19-342946-1
Misconduct is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Grand Jury
Indictment Beyond Statute of Limitations is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must
be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late
demonstrating good cause.
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Throw Out Witness V.R.'s Grand
Jury Testimony is hereby DENIED. EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not
less than 15 days before the date set for trial. The court will only consider late motions based upon an
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Dismiss Due to Double Jeopardy is
Pursuant to EDCR 3.20, Defendants Raymond Davis's Motion to Call a Mistrial is hereby DENIED.
EDCR 3.20 states that all motions must be served and filed not less than 15 days before the date set
cause. The trial in this matter began on September 10, 2019 and the motion was filed on September
16, 2019 without an affidavit demonstrating good cause.

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES October 11, 2019

vs
Raymond Davis
October 11, 2019 10:00 AM Further Proceedings:

Competency
COURT CLERK: Michaela Tapia
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: O'Brien, Glen Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Appearances Continued: Denise Baker of the Specialty Courts also present.
Statement by Deft. regarding feeling he is doing great. There being no challenge by Defense Counsel,
COURT FINDS Defendant COMPETENT pursuant to the Dusky Standard as Defendant is capable of
understanding the nature of the charges against him / her and is able to assist counsel in his / her
defense and ORDERED, pursuant to 178.420, matter TRANSFERRED back to the originating court for
further proceedings. Upon Deft's inquiry, State indicated Deft. had been remanded in the originating
department and the Court declined to address the issue. CASE CLOSED.
CUSTODY
10/14/19 9:30 AM FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: RETURN FROM COMPETENCY COURT - DC 6

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
October 14, 2019 9:30 AM Further Proceedings:

Return from Competency
Court
HEARD BY: Becker, Nancy COURTROOM: RJC Courtroom 10C
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Court noted the Defendant's been found competent and that based upon issues at trial that resulted
in a mistrial and looking back on the laws in regards to self representation, Judge Bluth has indicated
the Defendant will no longer be allowed to represent himself and ORDERED, Public Defender
APPOINTED and is to determine if there's any conflict. Deputy Public Defender (P.D.) Ashley Sisolak
advised the P.D. cannot confirm at this time, requested a couple of days to confirm, advised a
speciality team will handle the case and requested access to the competency reports in case they seek
to challenge them. Court stated it cannot be challenged at this time, but counsel is entitled to the
reports. Ms. Kollins requested proceedings be calendared next Monday. COURT ORDERED,
proceedings SET for confirmation of counsel and to address bail. Argument by Defendant regarding
bail. Court stated the matter will he be heard by Judge Bluth. Defendant stated he can pay for his
own attorney. Court stated the Defendant can still hire private counsel if that's what's desired.
Continued argument/statement by Defendant. Court stated the bail issue will not be gone into,
which was explained to the Defendant and ORDERED, proceedings CONTINUED for matters to be
heard by Judge Bluth; no other issues will be discussed and should the Defendant desire to hire

C-19-342946-1
private counsel, he's to make those arrangements and have them in Court Monday.
CUSTODY
10-21-19 9:30 AM FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: CUSTODIAL STATUS/BAIL...CONFIRMATION OF

COUNSEL (P.D.)...STATUS CHECK: BAIL

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
October 21, 2019 9:30 AM All Pending Motions
REPORTER:
PARTIES
Overly, Sarah Attorney
Sanft, Michael W. Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL...FURTHER PROCEEDINGS: CUSTODIAL STATUS AND BAIL
Motion To Withdraw Due To Conflict FILED IN OPEN COURT. Appearing on behalf of the Public
Defender, Attorney Violet Radosta. Ms. Radosta advised the P.D. has a conflict and that the Office of
Appointed Counsel has sent over Mr. Sanft. Court noted Defendant was to have counsel from a
different State. Defendant concurred and argued the attorney came to the Clark County Detention
Center (CCDC) and was not allowed to see him. Terry King addressed the Court on behalf of the
Defendant and advised the Defendant's Attorney is Sebastian Lewis, who's licensed here, came from
out state and they would not let him see the Defendant; it's not certain if he will confirm; he's been
paid for investigative work to meet with the Defendant. COURT ORDERED, Michael Sanft
APPOINTED as counsel. Upon the inquiry of the Defendant, Court stated any custody motions are to
be in writing. Ms. Radosta informed the Court of the new policies of the CCDC in regards to new
attorney's trying to visit Defendants if they've not previously visited them before. COURT
ORDERED, matter TRAILED.

C-19-342946-1
MATTER RECALLED:
Attorney Michael Sanft present. Court informed Mr. Sanft of what transpired in his absence. Upon
the request of the Defendant to meet with Mr. Sanft, Mr. Sanft stated he will speak with the
Defendant at the CCDC. Argument in support of release by Defendant. COURT ORDERED, request
is to be placed in writing. Colloquy between Court and Defendant regarding proceedings,
Defendant's mental state and custody status leading to today. Colloquy between Court and Mr. Sanft
regarding trial setting and speedy trial. Court stated it's believed appropriate for the Defendant to be
placed on the next stack; technically speedy trial is waived, although the Defendants never really
agreed to it. William Rowles appeared on behalf of the State and advised that Ms. Kollins would like
the trial setting after the new year. Colloquy regarding trial setting. COURT ORDERED, matter SET
for trial with a FIRM setting. Mr. Sanft stated he'll meet with the Defendant today.
CUSTODY
2-3-20 9:30 AM CALENDAR CALL
2-1-020 10:00 AM JURY TRIAL

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
October 23, 2019 9:30 AM Further Proceedings
REPORTER:
PARTIES
Sanft, Michael W. Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Ms. Kollins advised she listened to the Defendant's jail calls and is concerned that the Defendant in
his mind removed Mr. Sanft as counsel, and wanted to update the Court on that the Defendant's
hired someone else and there's no substitution of counsel. Mr. Sanft stated a call was received from
the Defendant's employee Monday night indicating his services are no longer required, and advised
he doesn't believe this rises to a level of him being taken off of the case . Upon the inquiry of the
Court, Defendant stated he never hired Mr. Sanft, does not want him as counsel, he'll not use a state
appointed attorney or Public Defender and that he can pay for counsel. Defendant further stated he
always wanted his own attorney that he can pay for and advised he's hired Craig Mueller to
represent him. COURT ORDERED, matter SET for confirmation of counsel; Mr. Sanft is to be present
to make certain Mr. Mueller is hired. Colloquy regarding history of case, Defendant's request for
release and concerns with the Defendant's behavior. Ms. Kollins requested transcripts and video to
respond to the motions, noted concerns with Mr. Mueller as counsel that are on the record in regards
to Defendant's concerns with Mr. Mueller and his associates not adequately representing him and
requested Mr. Mueller be canvassed in that regard. Defendant informed the Court of why he fired
Mr. Mueller and his associates and that he's hired Mr. Mueller to represent him, not his associates.
C-19-342946-1
CUSTODY
10-28-19 9:30 AM CONFIRMATION OF COUNSEL (C. MUELLER)
CLERK'S NOTE: Office of Attorney Craig Mueller (Nancy) notified of calendared proceedings. kar
10/24/19

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
October 28, 2019 9:30 AM Confirmation of Counsel
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT: Clowers, Shanon Attorney
Mueller, Craig A Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Mr. Mueller stated he's been retained and moved to substitute as counsel. COURT ORDERED, Craig
Mueller CONFIRMED as counsel. Colloquy regarding Defendant's custody status, behavior during
prior proceedings and representation by counsel. COURT ORDERED, proceedings STAND.
CUSTODY

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES November 04, 2019

vs
Raymond Davis
November 04, 2019 9:30 AM Motion for Own

Recognizance
Release/Setting Reasonable
Bail
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Mr. Mueller requested bail of $25,000.00 be reinstated, advised he will not ask for an own
recognizance release and requested a trial setting in the ordinary course. Argument in opposition of
bail request by Ms. Kollins. Continued argument by Mr. Mueller. Court stated findings and
ORDERED, motion for reinstatement of bail DENIED; bail SET at $500,000.00 with House Arrest and
High Level Monitoring; written decision to be issued. Record made by Mr. Mueller, inquiring if it
would not be better if the case was transferred to another department. Court stated absolutely not.
Colloquy regarding prior request for recusal of this Court. Defendant requested he be allowed to
address the Court. COURT ORDERED, request DENIED.
CUSTODY

C-19-342946-1

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES December 10, 2019

vs
Raymond Davis
December 10, 2019 9:00 AM Motion
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Ms. Kollins advised she has spoken to Mr. Mueller who advised he is court in North Las Vegas and
is unable to appear today. Statement by Defendant. COURT ORDERED, matter CONTINUED.
CUSTODY
CONTINUED TO: 12/17/19 9:00 AM

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES December 17, 2019

vs
Raymond Davis
December 17, 2019 9:00 AM Motion
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Following extensive argument by Mr. Mueller COURT ORDERED, motion DENIED. Court to
prepare the order.

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES January 17, 2020

vs
Raymond Davis
January 17, 2020 9:00 AM Motion to Dismiss
COURT CLERK: Alice Jacobson

Rem Lord
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- MOTION TO DISMISS COUNSEL
Mr. Mueller submitted on the briefs. Defendant made a statement regarding dismissing his case
pursuant to double jeopardy. Court advised the Defendant that today s hearing was about his Pro Per
Motion to Dismiss Counsel. Defendant argued that Mr. Mueller had only been in contact with him
one time for twenty minutes and it was to hire a private investigator. Furthermore, he did not request
Mr. Mueller to file a motion to recuse the Judge or for bail. Colloquy between the Court and the
Defendant about his behavior during the last trial and use of profanity. Colloquy between the Court
and Defendant about the Defendant s competency and why there was a mistrial. Colloquy between
the Court regarding the Defendant s bail and the Defendant indicating that he did not have a
problem with his bail. Court advised the Defendant that Mr. Mueller was deemed appropriate to file
the necessary motions on his behalf. Court finds that the Defendant has displayed a failure to behave
or follow procedures and the Court has an obligation to control it s proceedings. COURT ORDERED,
Defendant s Pro Per Motion to Dismiss Counsel, DENIED. Trial date STANDS.
C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES January 23, 2020

vs
Raymond Davis
January 23, 2020 3:00 AM Minute Order
RECORDER:
REPORTER:
PARTIES
PRESENT:
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- This matter came on the Court's calendar on January 17, 2020 after Defendant filed two Motions to
Dismiss Counsel on December 26, 2019 and January 16, 2020 respectively. The January 16, 2020
motion sought to dismiss counsel as well as the case as a whole. As Defendant is represented by
counsel, the Court heard the motions only in regards to whether or not counsel should be dismissed
or remain on the case. The other substantive issues were not argued due to this being a fugitive
document as to those points. Should counsel deem it appropriate to file any motions having to do
with arguments Defendant brought up in the fugitive portion of the motion, counsel is free to do so.
After hearing argument in regards to the performance of counsel, the Court ordered the December
26, 2019 Motion to Dismiss Counsel denied. As such, the Court also orders the January 16, 2020
Motion to Dismiss Counsel denied and the proceedings regarding the motion scheduled for February
10, 2010 are hereby vacated. If either party believes there are outstanding matters that this Court has
not addressed please contact chambers and the matter will be placed on calendar.
CLERK'S NOTE: The above minute order has been distributed to: Chief Deputy D.A. Stacey L.
Kollins and Attorney Craig A. Mueller (Mueller & Associates)

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT
Felony/Gross Misdemeanor COURT MINUTES February 03, 2020

vs
Raymond Davis
February 03, 2020 9:30 AM Calendar Call
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Upon the inquiry of the Court, Defendant stated no new Motion To Dismiss Counsel has been filed.
Mr. Mueller stated he's prepared to proceed with the Motion To Dismiss. Court noted the matter is
not on calendar. Upon the inquiry of the Court, Ms. Kollins stated the Defendant's motion was filed 5
PM Friday; they called about 3:30 PM to ask if it'd been received. Court stated the motion can be
addressed orally. Colloquy regarding scheduling of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss, Inzunza case
and trial readiness. Mr. Mueller stated he can be ready for trial next week if the Defendant's motion is
not granted. Ms. Kollins stated the State will be ready and noted the defense filed a witness notice at
5 PM with no phone numbers and requested the contact information. Mr. Mueller stated all he has
will be given to the State. COURT ORDERED, case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1:00 PM; proceedings
SET for Defendant's Motion To Dismiss. Mr. Mueller requested the transcripts from the Evidentiary
Hearing and for the Court to order the Clerk to provide a copy of JAV's. Court stated the transcript is
in Odyssey.
CUSTODY

C-19-342946-1
2-5-20 9:30 AM Defendant's Motion To Dismiss
2-10-20 1:00 PM Jury Trial

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
February 05, 2020 9:30 AM Motion
REPORTER:
PARTIES
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Argument in support of Defendant's Motion To Dismiss by Mr. Mueller and Defendant, and in
opposition by Ms. Kollins. Court stated findings and ORDERED, motion DENIED. Motion To
Dismiss Counsel FILED IN OPEN COURT. Defendant moved to dismiss counsel and presented
argument in support thereof. COURT ORDERED, Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Counsel DENIED;
case to trial February 10, 2020 at 1 PM. Defendant stated he has a couple of other motions to file.
Court informed the Defendant he cannot file motions as he does not represent himself. Mr. Mueller
stated he will be filing a Widdis Motion. Ms. Kollins advised she's waiting on the phone numbers of
the witnesses and that she gave counsel a new return from Facebook on a disk. Mr. Mueller stated it's
believed the Court's ruling is in error and moved for a stay of proceedings for an appeal. COURT
ORDERED, stay DENIED; counsel may file an emergency stay. Exhibit Presented (See Worksheet)
CUSTODY
2-10-20 1:00 PM JURY TRIAL

C-19-342946-1
DISTRICT COURT

vs
Raymond Davis
February 19, 2020 9:30 AM Motion
REPORTER:
PARTIES
Ramsey, Catherine K Attorney
Schwartz, Bryan A. Attorney
JOURNAL ENTRIES
- Ms. Ramsey advised Mr. Mueller is in Henderson, Ms. Kollins is in Grand Jury and requested a
continuance until the 24th. COURT SO ORDERED.
CUSTODY
2-24-20 9:30 AM DEFENDANT'S MOTION AND NOTICE OF MOTION FOR REINSTATEMENT

OF OWN RECOGNIZANCE RELEASE

EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
ON APPEAL TO NEVADA SUPREME COURT
RAYMOND DAVIS #1943160

330 S. CASINO CENTER BLVD.
LAS VEGAS, NV 89101
DATE: March 5, 2020

CASE: C-19-342946-1
RE CASE: STATE OF NEVADA vs. RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS
NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED: February 18, 2020
YOUR APPEAL HAS BEEN SENT TO THE SUPREME COURT.
PLEASE NOTE: DOCUMENTS NOT TRANSMITTED HAVE BEEN MARKED:

- NRAP 3 (a)(1), Form 2
Order
Notice of Entry of Order
NEVADA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 3 (a) (3) states:

“The district court clerk must file appellant’s notice of appeal despite perceived deficiencies in the notice, including the
failure to pay the district court or Supreme Court filing fee. The district court clerk shall apprise appellant of the
deficiencies in writing, and shall transmit the notice of appeal to the Supreme Court in accordance with subdivision
(g) of this Rule with a notation to the clerk of the Supreme Court setting forth the deficiencies. Despite any
deficiencies in the notice of appeal, the clerk of the Supreme Court shall docket the appeal in accordance with Rule
12.”
Please refer to Rule 3 for an explanation of any possible deficiencies.
Certification of Copy
State of Nevada
SS:
County of Clark
I, Steven D. Grierson, the Clerk of the Court of the Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County, State of
Nevada, does hereby certify that the foregoing is a true, full and correct copy of the hereinafter stated
original document(s):
NOTICE OF APPEAL; CASE APPEAL STATEMENT; DISTRICT COURT
DOCKET ENTRIES; ORDER; DISTRICT COURT MINUTES; EXHIBITS LIST; NOTICE OF
DEFICIENCY
STATE OF NEVADA,
Plaintiff(s), Case No: C-19-342946-1
Dept No: VI
vs.
RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS,
Defendant(s).
now on file and of record in this office.
IN WITNESS THEREOF, I have hereunto

Set my hand and Affixed the seal of the
Court at my office, Las Vegas, Nevada
This 5 day of March 2020.
Steven D. Grierson, Clerk of the Court

EIGHTH J UDICI AL DISTR ICT CO URT
CLERK OF THE COURT
REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER
200 LEWIS AVENUE, 3rd Fl.
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89155-1160
(702) 671-4554
Steven D. Grierson Anntoinette Naumec-Miller

Clerk of the Court Court Division Administrator
March 5, 2020
Elizabeth A. Brown
Clerk of the Court
201 South Carson Street, Suite 201
Carson City, Nevada 89701-4702
RE: STATE OF NEVADA vs. RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS

D.C. CASE: C-19-342946-1
Dear Ms. Brown:
Please find enclosed a Notice of Appeal packet, filed February 18, 2020. Due to extenuating
circumstances minutes from the date(s) listed below have not been included:
February 24, 2020
We do not currently have a time frame for when these minutes will be available.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (702) 671-0512.
Sincerely,
STEVEN D. GRIERSON, CLERK OF THE COURT

Ray Davis Stuff

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

Ray Davis Stuff

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Electronically Filed

Mar 06 2020 02:04 p.m.

Docket 80746 Document 2020-09036

6 IN THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE

13 RAYMOND TYRONE DAVIS,

17 CASE APPEAL STATEMENT

19 2. Judge: Jacqueline M. Bluth

27 Steven B. Wolfson, District Attorney

Case Number: C-19-342946-1

14 12. Child Custody or Visitation: N/A

15 Dated This 5 day of March 2020.

16 Steven D. Grierson, Clerk of the Court

18 /s/ Amanda Hampton

Offense Statute Deg Date Case Type: Felony/Gross Misdemeanor

DATE CASE ASSIGNMENT

Current Case Assignment

Plaintiff State of Nevada Wolfson, Steven B

DATE EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT INDEX

PAGE 1 OF 17 Printed on 03/05/2020 at 9:14 AM

09/04/2019 Reporters Transcript

09/05/2019 Notice of Witnesses and/or Expert Witnesses

09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/09/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/10/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/10/2019 Motion for Change of Venue

09/10/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/11/2019 Jury List

09/12/2019 Audiovisual Transmission Equipment Appearance Request

09/13/2019 Amended Jury List

PAGE 2 OF 17 Printed on 03/05/2020 at 9:14 AM

09/16/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/16/2019 Motion to Dismiss

09/16/2019 Audiovisual Transmission Equipment Appearance Request

09/16/2019 Answer (Criminal)

10/09/2019 Bail Bond

10/10/2019 Competency Evaluations

10/29/2019 Motion for Own Recognizance Release/Setting Reasonable Bail

10/30/2019 Clerk's Notice of Hearing

PAGE 3 OF 17 Printed on 03/05/2020 at 9:14 AM

11/04/2019 Opposition to Motion

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/22/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/25/2019 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

11/26/2019 Clerk's Notice of Hearing

11/27/2019 Notice of Change of Hearing

12/05/2019 Answer (Criminal)

PAGE 4 OF 17 Printed on 03/05/2020 at 9:14 AM

12/09/2019 Media Request and Order

12/26/2019 Motion to Dismiss Counsel

01/13/2020 Supplemental Witness List

01/16/2020 Notice of Appeal (criminal)

01/16/2020 Notice of Appeal (criminal)

01/16/2020 Notice of Appeal (criminal)

01/16/2020 Motion to Dismiss Counsel

01/16/2020 Recorders Transcript of Hearing

01/17/2020 Case Appeal Statement