People of the State of California v. Eugene Selivanov and Tatyana Berkovich: Defendant's Supplemental Reply Brief in Support of 995 Motion

  • Print

See an overview of this case

People of the State of California v. Eugene Selivanov and Tatyana Berkovich: Defendant’s Supplemental Reply Brief in Support of 995 Motion [Filed on June 19, 2012] Defendant’s Supplemental Reply Brief in Support of his Motion to Set Aside Information Pursuant to California Penal Code Section 995, arguing that the charges must be dismissed because the Prosecution failed to present admissible evidence supporting each element of each charged offense.

Ask A Question

From Our Blog

CCSA Answers: The 1% Threshold and Justification Form

Question: Must charter public schools complete the 1 Percent Threshold and Justification Form? Answer: Yes, the 1 Percent Threshold Justification

Bob Coontz-CharterSAFE Safety Grant

Does your team have an innovative approach to risk management? Are you a CharterSAFE member? Apply for CharterSAFE's second-annual Bob