ADM F. 500 (Rev. 03/22) Order and Judgment
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
STATE OF RIDGEWAY
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
DOCKET NO. RSC-CM-356
Plaintiff
v.
QUIETOUS
Defendant
BACKGROUND
On the 8th of May 2022, the Ridgeway Justice Department filed an information against the defendant
alleging violations of 3 S.C.C § 09, 10, 03 on two counts, 5 S.C.C § 05, and 2 S.C.C § 07. The defendant was
present up until the middle of the pretrial conference, until their abrupt disappearance, leading (then) Judge
frostbleed to order that the proceedings continue in absentia. Trial began on the 31st of May and concluded on
the 8th of June.
State’s Exhibit A, a 45 second clip of the defendant’s alleged criminal misconduct stands as the central
artifact in the state’s argument. This exhibit is supported by State’s Exhibit B, the State Bureau of
Investigations’ report on its investigation conducted into the incidents depicted in Exhibit A.
The state argued the defendant’s guilt based on several factual assertions that went largely unchallenged
by the defense; one, that the defendant unlawfully killed a clearly-identifiable peace officer, and two, that the
defendant, with malice but without premeditation, unlawfully killed a civilian bystander. The state alleges that
the first assertion demonstrates guilt of one count of first-degree murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and
obstruction of justice. The state alleges that the second assertion demonstrates guilt of second-degree murder
and assault with a deadly weapon. The state also alleges that both of these assertions constituted an unlawful
discharge of a firearm.
The defense’s principal contentions were: (1) the defendant’s second homicide was conducted in the
‘heat of passion’ and thus was not a second-degree murder; and even if it was, the defendant could not be
charged with both murder and assault for the same incident; (2) that the defendant cannot be convicted for
assault as well as murder under Blockburger v. United States 284 U.S. 299, and (3) that Deputy
TaxesArentAwesome, the only on-site peace officer, was not conducting any active investigation and thus the
‘process of justice’ was not obstructed.
JUDGMENT
In regards to count one, the court is satisfied that state has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that
defendant committed a first-degree murder in their killing of a clearly identifiable peace officer engaging in
their lawful duties. In regards to count two, the court finds the defense’s contention that the homicide was made
in the ‘heat of passion’ to be moot because witness testimony and the state’s Exhibit A demonstrate beyond a
reasonable doubt that the killing of Mr. Anderson was an intentional homicide, thus, although the homicide may
have been a voluntary manslaughter, it was also a murder in the second degree.
With these two contentions sustained, this court must acquit the defendant on the two charges of-counts
three and four-assault with a deadly weapon. These two charges are lesser offenses to the charges of first and
second degree murder, and, with respect to the fact that the defendant has been found guilty of these two greater
offenses, cannot be guilty of the two lesser included offenses.
In regards to count five, this court is satisfied that the allegation of the defendant discharging a firearm
without just cause within a residential area has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The court does not
believe that this is a lesser included offense due to the fact that a firearm was used in the commission of the
offense, an element unique to the offense as compared to the two murder charges.
In regards to the final count, count six, this court does not believe that a peace officer’s presence is an
exercise in the ‘process of justice.’ This court will not convict the defendant on count six because of the state’s
failure to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Deputy Taxes was actively engaging in an exercise in the
‘process of justice.’
CONCLUSION
For the aforementioned stated reasons, this court finds the defendant;
- GUILTY ON COUNT ONE - 3 S.C.C § 09 - FIRST-DEGREE MURDER
- GUILTY ON COUNT TWO - 3 S.C.C § 10 - SECOND-DEGREE MURDER
- NOT GUILTY ON COUNT THREE - 3 S.C.C § 03 - ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON
- NOT GUILTY ON COUNT FOUR - 3 S.C.C § 03 - ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON
- GUILTY ON COUNT FIVE - 5 S.C.C § 05 - UNLAWFUL DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM
- NOT GUILTY ON COUNT SIX - 2 S.C.C § 07 - OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED.
At Palmer, Ridgeway, this 9th day of June, 2022.
/s/ Hecxtro
SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE
