Uploaded March 2024 | Updated September 2026, 4 hours ago
Trial lawyer Patrick D'Arcy gives a candid assessment of the chances Jose "Chille" DeCastro can overturn these two convictions on appeal. The odds are very low. It turns out Nevada has "fast track" rules for Justice Court cases, where it can take just a few months to have the matter heard. Chille's lawyer is having a hearing to get him out while on appeal. That goes before Judge Zimmerman again. I doubt she'll grant it.
For the appellate work I have handled on First Amendment cases, which is the crux of Chille's defense, I am unbeaten in the Appellate Courts, and 13-1 in First Amendment cases overall. I have considerable experience in this arena, even recently defeating a petition before the California Supreme Court, and getting three defendants immediately dismissed from a lawsuit after filing three anti-SLAPP motions. I look at the issues his appellate attorney is certain to raise, and give my assessment. I don't see much shot at a victory in Nevada, and his best chance will be an appeal to the Ninth Circuit, as the Nevada Supreme Court broke away from the Ninth Circuit in upholding what I call the "officer safety" cases. This was a main point brought up by the DA. The Constitutional defenses that were argued did not actually cite to any specific authority, and spoke of them in broad terms. The judge said she never saw the authorities and the DA claimed to have received them the morning of trial, which will generate objections. It's clear the judge ruled without having considered them. Appeals are different - we are looking for errors in how the trial was handled. The appellate court will not decide who lied, nor will it weigh the evidence. It is looking for errors that affected the outcome. If not objected to during trial, it is usually waived.
Trial lawyer Patrick D'Arcy gives a candid assessment of the chances Jose "Chille" DeCastro can overturn these two convictions on appeal. The odds are very low. It turns out Nevada has "fast track" rules for Justice Court cases, where it can take just a few months to have the matter heard. Chille's lawyer is having a hearing to get him out while on appeal. That goes before Judge Zimmerman again. I doubt she'll grant it.
For the appellate work I have handled on First Amendment cases, which is the crux of Chille's defense, I am unbeaten in the Appellate Courts, and 13-1 in First Amendment cases overall. I have considerable experience in this arena, even recently defeating a petition before the California Supreme Court, and getting three defendants immediately dismissed from a lawsuit after filing three anti-SLAPP motions. I look at the issues his appellate attorney is certain to raise, and give my assessment. I don't see much shot at a victory in Nevada, and his best chance will be an appeal to the Ninth Circuit, as the Nevada Supreme Court broke away from the Ninth Circuit in upholding what I call the "officer safety" cases. This was a main point brought up by the DA. The Constitutional defenses that were argued did not actually cite to any specific authority, and spoke of them in broad terms. The judge said she never saw the authorities and the DA claimed to have received them the morning of trial, which will generate objections. It's clear the judge ruled without having considered them. Appeals are different - we are looking for errors in how the trial was handled. The appellate court will not decide who lied, nor will it weigh the evidence. It is looking for errors that affected the outcome. If not objected to during trial, it is usually waived.
