Uploaded February 2026 | Updated September 2026, 7 hours ago
Will the Chille DeCastro Civil Rights Case Overturn Or Amend The Obstruction & Resisting Arrest Statutes?
The civil rights lawsuit is being appealed on "juror bias" and the granting of the defendants' motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding his prior conviction that was overturned. Juror bias can be pretty tough to overcome, especially if it is brought to light before the trial. A "boy scout" pledge of being impartial could be a lie, but the system is the system. We don't have enough information to fully figure out why the MIL was granted, as the judge didn't provide a minute order explaining the ruling. We also don't know what was objected to and what was preserved for appeal.
While Chille is trying to reverse the juries' decision, which is usually a very tough move, I want to focus on something else: will this result in the Ninth Circuit making a review of the obstruction and resisting arrest statutes, given that Nevada broke away for "officer safety" reasons? The statutes are part of the jury instructions, and were used to answer question one: did the cop have probable cause to arrest Chille. The Willson decision proved that the obstruction charge was a mess. Both statutes overlap each other. We'll have to wait and see what Chille's strategy is. I have problems with question 18 for the jury. Others say I am wrong. Maybe I am. One thing is for sure - this case presents many different questions, and was reviewed by three courts. The federal judge said that probable cause existed. I don't remember Leavitt making any findings that Borque lied on the stand, and Zimmerman didn't either. The appeals court isn't going to weigh credibility but will look at procedural errors and pure errors of law. The Willson exception is part of the instructions. Will the Ninth Circuit "punt" on the constitutional questions, or include briefing for that too? We'll just have to see.
If - and this is by no means certain - the Ninth Circuit wants to reign in Nevada, it is being presented with the statutes that are terribly drafted, and even overlap each other. The poor get nailed with them all the time, as they cannot fight the charges.
This is not legal advice, and is for entertainment purposes only. Nothing herein can be relied upon, and no attorney-client relationship is formed. Always consult a licensed professional in your area before making any decisions affecting your rights. I reserve all rights, including those under California's anti-SLAPP statute.
Will the Chille DeCastro Civil Rights Case Overturn Or Amend The Obstruction & Resisting Arrest Statutes?
The civil rights lawsuit is being appealed on "juror bias" and the granting of the defendants' motion in limine to exclude evidence regarding his prior conviction that was overturned. Juror bias can be pretty tough to overcome, especially if it is brought to light before the trial. A "boy scout" pledge of being impartial could be a lie, but the system is the system. We don't have enough information to fully figure out why the MIL was granted, as the judge didn't provide a minute order explaining the ruling. We also don't know what was objected to and what was preserved for appeal.
While Chille is trying to reverse the juries' decision, which is usually a very tough move, I want to focus on something else: will this result in the Ninth Circuit making a review of the obstruction and resisting arrest statutes, given that Nevada broke away for "officer safety" reasons? The statutes are part of the jury instructions, and were used to answer question one: did the cop have probable cause to arrest Chille. The Willson decision proved that the obstruction charge was a mess. Both statutes overlap each other. We'll have to wait and see what Chille's strategy is. I have problems with question 18 for the jury. Others say I am wrong. Maybe I am. One thing is for sure - this case presents many different questions, and was reviewed by three courts. The federal judge said that probable cause existed. I don't remember Leavitt making any findings that Borque lied on the stand, and Zimmerman didn't either. The appeals court isn't going to weigh credibility but will look at procedural errors and pure errors of law. The Willson exception is part of the instructions. Will the Ninth Circuit "punt" on the constitutional questions, or include briefing for that too? We'll just have to see.
If - and this is by no means certain - the Ninth Circuit wants to reign in Nevada, it is being presented with the statutes that are terribly drafted, and even overlap each other. The poor get nailed with them all the time, as they cannot fight the charges.
This is not legal advice, and is for entertainment purposes only. Nothing herein can be relied upon, and no attorney-client relationship is formed. Always consult a licensed professional in your area before making any decisions affecting your rights. I reserve all rights, including those under California's anti-SLAPP statute.
