SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 1

·1
·2
·3· · · ·IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
·4· · · · · · ·IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
·5· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--·6
·7·
· ·
·8·
· ·
·9·
· ·
10·
· ·
11·
· ·
12·

·SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S )
·OFFICE,· · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · · Petitioner,· · · )·
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
· · · · · vs.· · · · · · · · )·
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
·ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,· · ·)·
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)·
· · · · · · Respondent.· · · )
·____________________________)

No. 34-2020-70007786
Dept.· 41
REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF
GVRO HEARING

13
14
15· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--16· · · · · · · · · ·THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2020
17· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--18
19
20· · · · · · The above-entitled matter came on regularly at
21· ·the date above set forth before the HON. DAVID DE ALBA,
22· ·Judge of the Superior Court of the State of California,
23· ·County of Sacramento.
24· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--25
26
27· ·Reported by:
28· ·Elizabeth Teklinsky, CSR No. 7895

Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 2

·1· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
·2· ·For the Petitioner:
·3·
· ·
·4
· ·
·5
· ·
·6·
· ·
·7·

·SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
·BY:· NATE GRGICH, SGT.
·For the Respondent:
·DONATO LEGAL GROUP
·BY:· ALAN J. DONATO, ESQ.
·1383 Garden Highway, Suite 100
·Sacramento, CA· 95833

·8
·9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 3

·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·SESSIONS
·2· ·DATE· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
·3· ·AUGUST 13, 2020
·4· ·MORNING SESSION· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 4
· · ·GVRO hearing· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·4
·5
·6
·7
·8
·9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 4

·1· · · · · · · · · THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2020
·2· · · · · · · · · · · ·MORNING SESSION
·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--·4· · · · · · Proceedings in the matter of SACRAMENTO COUNTY
·5· ·SHERIFF'S OFFICE, Petitioner, vs. ANDREW RICHARD
·6· ·CASAREZ, the Respondent, Case Number 34-2020-70007786,
·7· ·came on regularly before the Honorable DAVID DE ALBA,
·8· ·Judge of the Sacramento Superior Court, County of
·9· ·Sacramento, State of California, sitting in Department
10· ·41.
11· · · · · · The Petitioner was represented by NATE GRGICH,
12· ·Sergeant for the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office,
13· ·appearing via CourtCall.
14· · · · · · The Respondent, ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ, was
15· ·present and represented by ALAN J. DONATO, Attorney at
16· ·Law, both appearing via CourtCall.
17· · · · · · The following proceedings were then had:
18· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--19· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· There's one other
20· ·matter on the calendar this morning; that is, the
21· ·matter of the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office vs.
22· ·Andrew Richard Casarez, case number 07786.
23· · · · · · I'm sorry.· Someone on the CourtCall line has
24· ·either a radio or something, other appliance or I'm not
25· ·sure what it is, that's on.· We can hear transmissions.
26· ·So I would ask you all to please turn off whatever
27· ·devices you have so we don't hear that background
28· ·noise.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 5

·1· · · · · · So, good morning.· On behalf of the sheriff's
·2· ·department, who's appearing this morning?
·3· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Sergeant Nate Grgich.
·4· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sergeant, good morning, and thank
·5· ·you for being patient.· You want to spell your last
·6· ·name slowly for the benefit of the court reporter?
·7· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, sir.· Last name is
·8· ·spelled G-r-g-i-c-h.
·9· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Thank you for your
10· ·patience.
11· · · · · · And then Andrew Richard Casarez.· Are you on
12· ·the line, sir?
13· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yeah.· Good morning, Your Honor.
14· ·Alan Donato, on behalf of Mr. Casarez.· He is present
15· ·in my office with his father.· Would you like to hear
16· ·from Mr. Andrew Casarez personally, or -17· · · · · · THE COURT:· Well, ultimately, I suppose I
18· ·will.
19· · · · · · Good morning, Attorney Alan Donato.· Thank you
20· ·for being patient, sir.· And is your client, you say,
21· ·next to you?· Can he hear me?
22· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· He can.
23· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I'm going to ask him
24· ·to confirm his presence.
25· · · · · · Andrew Richard Casarez, are you on the line,
26· ·sir?
27· · · · · · ANDREW CASAREZ:· Yes, I am.
28· · · · · · THE COURT:· Good morning, sir, and thank you
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 6

·1· ·for being patient.
·2· · · · · · And, Mr. Donato, you say there's another
·3· ·individual, Mr. Casarez's father?
·4· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Correct.
·5· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· And what is his name?
·6· · · · · · ARTURO CASAREZ:· Arturo Casarez, Your Honor.
·7· · · · · · THE COURT:· Arturo Casarez.· Good morning,
·8· ·sir.
·9· · · · · · ARTURO CASAREZ:· Good morning, Your Honor.
10· · · · · · THE COURT:· Thank you for being patient.· One
11· ·moment.
12· · · · · · I remind you that there is a court reporter
13· ·present and that she is taking down everything that's
14· ·being said here in the courtroom, obviously, on this
15· ·CourtCall.· We have a court reporter present, the
16· ·bailiff present, and there is another individual in the
17· ·courtroom that I've allowed to be present, I believe to
18· ·be a representative of the local media, "The Sacramento
19· ·Bee," who is present.
20· · · · · · I have the petition before me that was filed
21· ·with this court on or about July 13 and a copy of the
22· ·order that was issued by Judge Roman on or about that
23· ·date.· I have read the declarations and material in
24· ·support of the petition.
25· · · · · · Mr. Donato, I also have, of course, your
26· ·substitution of attorney that you filed here on July 29
27· ·with our court representing Mr. Casarez, and I also
28· ·have your opposition brief, Mr. Donato, that I have
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 7

·1· ·read and considered.
·2· · · · · · And attached to your brief -- and I have 12
·3· ·pages of your brief.· I'm not sure if it's longer, but
·4· ·I have 12 pages, and attached thereto is a declaration
·5· ·of Andrew Casarez, and it looks to be signed.· The
·6· ·declaration is under penalty of perjury.· It does not
·7· ·appear to be dated, but it does appear to be signed.
·8· · · · · · Andrew Casarez, did you sign this declaration
·9· ·that your lawyer provided to the court?
10· · · · · · ANDREW CASAREZ:· Yes, I did.
11· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Thank you.
12· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, just for the record,
13· ·the motion itself is 13 pages.· The 13th page is just a
14· ·conclusion and my signature.· The 14th page is
15· ·Mr. Casarez's declaration.· I apologize.· I do see that
16· ·it's not dated.· And then Exhibit A is the
17· ·declaration -- not the declaration, the affidavit
18· ·submitted by Sergeant Grgich.
19· · · · · · THE COURT:· Thank you for that clarification,
20· ·Mr. Donato.
21· · · · · · I will listen to Sergeant Grgich first, and
22· ·then, Mr. Donato, I will hear you and/or your client or
23· ·his father, as you please.
24· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, I apologize for
25· ·interrupting.· May I just address some preliminary
26· ·matters before we begin?
27· · · · · · THE COURT:· You may, sir.
28· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· I understand that it's not Your
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 8

·1· ·Honor who is choosing to have the proceeding in this
·2· ·way, but we would lodge some preliminary objections to
·3· ·this being telephonic and not via Zoom or in person.
·4· · · · · · We would also reiterate our objections stated
·5· ·in the moving papers in regards to our lack of notice,
·6· ·our lack of due process, the fact that I believe
·7· ·Sergeant Grgich is going to be testifying without any
·8· ·type of question-and-answer format that would allow us
·9· ·to lodge objections based on the Evidence Code.
10· · · · · · I tried to contact County counsel to see if
11· ·there was going to be a representative like Kevin
12· ·Kundinger was from the City attorney's office.· I don't
13· ·believe the Sacramento Sheriff's Department even
14· ·notified County counsel, so there's no opportunity for
15· ·me to object, as Sergeant Grgich is going to be
16· ·testifying in a narrative format and based on
17· ·information that he does not have personal knowledge
18· ·of.
19· · · · · · It's my understanding he's going to be
20· ·relating an investigation done by a member of the media
21· ·who is not named and he was not a part of that
22· ·investigation, so if that's the nature of his
23· ·testimony -- which, again, we don't know what exactly
24· ·that testimony is going to be -- it lacks foundation
25· ·because it doesn't have any personal knowledge.
26· · · · · · THE COURT:· So, Mr. Donato, I'm going to ask
27· ·you, as I said previously, to speak slower.· We can
28· ·hear you, but it's easier if you speak slower for the
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 9

·1· ·court reporter to take down your statements, your
·2· ·comments.
·3· · · · · · And if you would wait until I invite you to
·4· ·address the Court, that way only one of us is speaking
·5· ·at a time, as, again, it is very challenging for the
·6· ·court reporter to take down two individuals speaking at
·7· ·the same time.
·8· · · · · · So, Mr. Donato, I have noted your objections.
·9· ·Was there something else preliminarily, sir, that you
10· ·wished to address?
11· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· In addition to the -- what has
12· ·been contained in the motion not preliminary.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Let me address your
14· ·first objection, to the telephonic nature of the
15· ·hearing.· What alternative would you suggest, sir?
16· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Zoom, where we could actually
17· ·have a method by Mr. Casarez seeing his accuser.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment.
19· · · · · · Madam Clerk, can we arrange for a Zoom hearing
20· ·on this case?
21· · · · · · THE CLERK:· Yes, we can.
22· · · · · · THE COURT:· Is it true that all we have to do
23· ·is give them the access information?
24· · · · · · THE CLERK:· Correct.
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Sergeant Grgich, are
26· ·you available and have the capacity to appear this
27· ·morning by Zoom if the clerk gives you the relevant
28· ·information to join, sir?
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 10

·1· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I would have to
·2· ·double-check, sir.· I don't Zoom, really, ever, so I
·3· ·have never played with that type of technology.
·4· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I understand.· Yes.
·5· ·You have to have the application.· You have to have a
·6· ·computer with a camera and the application as well.
·7· · · · · · Mr. Donato, are you able to do that this
·8· ·morning, appear by Zoom?
·9· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes, Your Honor.
10· · · · · · THE COURT:· Well, I appreciate your
11· ·suggestion, Mr. Donato, and I just want to make sure
12· ·that the sergeant can access the court through Zoom.
13· · · · · · Sergeant, do you have a laptop computer with a
14· ·camera on it?
15· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, sir.
16· · · · · · THE COURT:· Or a smartphone, iPhone?
17· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I have an iPhone.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· Do you have it there in your hand
19· ·in front of you?
20· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I do.· I would have to look
21· ·how to download the Zoom app, sir, and I can try to do
22· ·that.
23· · · · · · THE COURT:· Exactly.· If you could download
24· ·the Zoom application, I think we will be able to
25· ·accommodate you through your phone.
26· · · · · · I'm also going to need an e-mail address,
27· ·Mr. Donato and Sergeant.· We'll need an e-mail address
28· ·you can give to the clerk, and then she will forward
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 11

·1· ·you what we call the link or the meeting ID numbers,
·2· ·and you simply type those numbers into the Zoom
·3· ·application, and then you'll be on the screen here in
·4· ·the courtroom.
·5· · · · · · So let me address some of the other
·6· ·objections -- preliminary objections.
·7· · · · · · Mr. Donato, you made a statement that you felt
·8· ·your client was being denied due process.· Do you wish
·9· ·to say more about that?
10· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Well, as stated in my motion,
11· ·Your Honor, the affidavit submitted by the Sacramento
12· ·County Sheriff's Department is brief, to say the least.
13· ·It doesn't include any specific threat, any specific
14· ·comments or statements made by Mr. Casarez for us to
15· ·refute or deny.
16· · · · · · There's been no offer of proof as to what
17· ·Sergeant Grgich is going to come in and testify to, to
18· ·provide for meaningful cross-examination or preparation
19· ·of testimony.
20· · · · · · The Sacramento Sheriff's Department is also
21· ·violating his due-process rights by the manner in which
22· ·they proceeded in this case in obtaining the
23· ·gun-violence restraining order and failing to meet the
24· ·minimal requirements of reasonable cause, affording him
25· ·an opportunity and notice to respond.
26· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I've read and
27· ·considered your papers, and I appreciate what you're
28· ·saying, but if you study the gun-violence restraining
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 12

·1· ·statutes -- and I see that you have set them forth in
·2· ·your opposition memoranda; in fact, you set out a
·3· ·little bit of the history of how these statutes were -·4· ·why they were created and when they were created -- you
·5· ·would appreciate that the statutory framework is one
·6· ·for efficiency, speed, because these situations
·7· ·oftentimes involve imminent danger; and that the
·8· ·statutes refer to a hearing, not a trial.
·9· · · · · · And like civil restraining-order hearings,
10· ·there is no guarantee or provision for, quote/unquote,
11· ·discovery.· In other words, your complaint that you
12· ·don't know what the officer is going to say and you're
13· ·not sure that you're adequately or can adequately be
14· ·prepared for cross-examination is not contemplated in
15· ·the statutory scheme, as, again, these hearings are, by
16· ·statute, designed to be informal, brief, quick, and the
17· ·rules of evidence relaxed.
18· · · · · · Now, you also had an objection to not knowing
19· ·or objecting to the sergeant testifying because you're
20· ·not aware of what he would say this morning.· Is that
21· ·what I heard you say, Mr. Donato?
22· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes, Your Honor.
23· · · · · · THE COURT:· The declaration -- I'm sorry?
24· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· The only thing we have is the
25· ·one-page affidavit in which he claims that Mr. Casarez
26· ·is a white supremacist.· There's no additional facts or
27· ·statements, threats, anything, that have been
28· ·attributed to Mr. Casarez for us to refute or deny.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 13

·1· · · · · · And in addition, the 21-day requirement of
·2· ·taking the hearing was not abided by in this case, and
·3· ·we're now on, I believe, day 35.
·4· · · · · · THE COURT:· The declaration in support of the
·5· ·petition is what we call a prima facie showing of
·6· ·reasonableness in support of the request for a
·7· ·temporary gun-violence restraining order, which Judge
·8· ·Roman entertained and obviously concluded that, from
·9· ·the declaration, there was sufficient basis to issue
10· ·the temporary gun-violence prevention order.
11· · · · · · Again, statutorily, the Legislature created a
12· ·vehicle by which individuals -- law enforcement,
13· ·members of the community, family members, employers,
14· ·and others -- could quickly, through the use of these
15· ·various forms like the declaration that you have in
16· ·this case, could bring to the Court's attention,
17· ·speedily, the need for relief.
18· · · · · · Your objection that the hearing has not been
19· ·held within 21 days is overruled.· Specifically,
20· ·Mr. Donato, you are correct in that the statute affords
21· ·and mandates that hearings be held quickly; that is,
22· ·within 21 days.
23· · · · · · But as you may be aware, sir, the Chief
24· ·Justice of the state of California, given the pandemic
25· ·emergency that confronts our state and our community,
26· ·issued emergency orders addressed to the court
27· ·continuing various civil and criminal proceedings for
28· ·up to 60 days.· That order encompassed these types of
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 14

·1· ·petitions.
·2· · · · · · Otherwise, you would be correct, and I perhaps
·3· ·would agree with you that the hearing has not been held
·4· ·within 21 days, but in light of the Chief Justice's
·5· ·order, your objection to the speedy hearing is
·6· ·overruled.
·7· · · · · · Madam Clerk, for the record, note that the
·8· ·Court has entertained and overruled the objections to
·9· ·the telephonic hearing and also overruled any objection
10· ·that was made that this process violates Mr. Casarez's
11· ·due process.
12· · · · · · Sergeant, have you had any success with the
13· ·Zoom application?
14· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· I figured
15· ·something out.
16· · · · · · THE COURT:· Wonderful.· So if we provide you
17· ·with the information, you believe you will be able to
18· ·join this hearing via Zoom, sir?
19· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I do believe so, sir.
20· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Mr. Donato, I think I
21· ·heard you say earlier that you would be able to join by
22· ·Zoom as well.· Correct?
23· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes, Your Honor.· I believe I
24· ·already e-mailed your clerk with my e-mail address.
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I'm looking at her.
26· · · · · · Sergeant, I'm going to ask you to send an
27· ·e-mail as well to my clerk.· I'm going to let her
28· ·announce her e-mail address so that you can e-mail her.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 15

·1· · · · · · Mr. Donato, my clerk is shaking her head,
·2· ·saying she has not received anything.
·3· · · · · · Go ahead.· The clerk is going to write down
·4· ·your e-mail, Mr. Donato.· Slowly.· Say it slowly.
·5· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Alan@donato.legal.· So it's
·6· ·a-l-a-n@d-o-n-a-t-o.l-e-g-a-l.· So, again,
·7· ·alan@donato.legal.
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Sergeant, do you want
·9· ·to say your e-mail address so the clerk can write it
10· ·down?
11· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· It's
12· ·n-g-r-g-i-c-h@s-a-c-s-h-e-r-i-f-f.com.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment.· It looks
14· ·like the clerk has that information.· She is preparing
15· ·an e-mail to give you the Zoom link ID number, which,
16· ·Sergeant, I believe you simply have to type into the
17· ·box that says "Join a Meeting," and that will link you
18· ·here to the courtroom.
19· · · · · · I think momentarily we'll all be on Zoom, as
20· ·soon as the clerk e-mails the two of you the Zoom link
21· ·information, which you can acknowledge here in a
22· ·moment.
23· · · · · · Mr. Donato, did you receive the e-mail?
24· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· I did, Your Honor.
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· Does it have the meeting link
26· ·information, sir?
27· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· It does, and I am joining now.
28· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I do see you.· I will
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 16

·1· ·admit you here to the hearing.
·2· · · · · · Sergeant, you can do the same.· Let me know,
·3· ·and I will admit you as well.
·4· · · · · · I see Attorney Donato, wearing a mask, on our
·5· ·screen.
·6· · · · · · Sergeant, are you in the process of joining
·7· ·us?
·8· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· I'm
·9· ·trying.
10· · · · · · THE COURT:· Mr. Donato, one moment, sir.

I

11· ·believe I have the sergeant on the Zoom meeting.
12· · · · · · Sergeant, there you are, wearing a mask as
13· ·well.· Sergeant, can you see and hear me?
14· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor, I can.
15· · · · · · THE COURT:· Do you see Attorney Donato?
16· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, Your Honor.
17· · · · · · THE COURT:· Perhaps there's another button on
18· ·your phone or computer that might say "Gallery," which
19· ·would enable you to see four different faces.· The
20· ·unidentified face thus far is the young intern from UC
21· ·Davis Law School, Ms. Katharine Pearce, who is on the
22· ·Zoom meeting with my permission as an extern here in my
23· ·department.
24· · · · · · Again, Mr. Donato, one moment while we get the
25· ·sergeant squared away here.
26· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I think I'm there, sir.
27· · · · · · THE COURT:· Can you hear and see me, Sergeant?
28· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 17

·1· · · · · · THE COURT:· And can you see Attorney Donato?
·2· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
·3· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· And then as I said
·4· ·earlier, the young lady is Ms. Pearce, who is an intern
·5· ·with the court.
·6· · · · · · All right.· Thank you for making the
·7· ·arrangement, Sergeant, to appear by Zoom.
·8· · · · · · And, Mr. Donato, I overruled your objection to
·9· ·the telephone appearance, but now, at your suggestion,
10· ·we're appearing by Zoom.· Is this satisfactory to you
11· ·and your client, Mr. Donato?
12· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· May I just inquire as to whether
13· ·there's anyone in the room with Sergeant Grgich that
14· ·would necessitate the mask?
15· · · · · · THE COURT:· How about you answer my question
16· ·first?· Mr. Donato, are you satisfied that we can
17· ·proceed with this Zoom hearing this morning?
18· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes.
19· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment, because
20· ·we've lost the sergeant.
21· · · · · · Sergeant, we lost you for a moment.
22· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I'm sorry, sir.· Yeah.· My
23· ·media keeps going in and out, sir.
24· · · · · · THE COURT:· You're back.· Is there anyone with
25· ·you, sir, in the room, or are you alone?
26· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I'm alone, sir.
27· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Mr. Donato was asking
28· ·that question when you went off the screen.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 18

·1· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, I'm alone.
·2· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· You're welcome to
·3· ·remove your mask.· I appreciate that you're wearing it.
·4· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Out of an abundance of
·5· ·caution, sir.
·6· · · · · · THE COURT:· Yes, sir.· I appreciate that.
·7· · · · · · Mr. Donato, do you want to say anything more
·8· ·before I ask the sergeant to proceed with his
·9· ·statement/comment in support of the petition?
10· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, I did voice an
11· ·objection as not being a question and answer and the
12· ·offer of proof lacking personal foundation.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· You did do that, and I considered
14· ·that as part of your due-process objection, and if it
15· ·wasn't clear, I overruled your objection when I noted
16· ·that these hearings are not statutorily or otherwise
17· ·designed to be trials.· They're informal hearings.
18· · · · · · By the way, Mr. Donato, I don't see your
19· ·client or his father.
20· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· They are on the other side of the
21· ·laptop from me.· They're viewing the projection onto
22· ·the TV in my office.· They're able to see Sergeant
23· ·Grgich.· Thank you.
24· · · · · · THE COURT:· Thank you, sir.
25· · · · · · Sergeant, did you wish to proceed with the
26· ·petition, the gun-violence prevention order, this
27· ·morning?· If so, you may be heard in support.
28· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· Thank you.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 19

·1· ·If I cut out at any point, please understand it's my
·2· ·phone.
·3· · · · · · On or about December 2017 and December 2018, a
·4· ·local synagogue in Orangevale was what we call flyered,
·5· ·where there was anti-Semitic posters placed all around
·6· ·the synagogue.· During that time, there was an
·7· ·investigation that was launched by the Sacramento
·8· ·County Sheriff's Office into white-supremacy activities
·9· ·in the Orangevale area.
10· · · · · · During that time -11· · · · · · THE COURT:· I have lost him, Mr. Donato, so
12· ·we'll see what happens.· We can get him back.
13· · · · · · Sergeant, we lost you.· We can hear you.
14· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I apologize, sir.· Are you
15· ·there, sir?
16· · · · · · THE COURT:· Yes.· We can hear you, so if you
17· ·want to proceed with your verbal comments.· We lost you
18· ·when you said that the sheriff's department had started
19· ·an investigation back in December.
20· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yeah.· The sheriff's office
21· ·started an investigation at that time to see if there
22· ·was any identifiable people inside the area of
23· ·Orangevale who were involved in white-supremacy
24· ·activity.
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· Proceed.· Whatever application -26· ·Sergeant, now we see you and can hear you again.
27· ·Sometimes being closer to a router works better, but go
28· ·ahead.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 20

·1· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I'm off of -- okay.· Could I
·2· ·ask if I could call in?· And then we could run the Zoom
·3· ·and I could mute it.
·4· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sure, go ahead and do that.· We
·5· ·need to hear you.
·6· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· It seems like we're
·7· ·constantly being interrupted.
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sergeant, we're having a rough
·9· ·time keeping you on the line here.· I think I'm going
10· ·to ask you to just call in.· Hang up the Zoom
11· ·application.· Stop with the Zoom, and just call back
12· ·the original number you did this morning.
13· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
14· · · · · · THE COURT:· The clerk is going to try to hook
15· ·you up as well.
16· · · · · · THE CLERK:· The same way he came in this
17· ·morning.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· The same way you came in this
19· ·morning.
20· · · · · · THE CLERK:· Tell him whatever instructions
21· ·were given to him.
22· · · · · · THE COURT:· So, Sergeant, if you could follow
23· ·the initial instructions you were given this morning.
24· · · · · · · · · ·(Pause in proceedings.)
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· We have you now clearly on the
26· ·phone line.
27· · · · · · So, for the record, we had some technical
28· ·difficulties with the Zoom application for Sergeant
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 21

·1· ·Grgich.
·2· · · · · · Sir, you may resume your statement.· The last
·3· ·thing we heard you say -- I heard you say was the
·4· ·sheriff's department starting an investigation about
·5· ·white-supremacy activity.· You may proceed.
·6· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Thank you, Your Honor.
·7· · · · · · Mr. Donato, I do apologize for my technical
·8· ·issues.
·9· · · · · · It was given to us at the time -- let me just
10· ·kind of regather -11· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, I apologize.· I can't
12· ·hear him at all.· I'm going to call in as well.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment.
14· ·Mr. Donato is going to call in.· He can't hear you,
15· ·Sergeant.
16· · · · · · Yes, sir, Mr. Donato, call in as well.
17· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Thank you.
18· · · · · · · · · ·(Pause in proceedings.)
19· · · · · · THE COURT:· Mr. Donato, you're on the phone
20· ·line now?
21· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes.· Much clearer.· Thank you.
22· ·I could hear him doing Zoom, but not when he was trying
23· ·to do the phone in through Zoom.· So, thank you.
24· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· We're back on the
25· ·record.· The attempt at Zoom meeting or hearing was not
26· ·successful.· Sergeant Grgich and Attorney Donato and
27· ·his client, Mr. Casarez, are now on CourtCall and can
28· ·be heard clearly.
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 22

·1· · · · · · Sergeant, you may proceed with your statement
·2· ·in support of the petition.
·3· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· All right.· Again,
·4· ·Mr. Donato, I apologize to you and your client for
·5· ·having technical issues.
·6· · · · · · So to kind of recap here, in one train of
·7· ·thought, in December 2017, the synagogue located on
·8· ·Hazel Avenue just south of the Placer border was what
·9· ·we call flyered, which is where white-supremacist
10· ·posters were placed on the grounds of the synagogue by
11· ·way of using spray glue that was damaging to the
12· ·building itself.
13· · · · · · The next December, there was a second incident
14· ·that happened again inside -- or at the same synagogue.
15· ·This time, the subjects were actually caught on camera.
16· ·It was two subjects wearing head coverings and darker
17· ·clothing approached the synagogue and used Scotch-taped
18· ·flyers and posted them again on the actual synagogue
19· ·itself.· It launched an investigation from the
20· ·sheriff's office, but the knowledge of who it was and
21· ·how it happened were sketchy, and where the actual
22· ·assailants came from.
23· · · · · · A month later, information started to trickle
24· ·in from sources on the outside leading to a name of Vic
25· ·Mackey.· Mackey was a -- basically a false identity
26· ·used on the Internet to -- that was the leader of what
27· ·was called the Bowl Patrol.
28· · · · · · The Bowl Patrol was started in support of
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 23

·1· ·Dylann Roof, who went inside of a church in Charlotte
·2· ·[sic], South Carolina, and killed nine people that were
·3· ·in prayer at the time of the assailant, Dylann Roof,
·4· ·shooting them point blank.· Dylann Roof was later
·5· ·captured and then stood trial and so forth.
·6· · · · · · The Bowl Patrol came into -- by the way, am I
·7· ·talking too quickly, Your Honor?
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· You could slow down just a taste,
·9· ·yes, sir.
10· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I apologize to the Court.
11· · · · · · The Bowl Patrol began to be monitored.· Again,
12· ·a pronounced figure on that site was Vic Mackey, which
13· ·related to a show on television called "The Shield."
14· ·That person on "The Shield" dealt with -- he was a
15· ·dirty officer, a dirty cop, who basically went out and
16· ·got information the wrong way, hurt people, was a
17· ·racist, and so forth.
18· · · · · · The investigation kind of went back and forth
19· ·with no possible way of confirming that Vic Mackey was
20· ·in charge of the synagogue papering or flyering, and
21· ·ultimately, things kind of calmed down and the
22· ·synagogue was not hit during 2019.
23· · · · · · Fast forward to July 7th of 2020, a,
24· ·quote/unquote, doxing, which is where documents are put
25· ·out on the Internet identifying different people, both
26· ·far-right white supremacists and far-left extremists,
27· ·for the purpose of basically harassing and identifying
28· ·them and allowing them not to have anonymity anymore
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 24

·1· ·through the Internet.
·2· · · · · · Mr. Casarez was linked to the online profile
·3· ·of Victor Mackey by a website called -- I had this all
·4· ·up, and I lost it; I apologize -- by the Anonymous
·5· ·Collective, is what they are called -- excuse me -·6· ·Anonymous Comrade Collective, where they went through
·7· ·and conducted an exhaustive research to try to identify
·8· ·who Vic Mackey was.
·9· · · · · · Following the Anonymous Comrade Collective's
10· ·information online, we were able to ascertain that
11· ·there were key details that were relayed on something
12· ·called the Bowlcast, which would be a -- basically a
13· ·thread of information between multiple members of the
14· ·Bowl Patrol linking or little crumbs of who Vic Mackey
15· ·was.· Those included that he lived in Northern
16· ·California, that his father was an Army veteran and a
17· ·firefighter, and that his sister lived in San
18· ·Francisco, all of which we were able to track and found
19· ·that those were in fact to be true of Andrew Casarez.
20· · · · · · We noted that during some of the Bowlcasts,
21· ·things were mentioned about obtaining an AR-15,
22· ·reloading his own ammunition, as well as gathering
23· ·information about harming law enforcement and the
24· ·Jewish community as well as other minority groups.
25· · · · · · On one of the other Bowlcasts, Vic Mackey
26· ·states the following:· If you want to get a little
27· ·ballsier and go to do -- and go to that synagogue that
28· ·you want to tape them up, don't use adhesive spray,
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 25

·1· ·because it can remove paint and they could consider it
·2· ·vandalism, and we don't want that.· Tape them up on the
·3· ·synagogue, on the doors, on things like that, and just
·4· ·watch hysteria ensues.· I promise you those -- and this
·5· ·is a derogatory term, and I quote it verbatim -- kikes
·6· ·are going to be very scared and very sad.· So if any of
·7· ·you guys have any ideas about terrorizing the mamzers
·8· ·in your community and how you can do that and get away
·9· ·with it, I'm all ears.
10· · · · · · The flyering of the synagogue in 2018 was done
11· ·with flyers, and they were taped to the actual doors
12· ·and windows in the front of the synagogue.· That
13· ·information was never released to the public because we
14· ·did not want to, again, incite any sort of violence or
15· ·incite any type of panic to the community, and let
16· ·alone the Jewish community, who had gone through a
17· ·second round of vandalism and paper terrorism.
18· · · · · · Due to these facts, and in the abundance of
19· ·caution, the sheriff's office sought a gun-violence
20· ·restraining order, which Judge Roman signed on July
21· ·13th, and then on July 15th we executed a search
22· ·warrant, which was also signed by Judge Roman on July
23· ·13th, which led us into the home of Victor Mackey, or
24· ·Andrew Casarez.
25· · · · · · We confiscated one handgun with its two
26· ·magazines and other -- and also a T-shirt that actually
27· ·had an image of a skull and crossbones with a hairpiece
28· ·looking like the hair of Dylann Roof, or also known as
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 26

·1· ·the Bowl Patrol.· Those same images are strewn
·2· ·throughout the Bowlcast, which again espouses violence
·3· ·towards anyone who is not of pure white lineage, as
·4· ·they say.
·5· · · · · · I think that kind of covers it.
·6· · · · · · There were also some other indicators of who
·7· ·Vic Mackey truly was, including his height, which he
·8· ·lists as 6'4, which we noted that Andrew Casarez is
·9· ·fairly tall, being over 6', as well as that he has a
10· ·Spanish appearance, which Victor Mackey has -- or
11· ·excuse me -- Andrew Casarez has more olive skin and
12· ·darker features as well.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Sergeant, again, thank
14· ·you for your patience.· We heard your statement.· Let
15· ·me make sure I understand certain things that you've
16· ·offered.
17· · · · · · Did I hear you say the initial investigation
18· ·surrounding the Jewish synagogue was started in 2018?
19· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· 2017, Your Honor, December
20· ·of 2017.
21· · · · · · THE COURT:· December of 2017.
22· · · · · · And when did your department actively start
23· ·investigating the vandalism, I'll call it, to the
24· ·synagogue?· Was that this year?
25· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, Your Honor.· We actually
26· ·started in December of 2017 and then again in December
27· ·of 2018.
28· · · · · · THE COURT:· And it was not until most recently
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 27

·1· ·that certain information was developed in the
·2· ·investigation that started suggesting that Andrew
·3· ·Casarez was a person on the Internet who had posted
·4· ·certain information that your department concluded
·5· ·linked him to this fictitious individual or person
·6· ·referred to as Vic Mackey?
·7· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· And about how long ago was that
·9· ·conclusion reached?· Was that a few months ago, or last
10· ·month, in July?
11· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
12· · · · · · THE COURT:· And you reference that on the
13· ·Internet that Mr. Casarez was linked to this fictitious
14· ·identity Vic Mackey by, I think you called it, an
15· ·Anonymous Collective.· Is that right?
16· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor, Anonymous
17· ·Comrade Collective.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· And what does that mean, Anonymous
19· ·Comrade Collective?· Is that a bunch of anonymous
20· ·people on the Internet who perhaps did some searching,
21· ·research, whatever it was that they engaged in, who
22· ·then reached some sort of conclusion anonymously about
23· ·Vic Mackey?
24· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes.· So they are -25· ·basically conducted their own Internet research of who
26· ·Victor Mackey was by basically the clues that he would
27· ·talk about and leave on his Bowlcast and other not
28· ·advertisements, but other communications between the
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 28

·1· ·group that he was a part of, the Bowl Patrol.
·2· · · · · · THE COURT:· Including, as you mentioned,
·3· ·crumbs -- little crumbs of information; such as, that
·4· ·the individual lived in Northern California.· I believe
·5· ·you said his father was retired from the Army; and a
·6· ·third item, that his father was perhaps a retired
·7· ·firefighter.
·8· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· And if I
·9· ·can add one thing.· The Bowlcasts that were linked to
10· ·Mr. Casarez, Mr. Casarez has a very identifiable voice,
11· ·where he would actually talk about going out and doing
12· ·these acts of hate and violence and so forth, including
13· ·which we were able to gather a video of him going
14· ·around the streets of San Francisco interviewing
15· ·individuals kind of like -- it was like a Conan O'Brien
16· ·schtick, where he would approach people and say that
17· ·President Trump pardoned Dylann Roof for the crimes
18· ·that he committed about killing the nine people in that
19· ·church.
20· · · · · · When I spoke to Andrew Casarez the day that we
21· ·conducted the search warrant, I recognized that that
22· ·voice from those multiple Bowlcasts or podcasts and the
23· ·video of him walking around San Francisco, in which he
24· ·again talks about the Bowl Patrol and the killing of
25· ·those nine individuals at the church, was the same
26· ·person, if that kind of helps clear up things as well.
27· · · · · · THE COURT:· You say you actually saw or have
28· ·video of the respondent, Mr. Casarez, engaging in this
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 29

·1· ·type of behavior in San Francisco?
·2· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.· It is only
·3· ·his voice.· He's very careful not to show his face, but
·4· ·Mr. Casarez has a very specific voice.
·5· · · · · · THE COURT:· And how was it that you or your
·6· ·department learned or managed to see this particular
·7· ·video that captures this activity in San Francisco?
·8· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· It was obtained via open
·9· ·source, open-source searches of the Internet.
10· · · · · · THE COURT:· And is there a date associated
11· ·with this activity in San Francisco?
12· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, Your Honor.
13· · · · · · THE COURT:· Is there any reference on that
14· ·video or the audio of that activity that you think is
15· ·attached to Mr. Casarez because of his unique voice or
16· ·voice identification -- is there anything where
17· ·Mr. Casarez is threatening violence or threatens to
18· ·harm anyone; and more specifically, by use of a
19· ·firearm?
20· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Not particularly.· He does
21· ·use multiple racial derogatory terms, talks about
22· ·people just needing to die, but he does not mention
23· ·anything specific with a firearm.
24· · · · · · THE COURT:· From your entire investigation and
25· ·that that you've described this morning, do you have
26· ·any direct -- and by "direct," I mean evidence that
27· ·points and incriminates, if you will, Mr. Casarez by a
28· ·statement that he's made or by a posting, perhaps, that
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 30

·1· ·others have made where it's represented that
·2· ·Mr. Casarez would harm anyone with a firearm?
·3· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· There are multiple excerpts
·4· ·that we take from his podcast where he says, "I would
·5· ·love to do what he did in Parkland.· Do you know how
·6· ·many kikes he killed in that high school?" which leads
·7· ·me to believe that Parkland was only done with a
·8· ·firearm.
·9· · · · · · I'm just going to try to peruse through.
10· · · · · · THE COURT:· While you're looking, let me ask:
11· ·Now you've referenced a podcast.· Are you referring to
12· ·Mr. Casarez being the host or speaking himself on a
13· ·podcast?
14· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
15· · · · · · THE COURT:· And in those podcasts,
16· ·Mr. Casarez, you say, makes representations about
17· ·violence in South Carolina that this man Dylann Roof
18· ·engaged in?
19· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
20· · · · · · THE COURT:· And say again what specifically
21· ·Mr. Casarez says on the podcast in reference to the
22· ·violence in South Carolina.
23· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· He talked very specifically
24· ·about what Dylann Roof did in killing those nine people
25· ·was the correct answer and that more people need to do
26· ·it.· He talked about -- and I'm just trying to go
27· ·through things, Your Honor.· I apologize.
28· · · · · · THE COURT:· Well, recall that my question to
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 31

·1· ·you is a specific representation or utterance where
·2· ·Mr. Casarez represents that he would harm someone with
·3· ·a firearm.
·4· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· He said he would like to.

I

·5· ·just read that part about Parkland.· That was a direct
·6· ·quote from Casarez, about he would like to follow in
·7· ·what they did at Parkland.
·8· · · · · · He also said:· We need more school shooters,
·9· ·and they need to target heavily on to the Jewish
10· ·schools like Broward County, and more and more and
11· ·more.
12· · · · · · He also said 14/88, which is in reference to
13· ·the 14 words of the Mein Kampf, and the 88 responding
14· ·to HH in the alphabet, which is the Heil Hitler.· He
15· ·says:· I encourage school shooters on the air right
16· ·now.
17· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment, Sergeant,
18· ·because none of this is in the petition, correct?· No
19· ·reference to this podcast or any of these statements
20· ·attributable that you're telling me today that are
21· ·attributed to Mr. Casarez are in the petition, correct?
22· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Correct.· The only thing I
23· ·have listed is that he wanted to get an 80 percent
24· ·lower AR and that -- yeah, that's about it in the
25· ·petition, Your Honor.
26· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· One moment.
27· · · · · · Mr. Donato, have you been able to hear all
28· ·that has been said?
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 32

·1· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes, Your Honor.
·2· · · · · · THE COURT:· Here's what I'm thinking,
·3· ·Mr. Donato, because I'm already about 20 minutes
·4· ·overdue for another hearing I was supposed to have at
·5· ·ten o'clock.· I don't think we can finish this today.
·6· ·And, Mr. Donato, I'm thinking that you and your client
·7· ·or you, your client, and his father are going to have
·8· ·to come down here to the courtroom.
·9· · · · · · And, Sergeant, I'm thinking the same.
10· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, we would object to
11· ·any further continuance.· This was the time and date
12· ·for the petitioner to come forward with clear and
13· ·convincing evidence.· They clearly have not today.
14· · · · · · There was no crime committed, no threat, no
15· ·acts of violence, no past acts of violence in
16· ·Mr. Casarez's history.· I mean, all the factors that
17· ·are delineated in 18148, none of those have been met
18· ·today.· We would ask that the Court rule in our favor.
19· ·I mean, there has been no threats, no linkage
20· ·whatsoever between Vic Mackey and Mr. Casarez.
21· · · · · · The officer talks about the Anonymous Comrade
22· ·Collective.· He has no idea who that is, what they've
23· ·done, how they've done it.· There's no independent
24· ·investigation by him or any member of his department.
25· · · · · · We believe that the petitioner has not met
26· ·their burden today, and we would ask that the Court
27· ·rule in our favor.
28· · · · · · THE COURT:· I appreciate your statement,
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 33

·1· ·Mr. Donato.
·2· · · · · · Sergeant, do you have a copy, a transcript of
·3· ·the statements that you are telling me are part of this
·4· ·podcast?
·5· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor, I do.
·6· · · · · · THE COURT:· So, Mr. Donato, I appreciate your
·7· ·objections and your zealous representation of your
·8· ·client, but as I've told you or was beginning to say,
·9· ·there's much more than what is in the petition.· And
10· ·you have now heard, Mr. Donato, and your client has
11· ·heard, much more than is in this petition.
12· · · · · · And I intend to give the sergeant and the
13· ·sheriff's department every opportunity to substantiate
14· ·their claims as to why your client should be restrained
15· ·from having firearms, and I also intend to give you,
16· ·Mr. Donato, and your client every opportunity to be
17· ·heard and rebut or refute or put on whatever type of
18· ·evidence you want.
19· · · · · · And it's not going to happen today, because as
20· ·I'm telling you, this court calendar this morning does
21· ·not accommodate the time necessary, due to the
22· ·technical challenges we've had, due to the fact I do
23· ·have another matter in a large litigation surrounding
24· ·the state of the Sacramento County jails and Covid
25· ·conditions in the jails that I'm supposed to have heard
26· ·at ten o'clock and that everyone is waiting for me to
27· ·turn my attention to that.
28· · · · · · So, Mr. Donato, what day is convenient for you
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 34

·1· ·and your client -- and I'm going to ask the sergeant
·2· ·the same thing -- to come down here to department 41?
·3· ·Mr. Donato?
·4· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Your Honor, I would ask to be
·5· ·able to appear on behalf of my client.· Because the
·6· ·media will be present and my client's family -- I would
·7· ·ask for 1:30 on the 21st, please.
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· What day is the 21st?
·9· · · · · · THE CLERK:· That's a Friday, Your Honor, and
10· ·we already have a resentencing at 1:30.
11· · · · · · THE COURT:· How about later, beyond 1:30?
12· · · · · · THE CLERK:· We can do three o'clock.
13· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Actually, I'm also available at
14· ·1:30 on the 20th, the day before.· That's my first
15· ·availability.
16· · · · · · THE CLERK:· That's another resentencing we
17· ·have.· What about the 19th at 1:30?
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· What's the matter on the 20th?
19· · · · · · THE CLERK:· It's a status conference on
20· ·"People v. Camacho."
21· · · · · · THE COURT:· How about two o'clock on Thursday?
22· · · · · · THE CLERK:· That's the status conference on
23· ·the JCCP case.
24· · · · · · We can do 11 a.m. on the 21st.
25· · · · · · THE COURT:· 11 a.m. on the 21st, the clerk
26· ·says.
27· · · · · · Sergeant, what's your general availability at
28· ·the end of next week?
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 35

·1· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Your Honor, I can be
·2· ·flexible to appease the Court.
·3· · · · · · THE COURT:· How about Wednesday, the 19th?
·4· ·We're pretty wide open, Mr. Donato, on Wednesday.
·5· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· I'm not available the 17th, 18th,
·6· ·or 19th at all.· I apologize.
·7· · · · · · THE COURT:· Thursday, the 20th, in the
·8· ·morning, Madam Clerk, I don't see anything on our
·9· ·calendar.
10· · · · · · THE CLERK:· Thursdays is our GVRO calendar.
11· · · · · · THE COURT:· Can we do 10 a.m. on Thursday, the
12· ·20th, Mr. Donato?
13· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Yes, Your Honor.
14· · · · · · THE COURT:· Okay.· That works.
15· · · · · · Sergeant, are you good Thursday, August 20, at
16· ·10 a.m.?
17· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Yes, Your Honor.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· I apologize to you,
19· ·Sergeant, to you, Mr. Donato, and to your client,
20· ·Mr. Casarez, that we don't have enough time today to
21· ·finish this, but this is a serious matter, and I intend
22· ·to, as I've said, Mr. Donato, afford your client every
23· ·due-process -- substantive due-process right that he
24· ·has, particularly with his -- with respect to his First
25· ·and Second Amendment rights, and certainly also
26· ·anything that the sergeant has that the Court needs to
27· ·consider with respect to the safety of the community.
28· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· May I make a request that
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 36

·1· ·Sergeant Grgich be ordered to produce to the Court and
·2· ·myself, by the close of business tomorrow, what he
·3· ·intends to introduce against Mr. Casarez at the hearing
·4· ·on the 20th?
·5· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sergeant, I don't intend to make
·6· ·any orders forcing your department to produce anything,
·7· ·but what is your response to the lawyer's request as a
·8· ·courtesy?
·9· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Your Honor, as a courtesy, I
10· ·can help with that.· It would probably have to be the
11· ·18th.· I'm going out of town tomorrow.
12· · · · · · THE COURT:· I'm sorry.· You're saying you
13· ·could make certain information available to Mr. Donato
14· ·when?
15· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· By the 18th, Your Honor.
16· ·I'm heading out of town, actually.
17· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· So, Mr. Donato, you
18· ·have the sergeant's e-mail address, I think.· Did you
19· ·hear it when it was stated earlier?
20· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· No.· May I have it again?
21· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sergeant, do you have any
22· ·objection sharing your e-mail address with this lawyer?
23· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· I would prefer to go through
24· ·our legal counsel, Your Honor, but in the spirit of
25· ·helping everything out, I will give this.
26· · · · · · Are you ready, Mr. Donato?
27· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· I am.
28· · · · · · What legal counsel should I be -- what legal
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

YVer1f

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 37

·1· ·counsel are you talking about?
·2· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· Well, I'm just going to let
·3· ·our County counsel know, sir.
·4· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· Please let me know when -- all
·5· ·right.· What's your e-mail?
·6· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· It is
·7· ·n-g-r-g-i-c-h@s-a-c-s-h-e-r-i-f-f.com.
·8· · · · · · THE COURT:· Sergeant, thank you for that
·9· ·courtesy.· And I'm ordering you, Sergeant, to be here
10· ·August 20 at 10 a.m. in department 41.
11· · · · · · I can't order you or your client, Mr. Donato,
12· ·but that's the time and place of the hearing, August
13· ·20, 10 a.m., department 41.
14· · · · · · The previous order of Judge Roman will remain
15· ·in place until further order of the court.
16· · · · · · Mr. Donato, anything more this morning, sir?
17· · · · · · MR. DONATO:· No.
18· · · · · · THE COURT:· Thank you for your courtesy and
19· ·patience this morning, Mr. Donato.
20· · · · · · Sergeant, anything more this morning, sir?
21· · · · · · SERGEANT GRGICH:· No, Your Honor.· Thank you
22· ·very much.
23· · · · · · THE COURT:· All right.· Thank you for your
24· ·patience and courtesy.· You're both excused.· Have a
25· ·good day.
26· · · · · · · · · ·(Proceedings concluded.)
27
28
Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM

 SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE vs ANDREW RICHARD CASAREZ,
34-2020-70007786
August 13, 2020

Page 38

·1· · · · ·CERTIFICATE OF CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER
·2
·3· ·STATE OF CALIFORNIA,· · ·)
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ) ss.
·4· ·COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO· · ·)
·5
·6· · · · · · I, Elizabeth Teklinsky, hereby certify that I
·7· ·am a Certified Shorthand Reporter and that I recorded
·8· ·verbatim in stenographic writing the proceedings had on
·9· ·THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2020, in the matter of SACRAMENTO
10· ·COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, Petitioner, versus ANDREW
11· ·RICHARD CASAREZ, Respondent, Case Number
12· ·34-2020-70007786, completely and correctly to the best
13· ·of my ability; that I have caused said stenographic
14· ·notes to be transcribed into typewriting, and the
15· ·foregoing pages 1 through 37 constitute a complete and
16· ·accurate transcript of said stenographic notes taken at
17· ·the above-mentioned proceedings.
18
19· ·Dated:· THURSDAY, AUGUST 13, 2020
20
21
22
23· · · · · · · · · · · · · _____________________________
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ELIZABETH TEKLINSKY
24· · · · · · · · · · · · · CSR NO. 7895
25· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---o0o--26
27
28

Superior Court of the State of California
County of Sacramento

08-18-2020 9:49AM