[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6111044,"mediaKeyId","2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852","parentId",2753987,"title","Judge denies dismissal in Ashbaugh case after late discovery; narrows immediate exclusions and orders GPS curfew","audioSeconds",3141,"startMs",4119000,"endMs",7260000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852&start=4119&end=7260","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852/thumbnail_4119000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6111044/Texas/Judge-denies-dismissal-in-Ashbaugh-case-after-late-discovery-narrows-immediate-exclusions-and-orders-GPS-curfew","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6111044-5dd32ea3efecbf81d9402f561f496c7b/orig.mp4?Expires=1773650917&Signature=RvlA69Nf4HE27x2ra-xEfwiKFgGbaHa0c42XgrYbqQwun2zd1txolttY-fctCUR30pUWP0mAjvqz7aLEzcMIsAM-M76y4KOiLFoU2Qfvl4tcW5uSTaFY1JbOXbB-dfscLNs-Bkuy5Mx6czVozsWazg-I0s3ncppfYEdy1vespzYwu1wvD5xKavZ6xKFKL~pDVvRTGS5dLzOalFSNQDXgZ3I3OL-iUg9c70mS5l4Oct3EyBjxHz7dPPVYvzUsuiqcTPxLY2AOv1KwtSQuhXEnqvZR4f6uf4Pro5Ca3kTCFT7I~an-OUt~d1FUrAkJoYaScbiPzUsGYOsIYyPCgbr5gQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-03-24T22:29:40Z","article","The court on March 31 heard an extensive defense motion arguing violation of defendant Tyler Ashbaugh’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial after a large tranche of discovery was produced shortly before trial. Defense counsel Nathaniel Navey asked the court to dismiss the indictment, saying the late disclosures — which he described as roughly 212 jail calls, 44 dash- or body-camera videos, 53 PDF documents including a 571‑page gunshot-residue (GSR) report and other testing — prejudiced the defendant who has been under indictment since May 22, 2022.

Assistant District Attorney Megan Galloway told the court she had taken affirmative steps to locate and turn over records that were not retained in the case file, including going to SAPD headquarters to recover videos and sending evidence to be retested when the original analyst was unavailable. Galloway said she delivered the recovered materials to defense counsel as soon as she obtained them.

Judge Stephanie Boyd declined to grant the defense motion to dismiss for speedy‑trial violation. On the record she said the constitutional right to a speedy trial is important but that dismissal is not the automatic remedy for all discovery delay claims. The court did make two immediate evidentiary rulings: the jail calls (which defense counsel says were uploaded to eDiscovery March 3, 2025) and the recently produced “punishment” materials (older-case materials newly placed in this file) are the categories the court said it is willing to exclude if the defense elects exclusion. The court did not at this hearing broadly exclude the other newly produced materials (e.g., historical cell-site data, retested firearms report or recovered body/dash cams) but left open further argument after the defense has had time to review them.

Judge Boyd also addressed logistics: she ordered the parties to agree on a GPS-tracking-with-curfew arrangement for Ashbaugh (the court and counsel agreed to an 11 p.m. curfew to accommodate late work shifts), directed counsel to estimate how long they would need to review the files, and to confer on a joint jury-trial date that works for both the defense and the state. The court said it would reconsider suppression/exclusion motions based on that schedule and would hold a pretrial hearing if the defense seeks exclusion of the punishment materials.

During the hearing Ashbaugh testified that he had been arrested on May 22, 2022, spent more than two months in custody before release, and had been under GPS monitoring since bond. He described long-term limits on employment access, loss of housing when his lease was not renewed after press coverage, and difficulty scheduling attorney visits through his GPS officer. Defense counsel emphasized those facts as part of the asserted prejudice and asked the court to consider dismissal as the only adequate remedy.

The state countered that the record shows efforts by ADAs and SAPD to locate and preserve materials; that some discovery was created or assembled mid‑case (including some retesting done after the original analyst was unavailable); and that the defense had not formally pursued a speedy‑trial demand earlier. The court balanced those factual claims, denied dismissal, and set the path for a short schedule to let the defense review the material and either move to exclude particular items or proceed to trial on an agreed date.

The court’s partial exclusions (jail calls and punishment evidence) and the tracking-with-curfew order are immediate administrative outcomes. The court said it will revisit suppression and exclusion questions after counsel sets and confirms the joint pretrial and jury-trial dates.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","MON, MARCH 24, 2025/JUDGE STEPHANIE BOYD/187TH DISTRICT COURT/AFTERNOON DOCKET","oneSentenceSummary","Judge Stephanie Boyd denied a motion to dismiss the indictment in the case of Tyler Ashbaugh despite defense claims of a speedy‑trial violation tied to late discovery; the court said it will consider excluding certain recently turned‑over items and ordered tracking with a curfew while parties set a trial date.","taxTitle","Judge Stephanie Boyd 187th District, District Court Judges, Judicial, Texas","taxId",66298,"location","Texas","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6111048,"Judge denies return of two seized firearms after pretrial diversion in 2019 drug case",498,2582000,3080000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852&start=2582&end=3080","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852/thumbnail_2582000.jpg","/articles/6111048/Texas/Judge-denies-return-of-two-seized-firearms-after-pretrial-diversion-in-2019-drug-case","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6111048-f074f271d39a2a6036ee0e3370c4c6ed/orig.mp4?Expires=1773650917&Signature=CES7d1g07ZBMR1gDXlnAVknulEh~n3hDNr5vwbnVTX86GmgvjF6wPuhAiFLDekMN0vxm0IIuvzwV6x7TF86t5oDv3EaXrZdQU7GpPTJNVNN-1mw45Fht-u~P5ivY5Da7rh3G2I1AXI8DEcWm4MKWJxJaBvau-9QdpvnCdckv1aUlnJMCTCWh-Gw1twUojPxvYO-A~Y7u9mRGvG1VQq6Y0p8YDvm5nvp4xaF5AxtlecAk8FHqV0wMGuVUf~HIQg3KH0HcfUWHEc1Z2Ghaey2nXtGSb29rVsMX2K-dJN1LyQNYUSrciGRzIK1GmMxcC2OTSYeqj6nS0QWNvE9WG~C7LA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Judge Stephanie Boyd of the 187th District Court on the record denied an amended motion to return two firearms seized in case 2019CR10379 while ordering the return of $823 and three cell phones to defendant Christopher Ryan Caballero.

The ruling followed arguments on an amended motion for return of seized property. Defense attorney Jonathan Chavez asked the court to amend an earlier order so that the U.S. currency ($823) and three cell phones now be turned over to Caballero. Assistant prosecutor Andrew Harris did not object to turning over the cash and phones. Chavez then asked for return of the weapons that had been seized in the same cause.

In explaining the decision, Judge Boyd reviewed the written pretrial diversion agreement and legal text the parties raised. The court noted that Article 18.19 uses the phrase “if there is no prosecution or conviction,” and said it lacked controlling case law to define whether entry into a pretrial diversion contract amounts to a legal prosecution. Judge Boyd said that the record showed no conviction but that the appellate courts must ultimately interpret the statute’s meaning; on that basis she denied the return of the firearms.

The court specified the items by their docket entries: item 17 — $823 — and item 18 — three cell phones — were ordered returned to Caballero; item 14 (described in the record as a Springfield Armory XD-9 9mm handgun with one magazine and 12 live rounds) and item 15 (described in the record as a Sega 7.69 millimeter rifle with one magazine and 10 live rounds) were denied return. The court also advised that language concerning return of seized weapons should be placed explicitly in any future diversion contract if parties want to preserve the right to the property.

The court’s oral ruling stressed that the dispositive legal question — whether diversion constitutes a prosecution for the purposes of Article 18.19 — is a matter for the appellate courts or the Legislature to define. The record shows Caballero was placed into and completed a pretrial diversion program under the terms of an agreement that led to dismissal of the underlying charge; the court declined to treat that procedural outcome as equivalent to a statutory finding that would require return of weapons under the statute as currently interpreted.

The court’s order remains on the docket; counsel may pursue appellate review if they choose.

","In case 2019CR10379, the court ordered return of $823 and three cell phones to Christopher Ryan Caballero but denied his amended motion to return two seized firearms, citing uncertainty whether a pretrial diversion constituted a \"prosecution\" under Article 18.19.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6111039,"Docket roundup: multiple pleas, deferred adjudications and sentences in 187th District Court",7549,3361000,10910000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852&start=3361&end=10910","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2753987-cfcd3151abf8ccd68d1bc8bd0565b852/thumbnail_3361000.jpg","/articles/6111039/Texas/Docket-roundup-multiple-pleas-deferred-adjudications-and-sentences-in-187th-District-Court","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6111039-d7d8ad5ff37c29416b1ccaff7b236b03/orig.mp4?Expires=1773650917&Signature=Z5bibD7tDhGRY-0s0fwXagPkhHMZ0WGdbc-mRnxq2k9-KMjzVL9e7sw~Kb4SDTlPWC8Cg5WneOq6jeJxlEpkQdv~q19Y~VOTIa6VymCJo23J~Fhjmye6a6~cPq3evEaeaMFlvpZzdjvkszi51dx5Iwbf889m7zoXlXxnyidgj2TsKX8C2b9HgYPfMYnLyp6KFRp-fiESCLSJTOaTnOt9FSGO9C~2PF0K2VxQogHRcNUAI1UaBczj1wi0RDKUJ0nnbov6nidg8hTNgYbfYfjQnvWYeJbnA6lXDeyWo8MROCPgZ5g8LJjmURw7P1Rq8FLMx1m6i3NNxM67nwDRHfML9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The 187th District Court resolved several cases on the docket with pleas, deferred adjudications and sentencing orders on March 31. Below are concise summaries of matters the court disposed of or reset with outcomes taken verbatim from the hearing record.

- Victoria Ballinger (possession of a controlled substance, penalty group 1, less than 1 gram): Ballinger pleaded no contest. The court accepted a plea agreement with punishment assessed at two years in a state jail facility, suspended and probated for three years; the sentence included a $2,000 fine (probated), restitution to the San Antonio Police Department for drug testing, 150 hours of community service, a TAP evaluation, and daily sober‑support meetings instead of community service hours.

- Jorge de Leon (aggravated assault with a deadly weapon): De Leon submitted an application for deferred adjudication and the court deferred a finding of guilt consistent with the defendant’s application. The written plea reflects an affirmative finding of family violence and no contact with the complainant; the written terms include that the state recommended deferred adjudication and, if revoked, the range could expose the defendant to up to 20 years.

- Tony (Salinas) Medellin (possession of a controlled substance, 4–200 grams): The court accepted a plea and deferred finding of guilt, placing Medellin on deferred adjudication for six years with TAP evaluation, a referral to felony drug court (follow TAP recommendations), daily sober‑support meetings (90 days), and 200 hours of community service/restoration (to be satisfied upon completion of parenting classes), plus regular reporting via Zoom or in person.

- Lorenzo Garcia IV (DWI, third or more): Garcia pleaded guilty; the court imposed a suspended sentence to prison (six years) with probation for six years, a $2,000 fine probated, a two‑year license suspension, ignition‑interlock requirements until further notice, an expedited TAP evaluation and daily sober‑support meetings, and 200 hours of community service (deemed satisfied by attendance at sober meetings per the court’s direction).

For other matters the court set plea‑deadline dates and short resets (examples: Jaime Escobedo’s plea deadline set for April 24; certain defendants were recalled or given brief discovery resets). In several cases the court emphasized that plea agreements and conditions — especially those touching on restitution, weapon possession, or registration requirements — are reflected in the written orders and that defendants were advised and signed written advisements on rights and waiver of appeal.

These dispositions were taken on the record and will be reflected in the clerk’s written orders.","At the March 31 docket the court accepted pleas and imposed sentences or deferred adjudication agreements in several cases, including deferred adjudication in an aggravated‑assault matter and a mix of suspended sentences and probated terms for drug and DWI cases; the court also set short follow‑ups and plea deadlines in others.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Judge denies dismissal in Ashbaugh case after late discovery; narrows immediate exclusions and orders GPS curfew

Judge denies return of two seized firearms after pretrial diversion in 2019 drug case

Docket roundup: multiple pleas, deferred adjudications and sentences in 187th District Court