Hours after the defense filed their response to Jose “Chille” DeCastro’s accusations that they were “playing games” in withholding discovery, Magistrate Judge Elayna J. Youchah ruled against DeCastro’s motion to compel discovery.

DeCastro had claimed in his December 22, 2023, filing that he had attempted to meet and confer with defense counsel for the Las Vegas Metro Police Department, Craig Anderson, through calling his office and direct text messages but was unable to obtain discovery. He further claimed that Anderson kept sending him the same initial disclosures “ten times” and that Anderson was essentially playing games with him.

The filing attached DeCastro’s requests for production, which asked for a large volume of data with many of the requests (home addresses of all defendants, requests for information denied to him in discovery for his criminal case including criminal histories of all possible witnesses, etc.), either out of the scope of the civil case or would be prevented from sharing due to privacy issues.

The defense responded with a filing showing that they had mailed their response to his requests for production and first supplement disclosure of witnesses and documents on November 16 and had mailed them to his preferred address. He later officially changed his address with the court to the same address, though has not changed his address on his court filings.

They further sent him a Drop Box link for documents and videos referenced in their discovery responses on December 15, 2023.

On December 21, DeCastro contacted the defense asking for an update on the written discovery process. At this time, he indicated he was having problems retrieving his mail from the new address due to “a roommate issue” and the defense provided him with a new Drop Box link containing the information he was seeking.

The defense included all relevant documents in their reply to DeCastro and included certificates of mailing and the Drop Box link for the Judge to review.

In denying DeCastro’s request, Judge Youchah found that the defense had unequivocally demonstrated that they had responded to all of DeCastro’s requests. She also chastised DeCastro, indicating that his suspicions that the defense was improperly withholding discovery were not enough to compel her to sanction the defense as he did not take the further step to back his suspicion with facts.

DeCastro’s Motion to Strike the defense’s Motion to Dismiss or alternatively give him an extension to reply to the motion to dismiss, filed on the same day as the Motion to Compel, is still outstanding with the court.