A Third Judicial District Court judge last week denied an appeal filed March 9 by the Lyon County District Attorney’s Office, upholding the dismissal of a battery charge against former Fernley City Councilman Stan Lau.
In his ruling filed July 29, Judge Leon Aberasturi affirmed the order issued Feb. 27 in Canal Township Justice Court dismissing the charge against Lau on the grounds that he was not brought to trial within 60 days of his arraignment. Aberasturi ruled that there was nothing in the record indicating Lau waived his right to a speedy trial or was responsible for any of the delays in the case.
Following his arrest in August 2025, legal proceedings against Lau involved multiple court transfers and motions to dismiss over several months. Judge Derek Dreiling ultimately dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning the charge could not be refiled. District Attorney Steve Rye then filed his appeal of the dismissal on March 9.
Lau was arrested Aug. 18, 2025, after a construction worker alleged that Lau had grabbed the sunglasses off his face and punched him during a dispute over traffic control around a construction project in the area of Shadow Lane and U.S. 95A. The construction worker, Chester Patterson, signed a citizen’s arrest form, and Lau was taken into custody later the same day by sheriff’s deputies after they questioned him at his home.
On Aug. 20, 2025, Fernley City Attorney Aaron Mouritsen filed a motion to transfer the case to Canal Township Justice Court, followed by an amended motion to transfer on Aug. 27 to send the case to Walker River Justice Court.
An arraignment hearing was held Sept. 17, 2025, in Walker River Justice Court. A prosecutor was not present at that hearing, and a pretrial hearing was scheduled for Oct. 14, 2025. That hearing was continued until Nov. 13, 2025. On that date, the prosecutor and Lau’s attorney stipulated to transfer the case back to Fernley Municipal Court because the case did not meet the requirements for transfer.
On Jan. 13, Fernley Municipal Court Judge Lori Matheus, who is also the Canal Township justice of the peace, entered an order recusing herself and assigning Senior Judge Derek Dreiling to preside. Lau was arraigned in Municipal Court by Dreiling on Jan. 22 and appointed counsel.
Rye said Lau invoked his right to trial for the first time at the Jan. 22 arraignment, and a trial was scheduled for March 13.
Attorney Lauren Gorman, representing Lau, filed two motions to dismiss the case, on Jan. 30 and Feb. 16. In the Jan. 30 motion, Gorman argued the case should be dismissed on the grounds that Lau was not brought to trial within 60 days of arraignment, the delay was not attributable to the defendant and the state could not demonstrate good cause.
On Feb. 12, Rye filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss in response to the motion filed by Gorman on Jan. 30, arguing that Lau did not invoke his right to a speedy trial at the Sept. 17 arraignment in Walker River Justice Court.
In her second motion to dismiss on Feb. 16, Gorman argued that the 60-day trial right is mandatory unless it is waived by a defendant and is not something that needs to be invoked.
In issuing his ruling, Aberasturi said that because Lau was a city councilman at the time, it was appropriate for a judge other than Matheus, the Fernley Municipal Court judge, to hear the case, but he said transferring the case to another court was the wrong remedy.
“Prosecuting a sitting city council member created conflicts for the Municipal Court and the City Prosecutor under their respective legal ethics,” he said. “Transferring the matter to an unrelated court would have created an ideal solution. However, as determined below, Nevada law did not provide that option due to the limited jurisdiction of the Municipal Court.”
Aberasturi said none of the delays were caused by Lau.
“But the mistake in the big picture, frankly, I think weighs against the City, because when they knew that the proper venue was in Canal Township, nothing happened from December to almost mid-January,” the judge said. “I don’t think there’s a ton of negligence here, but what’s troubling to the Court is after it was ordered returned to Canal Township, nothing happened.”
Aberasturi said the record presented to Dreiling did not indicate why the requests for continuances were made, and court dockets did not indicate any basis for the length of time requested for the delay.
“The lack of a clear record also supports the trial court’s determination that the City of Fernley did not provide good cause to receive additional delays,” Aberasturi said.
Comment
Comments