HORACE LANGFORD JR. / PVT The site of David Cleveland's Valley Homes is virtually desolate now with lawyers apparently determining its future behind very tightly closed doors. Advertisement

David Cleveland, who was involved in a car accident that resulted in the death of Jeremy Moon on Thanksgiving Day of last year, was denied a writ of habeas corpus last Wednesday.

Cleveland appeared in Fifth District Court for a hearing on the writ last Monday.

Patrick E. McDonald, one of Cleveland's many defense lawyers, argued in court that two declarations by lab technicians who analyzed Cleveland's blood and urine samples should not have been allowed as evidence in Cleveland's preliminary hearing.

One declaration was by Michael Stypa, the forensic technician who analyzed Cleveland's blood after the accident.

McDonald told the court that his statement should not have been admitted preliminary because Stypa failed to show he was qualified as an expert witness, and as such the declaration violated Nevada statutes that outline the requirements for lab evidence.

According to McDonald, Stypa was required to show that he had testified in a district court at some other point.

Kirk Vitto, prosecuting for the state, responded that the declaration was "simply a non-issue at so many levels."

Since there is no explicit, formal way of deeming a person as an expert witness, Vitto said that "Stypa's credibility is simply not assailable."

In addition, the deputy district attorney pointed out that Cleveland had a right to have his own experts analyze the lab results, but eight months after the accident had yet to do so.

"They are trying to capitalize on a legal loophole that they perceive and are trying to drive a black Jeep through," Vitto said, referring to the vehicle Cleveland was driving at the time of the accident.

Furthermore, the prosecutor argued that even without Stypa's declaration, the state had a large amount of evidence showing that Cleveland had cocaine and other drugs in his system at the time of the accident.

Vitto was referring in part to the second declaration the defense took issue on, a urine analysis conducted by Minoru Aoki.

According to McDonald, Aoki failed to include specific information in his declaration, such as whether or not he had initialized the samples, and so his declaration should not have been admitted either.

The prosecutor pointed out that in both samples the amount of cocaine and cocaine metabolite far exceeded the minimum amount required for the court to bind Cleveland over to trial.

"It's not like there's any threat of a mistake," Vitto said.

The defense attorney, however, maintained that there were very specific statutory requirements regarding lab test statements and testimony, and that Stypa's declaration "doesn't meet the first hurdle of the statute."

Lane, in a written decision issued two days after the hearing, ultimately agreed with the state.

The judge wrote that Aoki's declaration substantially met the statutory requirements.

Since Aoki's findings (the report said Cleveland had 26,000 nanograms per milliliter of cocaine and over 100,000 nanograms per milliliter of cocaine metabolite in his body; the required amount for both is only 150 nanograms per milliliter) were enough to send Cleveland to District Court, the question of Stypa's testimony became a moot point.