DEFENDANT #18: SERGIO TAPIA 2 #185836 (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

 

Role in People v. Michael Taylor (XNEGA111132)
Judge Sergio C. Tapia II presided over the preliminary hearing in Burbank where Mr. Michael Taylor was bound over for trial on multiple charges, including attempted murder and two counts of hit-and-run. Despite being presented with evidence that Mr. Taylor was, in part, a documented victim of a crime caught on surveillance, Tapia allowed the case to advance under asymmetrical prosecution, and did so after critical defense evidence — namely, the vehicle in question — had been destroyed without redress or judicial inquiry.

Summary of Involvement
The key procedural breach under Tapia’s jurisdiction lies in the destruction of exculpatory evidence: the vehicle involved in the incident central to the charges. According to Gay’s Towing, the vehicle was released by the Glendale Police Department and destroyed once signed over, allegedly due to unpaid storage fees. However, this occurred prior to the preliminary hearing, where evidence preservation was not only expected but constitutionally required under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of both the California and U.S. Constitutions.

Mr. Taylor’s appointed public defender at the time, Christian-Ahn Le (#216602), informed the court that no affirmative defense existed, despite video surveillance showing Taylor being victimized in the event — information that should have drastically altered the court’s review of probable cause and prosecutorial framing.

Despite this imbalance, Tapia:

• Failed to inquire into the destruction of material evidence that could have directly affected the outcome or theory of defense;
• Overlooked glaring indicators of selective prosecution, where Mr. Taylor was the sole individual charged despite multiple actors being involved in a mutual altercation;
• Bound the defendant over for trial in what amounted to a procedurally tilted preliminary hearing, with the evidentiary playing field already rigged against the accused.

The fact that Judge Tapia was later elevated to the position of Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California — a title given not by public election but by internal judicial appointment by his peers — raises further constitutional alarm: Was Tapia’s loyalty to institutional protection rewarded above his duty to individual rights? In the context of the Dossier, such a question is not rhetorical but factual, and it deserves judicial review.

Why He Is Defendant #18 in the Dossier

• Oversaw the destruction of critical exculpatory evidence without sanction, inquiry, or remedy.
• Permitted the People to proceed exclusively against the victim of a crime, creating a fundamental due process imbalance.
• Accepted and reinforced a false prosecutorial narrative, despite surveillance evidence and public defender omissions.
• Was later rewarded by internal judicial elevation, calling into question the broader culture of judicial incentives in LA County.
• Violated Equal Protection, as the legal protections afforded to similarly situated defendants were denied to Mr. Taylor.

> “A judge is to weigh justice, not silence it. But Tapia’s gavel fell on scorched ground, where evidence was discarded and fairness buried beneath advancement. In the Dossier, he is the face of pretrial collapse and institutional complicity.”