Suspect #1: BRANDON STALLINGS #263244 (The Vernon Patterson Dossier)

 

Role and Reasonable Suspicion
Brandon Stallings, a former Kern County prosecutor, is currently the Chair of the California State Bar Board of Trustees, having assumed that role in 2023. Prior to his chairmanship, he served as Vice Chair and Trustee during critical periods (2021–2023) when multiple, well-documented constitutional violations were occurring in the case of People v. Michael Bernard Taylor (Case No. XNEGA111132-01)—violations which have since gone uninvestigated and unremedied by the very institution he leads.

As Trustee Chair, Stallings is:

• Official liaison to the California Supreme Court, which appointed him.
• A structural authority over attorney discipline, oversight policy, and Bar governance.
• A central figure in the Bar’s response—or failure thereof—to formal misconduct complaints implicating attorneys, judges, and state officials involved in the Taylor case.

The basis for suspicion is not criminal, but institutional. Given the pervasive silence and refusal to investigate matters under his jurisdiction, Stallings is named here as a potential bridge figure between State Bar inaction and Judicial Council nonintervention—particularly in matters where both the Supreme Court and the Bar have mutual obligations.


Circumstantial Factors and Institutional Relevance

1. Timeline Synchronization

Stallings’s ascent to State Bar leadership directly mirrors the timeframe during which multiple constitutional grievances—documented in Exhibits and emails to the State Bar—were submitted and systematically ignored.

2. No Action Despite Mandated Duties

Despite being vested with the statutory and fiduciary authority to initiate inquiry, corrective measures, or referrals in cases of misconduct, no evidence has surfaced to indicate that Mr. Stallings directed any such action regarding:

• The unauthorized use of a PC § 730 psychological evaluation,
• Violations of attorney-client privilege,
• Ineffective assistance of counsel, and
• Ongoing due process denials in Los Angeles County.

3. Suspected Institutional Channeling

It is the Defendant’s reasonable suspicion—based on circumstantial alignment, oversight failures, and the totality of public silence—that Stallings may be functioning as a channel or agent of institutional filtration between the Bar, the Supreme Court, and the Judicial Council of California, under the direct influence or deference to Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero.

4. Theoretical Nexus to Structural Non-Accountability

As Chair of the State Bar, and with proximity to both prosecutorial and judicial communities, Mr. Stallings is in a unique position to either facilitate or frustrate constitutional enforcement. His inaction, in light of overwhelming complaint documentation, strongly implicates the possibility of coordinated systemic bias or deliberate nonintervention.

> “Where executive silence and judicial immunity conspire under color of law, the result is not oversight, but organized obstruction.”

Final Position
Brandon Stallings is not accused of criminal wrongdoing. However, the Defendant formally identifies him as a Suspect based on:

• His structural placement at the center of constitutional enforcement mechanisms,
• Documented failures to act on complaints during his leadership tenure,
• His appointment by and potential link to Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero, who herself is named in this Dossier.

Stallings’s inclusion reflects the Dossier’s commitment to naming those individuals whose institutional power, authority, or influence—whether exercised or withheld—has directly or indirectly enabled the concealment of public corruption and the suppression of constitutional redress.