13 13 13 13, 13 13 13 STATE OF NEVADA, Jeanne Lynn Winkler, Etecroni owiora| oe ae JUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA District Court Case No.: C-16-314005-1 Dept: XXV Plaintiff, vs. Justice Court Case No.: 11F02970X Defendant CERTIFICATE Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as, Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foregoing to be a full, true and correct copy of the proceedings as Thereby certify the foresoine to he a full. true and correct cony of the proceedings as THE COURT19 20 21 JUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA STATE OF NEVADA, District Court Case No Plaintiff, vs. Justice Court Case No. 11F02970X Jeanne Lynn Winkler Defendant BINDOVER and ORDER TO APPEAR An Order having been made this day by me that Jeanne Lynn Winkler be held to answer before the Eighth Judicial District Court, upon the charge(s) of THEFT (FELONY); THEFT (FELONY); THEFT (FELONY); THEFT (FELONY); EMBEZZLEMENT FROM OLDER PERSON; THEFT (FELONY); THEFT. (FELONY); THEFT (FELONY); THEFT (FELONY); EMBEZZLEMENT FROM OLDER PERSON; THE! (FELONY) committe: said Township and County, on March 15, 2006 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that said defendant is commanded to appear in the Eighth Judicial District Court, Regional Justice Center, Lower Level Arraignment Courtroom “A”, Las Vegas, Nevada on April 18, 2016 at 10:00 AM for arraignment and further proceedings on the within charge(s). Dated this 7th day of April, 2016 Yor Justice of the Peace, Las Vegas Township28 14F02970X 80177 THE STATE OF NEVADA, Plaintiff, “GEBUTEASE NO: —11F02970X sys . DEPT NO: 1 JEANNE WINKLER, aka, Jeanne Lynn Winkler #1045189, ___Defendant. CRIMINAL COMPLAINT ‘The Defendant above named having committed the crimes of THEFT (Felony - NRS 205.0832, 205.0835) and EMBEZZLEMENT, VICTIM 60 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER (Felony - NRS 205.300, 193.167), in the manner following, to-wit: That the said Defendant, on or between March 15, 2006 and October 23, 2008, at and within the County of Clark, State of Nevada, COUNT | - THEFT did, on or between April 1, 2006 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to JUANITA AND/OR JOHN THOMPSON, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attorney retained by JUANITA THOMPSON, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to JUANITA AND/OR JOHN THOMPSON, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of JUANITA AND/OR JOHN THOMPSON and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $49,221.20, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of JUANITA AND/OR JOHN THOMPSON. COUNT 2 - THEFT did, on or between October 1, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, sly, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an Wl 1 | rawppocsicoMeLnFcoMPao2=7008 DOC ] s RTSu Socwriaa 12 B 4 7 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, awful money of the United States, belonging to CAROLYN KAFANTARIS, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attorney retained by CAROLYN KAFANTARIS, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to CAROLYN KAFANTARIS, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of CAROLYN KAFANTARIS and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $2,860.52, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of CAROLYN KAFANTARIS. COUNT 3 - THEFT did, on or between November 1, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to JOY HOLLAND, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attomey retained by JOY HOLLAND, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to JOY HOLLAND, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of JOY HOLLAND and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $3,081.10, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of JOY HOLLAND. OUNT 4 - THEFT did, on or between March 15, 2006 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to ADELINE HARWICK, in the following manner, to-wit; by the Defendant, who was an attorney retained by ADELINE HARWICK, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to ADELINE HARWICK, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on PAWPDOCSICOMPLVFCOMP92\t0297001.00Cbehalf of ADELINE HARWICK and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $30,429.12, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of ADELINE HARWICK. COUNT 5 ~ EMBEZZLEMENT, VICTIM 60 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER: did, on or between March 15, 2006 and October 23, 2008, then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously embezzle personal property of a value of $250.00, or more, belonging to ADELINE HARWICK, victim 60 years of age or older, to-wit: lawful money of the United States, in the following manner, to-wit: Defendant, being then and there bailee of said lawful money of the United States, for the purpose Defendant's legal representation of ADELINE HARWICK, did appropriate or use said property in a manner or for purposes other than that for which the same was entrusted, by taking said funds from the client trust account and investing the funds in an unauthorized manner and converting same to her own use. COUNT 6 - THEFT did, on or between October 1, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to LEIGH RICHARDS-BOECKLE, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an atiomey retained by LEIGH RICHARDS-BOECKLE, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to LEIGH RICHARDS-BOECKLE, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of LEIGH RICHARDS-BOECKLE and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $8,000.00, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of LEIGH RICHARDS-BOECKLE. COUNT 7 - THEFT did, on or between November 1, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by conver fg aking an PawPDOCSICOMPLTMFCOMP}0%10297001. DOCunauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to WESAM | HEILIG, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attomey retained by WESAM HEILIG, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to WESAM HEILIG, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of WESAM HEILIG and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $5,250.00, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of WESAM HEILIG. COUNT 8 - THEFT did, on or between November 20, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having 4 value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to NATASHA OVERSTREET-GILLENWATER, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attorney retained by NATASHA OVERSTREET-GILLENWATER, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to NATASHA OVERSTREET-GILLENWATER, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of NATASHA OVERSTREET-GILLENWATER and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $3,500.00, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of NATASHA OVERSTREET- GILLENWATER. COUNT 9 - THEFT did, on or between October 31, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $250.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to PAULA SUAREZ , Clark County, Nevada, in the following manner, to-wit: by the ydant, who was an attorney retained by PAULA SUAREZ, stealing or unlawfully conttlling money PAWPDOCSICOMPLIFCOMPA.0210287001,.D0Cbelonging to PAULA SUAREZ, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of PAULA SUAREZ and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $750.00, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of PAULA SUAREZ. COUNT 10 - EMBEZZLEMENT, VICTIM 60 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER did, on or between November 30, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously embezzle personal property of a value of $250.00, or more, belonging to PAULA SUAREZ, victim 60 years of age or older, to-wit: lawful money of the United States, in the following manner, to-wit: Defendant, being then and there bailee of said lawful money of the United States, for the purpose Defendant's legal representation of PAULA SUAREZ, did appropriate or use said property in a manner or for purposes other than that for which the same was entrusted, by taking said funds from the client trust account and investing the funds in an unauthorized manner and converting same to her own use. COUNT 11 - THEFT did, on or between June 5, 2007 and October 23, 2008, then and there knowingly, feloniously, and without lawful authority, commit theft by converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or without authorization controlling property having a value of $2,500.00, or more, lawful money of the United States, belonging to THERESA BROWN, Clark County, Nevada, in the following manner, to-wit: by the Defendant, who was an attomey retained by THERESA BROWN, stealing or unlawfully controlling money belonging to THERESA BROWN, by Defendant taking funds deposited into the client trust account on behalf of THERESA BROWN and using the funds in an unauthorized manner, in the total amount of $40,000.00, thereby converting, making an unauthorized transfer of an interest in, or controlling without authorization, the money of THERESA BROWN. MW MW MW " RIN IMAGED ub PAWPBOCSICOMPLTFCOMPUN2\10297001 DOCmakes this declaration subject to the penalty 11F02970X/Ad 0906012711; 0906012708; 0906042508; 0906012712: 1004081120; 1001052203; | 1001132400; 1001131305 (TKI) All of which is contrary to the form, force and effect of Statutes in such cases made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State of Nevada. Said Complainant LVMPD EV# 0802211656; 0906022045; we PAWPDOCS\COMPLTFCOMPU 0210297001, DOCJUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP STATE VS. _WINKLER, JEANNE CASE NO. _11802970x. DATE, JUDGE OFFICERS OF COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES - HEARING CONTINUED TO. FEBRUARY 22.2011 | CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED: COUNTS 1, 2,3,4, 6,7,8,9, 11- THEFT MMK COUNTS 5, 10 - EMBEZZLEMENT, VICTIM 60 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER FEBRUARY 22,2011 | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT IT BONAVENTURE | COUNTS 1 - 4, 6~9. 11 -$3000/3000 MMK FOR D. LIPPIS COUNTS 5, 10 - $6000/6000 FEBRUARY 28, 2011 | INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT O3/07/11 7:30 A D. LIPPIS DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT *#IN CUSTODY OTHER B.RUTLEDGE,DA _| JURISDICTION** WASHOE COUNTY MMK J. GRIME, CR E. MCALOON, CLK PASSED BY COURT FOR DEFENDANT'S PRESENCE AND CONTINUED INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT NO BAIL POSTED ‘CASE RECALLED AT STATE'S REQUEST STATE VERIFIED BOND POSTED IN RENO NEVADA FUTURE COURT DATE OF 3/7/11 VACATED RETURN DATE GIVEN TO DEFENDANT STANDS FOR DEFENDANTS PRESENCE AND CONTINUED ARRAIGNMENT BOND CONTINUES 3/3/11 9:30 AM ICAL EM MARCH 11, 2011 MARCH 23, 2011 D. LIPPIS M. SCHWARTZER, DA, ‘A.CLAUS, ESQ. J. GRIME, CR E, MCALOON, CLK JUSTICE COURT RECEIVED $39,000 MAC'S BAIL BOND POSTED RECEIPT #9965794 TA INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT DEFENDANT PRESENT IN COURT DEFENDANT ADVISED OF CHARGES WAIVES READING OF COMPLAINT PRELIMINARY HEARING DATE SET BOND CONTINUES 3/3/11 9:30 AMAL O7725/11 9:00 #L MMKJUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP STATE VS. _WINKLER, JEANNE CASE NO. _11802970x. DATE, JUDGE OFFICERS OF COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES - HEARING CONTINUED TO. JULY 25, 2011 ‘TIME SET FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 12/12/11 9AM #1 D. LIPPIS DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT M, SCHWARTZER, DA. | DEFENSE INDICATES STATE IS SEEKING GRAND JURY INDICTMENT. A.CLAUS, ESQ MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING BY STATE - MOTION S. MCINTOSH, CR GRANTED, FE. MCALOON, CLK on BOND CONTINUES DECEMBER 12, 2011 | TIME SET FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 20112 AMAL D. LIPPIS DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT I. COOPER. DA MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING BY DEFENSE - MOTION ‘A. CLAUS, ESQ GRANTED, ‘S. MCINTOSH. CR PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHECK ON RESOLUTION E. MCALOON, CLK BOND CONTINUES EM DECEMBER 14.2011 | MEDIA REQUEST FOR JEANNE WINKLER FILED ON THIS DATE, JE FEBRUARY 1, 2012 | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT “OH12 SAM AT ITBONAVENTURE _| PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHEXCK ON NEGOTIATIONS FOR D. LIPPIS G. PESCI, DA BOND CONTINUES A.CLAUS, ESQ J. GRIME, CR E, MCALOON, CLK on ‘APRIL 04, 2012 D. LIPPIS. M, SCHWARTZER, DA ‘A.CLAUS, ESQ. S. MCINTOSH, CR S. PERRY. CLK OCTOBER 02, 2012 D. LIPPIS G. PESCI, DA A.CLAUS, ESQ S. MCINTOSH, CR I. BRELAND, CLK DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT MOTION BY DEFENSE FOR STATUS CHECK ON NEGOTIATIONS- MOTION GRANTED PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHECK ON NEGOTIATIONS DATE SET BOND CONTINUES DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT MOTION BY DEFENSE TO CONTINUE FOR STATUS CHECK ON RESOLUTION MOTION GRANTED BOND CONTINUES 10/02/12 8AM #l JE (04/02/13 8:00 #1 JGBJUSTICE CouRT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP STATE VS\ CASENO. DATE, JUDGE. OFFICERS OF COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES - HEARING CONTINUED TO: FERRUARY 25, S017] GRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED: “COUNTS 1,2,3,4,6.7,80, 11 THEFT MK | COUNTS §, 10 - EMBEZZLEMENT, VICTIM 60 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER: ‘DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT COUNTS 14,6 ~9, 11 - $3000/3000 MMK COUNTS 3, 10 $6000/6000 FRBRUARY 28, 2011 INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT [GOTAL 73041 1D LIPPIS | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT *#IN CUSTODY OTHER B.RUTLEDGE,DA —_ JURISDICTION** WASHOE COUNTY MMK J. GRIME, CR | PASSED BY COURT FOR DEFENDANT'S PRESENCE AND CONTINUED E.MCALOON, CLK | INITIAL ARRAIGNMENT [NO BAIL POSTED | CASE RECALLED AT STATE'S REQUEST 32H11 930 AMIC A | STATE VERIFIED BOND POSTED IN RENO NEVADA _ FUTURE COURT DATE OF 3/7/11 VACATED | RETURN DATE GIVEN TO DEFENDANT STANDS FOR DEFENDANTS | PRESENCE AND CONTINUED ARRAIGNMENT BOND CONTINUES MARGH 11, 2017 JUSTICE COURT RECEIVED $39,000 MAC’S BAIL BOND POSTED RECEIPT 3/23/11 930 AM #1 “9005794 TA MARCH, 2011 INTTIAL ARRAIGNMENT GrASIT SOOT D, LIPPIS | DEFENDANT PRESENT IN COURT. M.SCHWARTZER,DA | DEFENDANT ADVISED OF CHARGES WAIVES READING OF COMPLAINT | MMK ACLAUS, ESQ | PRELIMINARY HEARING DATE SET 5S GRIME, CR E.MCALOON, CLK. | BOND CONTINUESJUSTICE CouRT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP STATE VS. CASENO. _ DATE, JUDGE (OFFICERS OF COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES - HEARING CONTINUED TO: FLY 25, 2011 [TIME SBT FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING TART SANA D. LIPPIS | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT M.SCHWARTZER,DA | DEFENSE INDICATES STATE IS SEEKING GRAND JURY INDICTMENT A CLAUS, ESQ | MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING BY STATE ~ MOTION S.MCINTOSH,CR | GRANTED MCALOON, CLK | EM | BOND CONTINUES DECEMBER 12,2011 | TIME SET FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING 2DOW2 SAMA D. LBPIS | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT J. COOPER, DA | MOTION TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING BY DEFENSE - MOTION ‘A-CLAUS, ESQ “GRanrep S.MCINIOSH,CR PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHECK ON RESOLUTION, E MCALOON, i | BOND CONTINUES EM MEDIA REQUEST FOR JEANNE WINKLER FILED ON THIS DATE / IB FEBRUARY 1,207 DEFENDANT NOTPRESENTIN COURT Ta JTBONAVENTURE | PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHEXCK ON NEGOTIATIONS FOR D_LIPPIS : G.PESCI, DA | BOND CONTINUES A CLAUS, E5Q | J.GRIME, CR | B.MCALOON.CLK | EM ‘APRIL 04, 3012 | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT IN COURT Tous SAMA D.LIRIs MOTION BY DEFENSE FOR STATUS CHECK ON NEGOTIATIONS- MOTION 'M. SCHWARIZER.DA | GRANTED iB A CLAUS, EQ, | PASSED BY COURT FOR STATUS CHECK ON NEGOTIATIONS SMCINTOSH,CR | DATE SET 5 PERRY.CLE | | BOND CONTINUES OCTORERGD 2012 | DEFENDANT NOT PRESENT INCOURT OTIS FOOT D.LIPPIS | MOTION BY DEFENSE TO CONTINUE FOR STATUS CHECK ON RESOLUTION G.PESCL DA (MOTION GRANTED A.CLAUS, BSQ | S.MCINTOSH,CR | T'BRELAND, CLK | BOND CONTINUES sop> Justice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada cour nates Oe 41F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn 4/2/2013 8:00:00 AM Negotiations Result: Matter Continued PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustas PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Mcintosh, Shawna Court Clerk: Breland, Jourisha PROCEEDINGS: Hearings: 10/2/2013 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations Events: Continued by Stipulation of Counsel Continued for Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: brelj LVIC_Criminal_MinuteOrder 4/2/2013 3:31 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada aaa MOEA ° 41F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, _Lead Atty: T. Augustas Claus me arnt Result: Matter Heard 10/2/2013 8:00:00 AM Negotiations PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustas PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3, Prosecutor: Joseph, Lindsey Court Reporter: Grime, Joni Court Clerk: Breland, Jourisha PROCEEDINGS: _ Hearings: 4/7/2014 8:00:00 AM: Negotitions fo Events: Side Bar Conference Held Bench conference held Continued For Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: brelj LV3C_Criminal_MinuteOrder 10/2/2013 4:42 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada court nates I 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, __Lead Atty: T, Augustas Claus Jeanne Tyan 4/7/2014 8:00:00 AM Negotiations Result: Matter Heard PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustas PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3 Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Grime, Joni Court Clerk: Peterson, Brandin PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 10/17/2014 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations Events: Motion to Continue - Defense granted Continued For Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970x Prepared By: pterb LVIC_Criminal_MinuteOrder 4/10/2014 3:01 PMOnes Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada Court Minutes ORE 11F02970x ‘State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T, Augustus Claus vn Result: Matter Heard 10/17/2014 8:00:00 AM Negotiations PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Saragosa, Melissa Raman, Jay Mcintosh, Shawna Fisher, Shauna PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 6/17/2015 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations — Events: Continued by Stipulation of Counsel for Status check on negotiations - Motion Granted Continued For Negotiations Date requested by Stipulation of Counsel Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: fishers LV3C_Criminal_Minuteorder 10/17/2014 2:12 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Townsnip Clark County, Nevada cour Minutes ne 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus jeanne Tyan Resuit: Matter Heard 6/17/2015 8:00:00 AM Negotiations (Surety Bond) PARTIES Attomey Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Defendant Winkler, Jeanne Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3 Prosecutor: Raman, ay Court Reporter: Grime, Joni Court Clerk: Powers, Rissa [ PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 7/1/2015 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations Added Events: Continued For Negotiations Presence Waived Defendant's presence waived next court date Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: sori LVIC_RW_Criminal_Minuteorder 6/18/2015 10:14 AMJustice Court, Las Vegas rows Clark County, Nevada Court Minutes ENE 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus Jeanne Tynn Result: Matter Heard 7/1/2015 8:00:00 AM Negoti ns (surety bond) PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus eT Defendant Winkler, Jeanne Judgs Uppis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Jones, John Court Reporter: McIntosh, Shawna Court Clerk: Powers, Rissa PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 8/3/2015 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations Added Events: Continued For Negotiations Comment Per Defense, District Attorney Raman Is assigned to this case. Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: peterst LVIC_RW_Criminal_minuteOrder 7/242015 3:25 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada Court Minutes IMO EMT uu 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, _Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus leanne Lynn sult: Matter Heard 8/3/2015 8:00:00 AM Negotiations (surety bond) PARTIES. Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah J. Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Mcintosh, Shawna Court Clerk: Peters, Tonya PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 10/5/2015 8:00:00 AM: Status Check Added Events: Side Bar Conference Held Court Continuance Passed for status check on resolution Presence Waived Defendant's presence waived next court date Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: sorir LWIC_RW_Criminal_Minuteorcer 8/5/2015 1:04 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada cour minutes A 11F02970x__State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, _Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus Jeanne Lynn Result: Matter Heard 10/5/2015 8:00:00 AM Status Check (surety bond) PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: sudge: Lppis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Raman, ay Court Reporter: Grime, Joni Court clerk: Thomas, Veronica PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 12/7/2015 8:00:00 AM: Status Check Added Events: Comment Both parties are waiting for transcript from the State Bar possible 60 days Court Continuance Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: moors LV3C_RW_Criminal_minuteOrder 10/7/2015 1:26 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada palate INU T Lo0sa66459 11F02970X State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus jeanne Lynn Matter Heard 12/7/2015 8:00:00 AM Status Check (surety bond) PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Dickerson, Michael Court Reporter: Mcintosh, Shawna ‘Court Clerk: Thomas, Veronica PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 1/15/2016 8:00:00 AM: Status Check ‘Added Events: Status Check Resolution Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: thomv LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 12/7/2015 3:22 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada Court Minutes NT Logs037842 inkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus Result: Matter Heard 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka janne Lynn :00 AM Status Check (Surety 1/15/2016 8: Bond) PARTIES. Attomey Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judg Lppis, Deborah 3, Prosecutor: Overly, Sarah Court Reporter: Grime, Joanie Court Clerk: Espinoza, Jose PROCEEDINGS 1/29/2016 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations Added Side Bar Conference Held Continued For Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: espij LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 1/21/2016 7:08 AMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada court Minutes HMA Loooest12 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Wi Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus eeeeeee eee Result: Matter Heard 1/29/2046 8:00:00 AM Negotiations (Surety Bond) PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Pro Tempore, Judge Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Grime, Joanie Jansen, William D. Espinoza, Jose PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 2/25/2016 8:00:00 AM: Negotiations ‘Added Events: Oral Motion ‘Motion to Continue by mutual agreement. ‘Motion Granted. Continued For Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01, Case 11F02970x Prepared By: LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 2/3/2016Just _2 Court, Las Vegas TownMip Clark County, Nevada ee IAEA Looe1 89398 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus jeanne Lynn Result: Matter Heard 2/25/2016 8:00:00 AM Negotiations (Surety Bond) PARTIES Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Grime, Joanie Court Clerk: Howard, Erika PROCEEDINGS Hearings: 3/10/2016 8:00:00 AM Negotiations Added Events: Side Bar Conference Held Continued For Negotiations Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: howarde LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 2/26/2016 6:33 AMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada Court Minutes NMA Loo6249411 11F02970x State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus jeanne Lynn Result: Matter Heard 00 AM Negotiations (Surety 3/10/2016 8:00: Bond) PARTIES ‘Attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Grime, Joanie Court Clerk: Howard, Erika PROCEEDINGS: Hearings: 4/7/2016 8:00:00 AM: status Check Fee] Events: Motion to Continue - Defense Granted Waiver Written Waiver of Preliminary Hearing to be resubmitted by Counsel. Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: howarde LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 3/10/2016 1:40 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada ee HNN 11F02970X State of Nevada vs Winkler, Jeanne Lynn aka Winkler, Lead Atty: T. Augustus Claus icine yn SSFSSSsSSSSSSSSSSFSFSFsFFshhh or pound Over Jeanne Lynn Result: Bound Over 4/7/2016 8:00:00 AM Status Check (Surety Bond) PARTIES attorney Claus, T. Augustus PRESENT: Judge: Lippis, Deborah 3. Prosecutor: Raman, Jay Court Reporter: Grime, Joanie Court Clerk: Howard, Erika PROCEEDINGS Events: Waiver Waiver of Appearance at Preliminary Hearing and Unconditionally Waive Preliminary Hearing filed in open court. Unconditional Bind Over to District Court Review Date: 4/8/2016 Defendant unconditionally waives right to Preliminary Hearing. Defendant Bound Over to District Court as Charged. Defendant to Appear in the Lower Level Arraignment Courtroom A. Di Court Appearance Date Set Apr 18 2016 10:00AM: Surety Bond Case Closed - Bound Over Surety Bond Ordered Transferred Bonds: ‘Surety - AUL2072397 Bond Amount: $39,000.00 PleaDisp: 001: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court 002: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court 003: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court (004: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court 005: EMBEZZLEMENT FROM OLDER PERSON Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court (006: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court 007: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 4/7/2016 1: 0 PMJustice Court, Las Vegas Township Clark County, Nevada 008: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court (009: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court (010: EMBEZZLEMENT FROM OLDER PERSON Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court 014: THEFT (FELONY) Disposition: Waiver of Preliminary Hearing - Bound Over to District Court Las Vegas Justice Court: Department 01 Case 11F02970X Prepared By: howarde LVIC_RW_Criminal_MinuteOrder 4/7/2016 12:30 PMJUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CLARK COUNTY NEVADA THE STATE OF NEVADA CASE NO: 11F02970x PLAINTIFF EPT. NO: 1 vs. AGENCY: MSTRO- INTELLIGENCE WINKLER, JEANNE ID¥ 01045189 ARREST WARRANT DEPENDANT pean nerees THE STATE OF NEVADA, TO: ANY SHERIFF, CONSTABLE, MARSHALL, POLICEMAN, OR PEACE OFFICER IN THIS STATE: A COMPLAINT AND AN AFFIDAVIT UPON OATH HAS THIS DAY BEEN LAID BEFORE ME ACCUSING WINKLER, JEANNE, OF THE CRIME(S): counts CHARGE BAIL: CASH SURETY PROPERTY 9 THEFT (FELONY) 27,000.00 27,000.00 2 EMBEZZLEMENT PROM OLDE 12,000.00 12,000.00 YOU ARE, THEREFORE, COMMANDED FORTHWITH TO ARREST THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT AND BRING EER BEFORE ME AT MY OFFICE IN LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP, COUNTY OF CLARK, STATE OF NEVADA, OR IN MY ABSENCE OR INABILITY TO ACT, BEFORE THE NEAREST AND MOST ACCESSIBLE MAGISTRATE IN THIS COUNTY. THIS WARRANT MAY BE SERVED AT ANY HOUR OF THE DAY OR NIGHT. GIVEN UNDER My HAND THIS 22ND DAY dp redRagy 2ap WUSTICE OF THE PEACE IN AND FOR SATO TOWNSHIP JOB M BONAVENTURE SHERIFF'S RETURN 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT I RECEIVED THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING WARRANT ON THE DAY OF AND SERVED THE SAME BY ARRESTING AND BRINGING DEFENDAN' . INTO COU TH DAY OF : 1F02870X DOUGLAS C. GILLESPIE, SHERIFF, CLARK COUNTY, NEV aCASE NO: 11F02970x JUDGE JOB M BONAVENTURE oRT DOB 07121967 RAC W SEX P VRI SOC $23299190 HGT 507 DEPARTMENT — JCRT1 AGENCY: METRO- INTELLIGENCE NAME WINKLER, JEANNE sID WT 150 HAT RED EYE HAZ ~WARRANT-~ cor AoC CCN 11F02970x MIS 00305 0802211656 OFC F FTF WNM WINKLER, guy DSO 39,000.00 JEANNE TRE DOW 02222021 BAIL SUPPLEMENTAL-- WINKLER, JEANNE LYNN SUBMITTING OFFICER ID#:MP7042 counts CHARGE 9 THEFT (FELONY) NAME: DOWNING, JAMES J 2 EMBEZZLEMENT FROM OLDER PERSON teeter CON HAI FIDENTIAL theeseJUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP Y ‘ADA THE STATE OF NEVADA, Plaintiff, CASE NO: 11F02970X VS DEPT NO: 1 JEANNE WINKLER, aka, Jeanne Lynn Winkler #1045189, REQUEST FOR ARREST WARRANT Defendant COMES NOW, DAVID ROGER, District Attorney, and requests that a Warrant of Arrest be issued for the above named Defendant pursuant to NRS 171.106 and the Complaint and/or Affidavit(s) attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. DAVID ROGER DISTRICT ATTORNEY Nevada Bar #002781 (ods HALRB 000 code OX 5 No Sooo and) LAS a TOWNSH PROBABLE CAUSE FOUND: Aw Bal BA 000 PROBABLE CAUSE NOT FOUND: “FaF02970x AJustice coufti{ LaE\Bpas TownsHP ‘THE STATE OF NEVADA, Plaintiff, 11F02970X vs. JEANNE WINKLER, aka, Jeanne Lynn Winkier, #1045189, Defendant. FILED UNDER SEAL All materials, except the Criminal Complaint, are being filed under seal in obedience to Section 239B.030 of the Nevada Revised Statute and pursuant to the Order issued by the Honorable Douglas E, Smith, signed December 28, 2006. iF0270K 1779 i aLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION. OF, WARRANT/SUMMONS (RAS. tt os) . 53 @ (URS. amended 07/13/93) fea |i PA I 080221-1656 STATE OF NEVADA 80178 )ss: “LVMPDID#1045769 a0 ; n ooewanton | | il MN | | | J. Downing P#7042, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: i That he is a police officer with the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, being so employed for a period of ten years, assigned to investigate the crime(s) of Embezzlement and Embezzlement with a Victim 60 years of age or older committed on or about March 7, 2008, which investigation has developed WINKLER, JEANNE as the perpetrator thereof. ‘THAT DECLARANT DEVELOPED THE FOLLOWING FACTS IN THE COURSE OF THE INVESTIGATION OF SAID CRIME TO wit: On March 17, 2009, LVMPD Criminal Intelligence Section through a confidential source and other investigated means became aware that Jeanne Winkler, a Las Vegas Attomey, was possible stealing money from her clients. A computer search showed the Las Vegas Review Journal released several ticles outlining findings into Winkler's business practices and her wrongdoings. Acomputer search also howed a possible victim Juanita Thompson filed a LVMPD Police Report on February 21, 2008 (Event ‘Number 08021-1656) against Jeanne Winkler but the investigation showed to be a civil matter at that time. Detectives contacted the State Bar of Nevada and found that Jeanne Winkler, a Las Vegas Attorney at Law, Bar Number 7215, and former lawyer from Jeanne Winkler Law Firm and Associates was suspended by the Nevada Supreme Court on March, 7 2008 for allegedly misappropriating client funds from her attorney-client trust account. It was found that the State Bar of Nevada conducted an investigation and found Winkler to be in violation of numerous rules governed by the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct (R.P.C.} to include “Safekeeping of Property’ which governs clients funds. An investigation by the State Bar of Nevada showed Winkler misappropriated monies from clients whom entrusted Winkler’s Law Firm with those funds. Winkler’s Law Firm employed two other associate lawyers, Tracey Itts and Louis Schneider whom represented clients and collected retainer fees for the firm. As associate lawyers, Itts and Schneider would turn over client fees to Winkler to be deposited into her attorney-client trust account, Neither Itts or Schneider had access and/or were signatories on Winkler's attorney-client trust account. On January 2, 2008, Itts and Schneider notified Dawn Reid, a State Bar of Nevada Investigator, that the firm was experiencing financial difficulties. tts and Schneider notified the Bar because they were @eorcerned about their clients retainers of approximate $80,000 not being in Winkler’s attorney-client trust ‘account. Itts and Schneider advised they requested Winkler to provide an accounting record of their clients retainers and she refused. The State Bar of Nevada notified Winkler who scheduled an appointment with Bar Counsel Rob W. Bare.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 2 EVENT: 08021-1656 _ On February 1, 2008, Bar Counsel/Rob Bare and State Bar Investigator/Dawn Reid had a meeting with Jeanne Winkler and her attorney Rebecca Miller. During the meeting, Winkler admitted to misappropriating clients monies from her attorney-client trust account to fund an investment that was going to yield her enormous returns. Winkler advised the investment didn't pay off. Winkler admitted to misappropriating funds from her attorney-client trust account from January or February 2007 through the end of January of 2008. Winkler explained the misappropriated funds were used for the investment while other misappropriated funds were used for office expenses. On March 7, 2008, in the Supreme Court of the State of Nevada in the matter of the discipline of Jeanne Winkler, Esq., the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board filed an order of temporary suspension against Jeanne Winkler preventing her from practicing law pending the resolution of formal disciplinary proceedings against her. The order concluded that Winkler posed a substantial threat of serious harm to the public, and that her immediate temporary suspension was warranted. On March 4, 2009, the State Bar of Nevada, Souther Nevada Disciplinary Board filed a Complaint against Jeanne Winkler. The Complaint outlined sixteen (16) counts against Winkler and required Winkler to respond or answer the complaint within twenty (20) days of service of the complaint ‘On April 10, 2009, Jeanne Winkler, by and through her counsel of record, Michael J. Warhola, Esq., filed her answers to the State Bar of Nevada's formal complaint. The document was signed by Michael J. Warhola, Jeanne L. Winkler and notarized by Ana Flores, Notary Public, State of Nevada. A certificate of service was signed by Michael J. Warhola that he served Winkler's verified answers to the State Bar of Nevada's formal complaint to Rob W. Bare. Winkler, in her answers, admits to many of the complaints filed against her by the State Bar of Nevada. On March 2, 2010 and March 29, 2010, the State Bar of Nevada, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board, held hearings into the matter of the State Bar of Nevada (Complainant) vs. Jeanne Winkler (Respondent). During the hearings, Winkler accompanied by her attorney, Michael J. Warhola, Esq., gave full admissions in taking her clients monies and the circumstances surrounding the reasons. The hearings were transcribed and reported by Gina J, Mendez, CCR No. 787. On May 10, 2010, the State Bar of Nevada, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board, filed their Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendations concerning the State Bar of Nevada vs. Jeanne Winkler. In summary, the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board upon completing their inquiry unanimously recommended to the Supreme Court of Nevada that Jeanne Winkler be disbarred from the practice of law. During the investigation, many of Winkler's victims only became aware that Winkler was possibly stealing money from her attorney-client account after reading articles posted in the Las Vegas Review journal and/or learning of Winkler’s suspension which took place on March 7, 2008. It was found that any of Winkler's victims were given advice to file complaints with the State Bar of Nevada and not LVMPD. Victims then filed complaints with the State Bar and only at the conclusion of their investigation, victims learned that Winkler did in fact steal their money. The Client Security Fund of the State Bar of Nevada, at the conclusion of their investigation, refunded money to many of Winkler's victims.US VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 3 EVENT: __080221-1656 LVMPD Detectives served the State Bar of Nevada, Legal Counsel and Client Security Fund, with Grand Jury Subpoenas and learned of the victims who filed complaints with the State Bar of Nevada. Detectives contacted those victims provided by the State Bar and found 10 victims who wanted to move forward and file criminal complaints against Winkler. LVMPD Detectives also served Grand Jury Subpoenas to Bank of Nevada where Winkler’s bank ‘statements, deposit tickets and items, and cancelled checks were located. LVMPD Financial Analyst, Nancy P. Sampson conducted a financial analysis for Winkier's accounts in connection with Winkier's Law Firm. Sampson completed her analysis after analyzing Winkler's Money Market Account, Trust Account, Operating Account, and records received from various clients. Details Detectives spoke with Dawn Reid, a Paralegal/Investigator for the Office of Bar Counsel of the State Bar of Nevada and who works under the direct supervision of Bar Counsel Rob W. Bare. Reid stated she investigated numerous complaints filed by clients of Attorney Jeanne Winkler. ‘On or about November 27, 2007, Reid was asked to investigate Jeanne Winkler and alleged attorney- lient trust account allegations. Reid’s investigation started when the State Bar of Nevada received an \verdraft notice from Winkler’s bank, Bank of Nevada, reference a check in the amount of $600.52 made payable to Health Plan of Nevada for a lien on one of Winkler’s clients. The State Bar sent a copy of the notice to Winkler and requested a response. On January 2, 2008, Reid was contacted by two of Winkler's associate lawyers, Louis Schneider and Tracey Itts who informed her that Winkler was experiencing financial difficulties. Winkler’s associates informed Reid that payroll checks were bouncing and the business’ power was shut off. Winklers associates were concerned because they deposited all their clients monies into Winkler's attorney-client trust account and were in fear the money wasn't there. Inreturn, the Nevada State Bar subpoenaed Winkler's attorney-client trust account bank records from the Bank of Nevada, collected bank records from Winkler directly, and interviewed Winkler on several occasions. The State Bar of Nevada found Winkler to have misappropriated over $200,000 of clients monies by either not paying on agreed loans with clients and/or taking clients monies from her trust account without the clients permission. On March 4, 2009, the Nevada State Bar filed 16 complaints against Winkler and found Jeanne Winkler to be in violation of numerous Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct (R.P.C). Rule 1.15, Safekeeping Property, was one of the numerous rules Winkler was in violation of governing client's funds. Nevada Rule 1.15 states the following @ute 1.15. Safekeeping Property 1. (a) A lawyer shall hold funds or other property of clients or third persons that is in a lawyer's possession in connection with a representation separate from the lawyer's own property. AllLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 4 EVENT: _080221-1656 funds received or held for the benefit of clients by a lawyer or firm, including advances for costs and expenses, shall be deposited in one or more identifiable bank accounts designated as a trust account maintained in the state where the lawyer's office is situated, or elsewhere with the consent of the client or third person. Other property in which clients or third persons hold an interest shail be identified as such and appropriately safeguarded. Complete records of such account funds and other property shall be kept by the lawyer and shall be preserved for a period of seven years after termination of the representation. (b) A lawyer may deposit the lawyer's own funds in a client trust account for the sole purpose of paying bank service charges on that account, but only in an amount necessary for that purpose. (©) A lawyer shall deposit into a client trust account legal fees and expenses that have been aid in advance, to be withdrawn by the lawyer only as fees are earned or expenses incurred (a) Upon receiving funds or other property in which a client or third person has an interest, a lawyer shall promptly notify the client or third person. Except as stated in this Rule or otherwise permitted by law or by agreement with the client, a lawyer shall promptly deliver to the client or third person any funds or other property that the client or third person is entitled to receive and, upon request by the client or third person, shall promptly render a full accounting regarding ‘such property. {e) When in the course of representation a lawyer is in possession of funds or other property in which two or more persons (one of whom may be the lawyer) claim interests, the property shall be kept separate by the lawyer until the dispute is resolved. The lawyer shall promptly distribute all portions of the funds or other property as to which the interests are not in dispute [Added; effective May 1, 2006.] On March 2, 2010, and March 29, 2010, the State Bar of Nevada, Souther Nevada Disciplinary Board conducted formal hearings into the matters relating to the State Bar of Nevada (Complainant) vs. Jeanne Winkler (Respondent). On September 1, 2010, Detectives received transcripts from the State Bar of Nevada documenting these hearings. The Southern of Nevada Disciplinary Board formal hearing panel consisted of Chair Thomas Ryan, Esq., Robert Schumacher, Esq., Larry Lamoreux, Esq., and Carrie Taylor, who was a lay member. The parties present at the hearing were Bar Counsel Rob W. Bare who represented the State Bar of Nevada and Paralegal/Investigator Dawn Reid, CLA. Jeanne Winkler appeared at the hearing and was represented by Michael J. Warhola, Esq. Court reporter Gina J. Mendez, CCR No. 787 recorded and transcribed the proceedings. During the proceedings, Jeanne Winkler, Esq. testified on her own behalf and was sworn to tell 1e truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Winkler was questioned by Mr. Warhola, Mr. Bare, Ms. Taylor, Mr. Lamoreux, and Mr. Schumacher.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page e EVENT: 080221-1656__ The following is a summary and/or quoted testimony given by Winkler during the State Bar of Nevada, Southern of Nevada Disciplinary Board formal hearing proceedings. Winkler, in summary, gave the following testimony: Winkler was first questioned by Mr. Warhola and gave a brief overview of her personal and professional life. Winkler explained she was currently a member of the State Bar of Nevada but was suspended from practicing law. Winkler outlined her history as an attorney and provided a chain of events which lead up to the point where she misappropriated funds from her attorney-client trust account. Winkler advised she graduated from Whittier Law Schoo! in 1997 and passed the Nevada State Bar in 1999. Winkler then married her husband Michael Metzger in September 2000 and had two children together, Gage and Sienna. In 2001, Winkler and her husband bought an electrical business, Direct Electric. Metzger was responsible for running field operations while Winkler kept the books, paid the vendors, did the billing, everything that an office manager or office person would do. Winkler also worked full time as an attorney for Carmine Colucci. Direct Electric grew from having one employee in 2001 to 35 electricians. During the growth of Direct Electric, Winkler hired an employee by the name of Kelly eib who assisted her with office duties. Winkler came to know Kelly Geib before she hired her cause she represented Geib on a theft case. Winkler explained Geib was charged with numerous counts of theft and the end result was Geib received 5 years probation and had to pay restitution. Winkler explained she and Geib became friends during the time she was representing Geib. Winkler then discussed hiring Geib with her husband and they both decided Geib deserved a second chance. During the following year, Winkier explained life for her became really busy where she was burning the candle at both ends. Winkler explained things became difficult because she was pregnant with her first child and continued to keep up with her responsibilities. Winkler was trying to keep up with the daily office duties for Direct Electric which was an ever growing business while still running the family law portion for Carmine Colucci Law Office and on top of it, she was also traveling to Kingman, Arizona on an average of three to four days a week where she was taking care of two PD contracts. On December 17, 2002, Winkler gave birth to her child who was very ill and underwent surgery 4 weeks later. In February of 2002, Winkler voluntarily left Mr, Colucc's office and opened her own Law Practice. Winkler opened her law firm with only her and a paralegal and within two months the law office became so busy they couldn't keep up. Winkler attempted to maintain both businesses and finally moved Direct Electric's office into her law office where she wouldn't have to travel between the two offices. Winkler explained eventually she couldn't give the necessary time to both business so she gave Geib the office duties for Direct Electric. @ Winkler continued and explained, on December 31, 2003, her and her husband found out Geib lad been stealing money from Direct Electric since August 2002. Winkler stated she reported the theft to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. Winkler advised she worked with Metro for a little over a year as well as a forensic accountant and were able to determine that Geib had taken about $350,00 from Direct Electric.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS, Pageé EVEN 08021-1656 At the conclusion, Metro was able to trace $89,000 to $90,000 that Geib misappropriated from Direct Electric. There was a lot more money stolen but Metro was unable to trace it through Gieb's accounts and the DA's office couldn't charge her with stealing the full amount of $369,350 because they couldn't prove it. Winkler advised that Geib finally went to prison as a result of the theft committed by Geib. Winkler expiained the theft devastated her and her husband financially. Winkler and her husband tapped out every conceivable penny they could get their hands on. Winkler said they took loans, ‘equity loans on their homes, as well as, the rental home they owned at that time, and raw land that they owned in Sandy Valley. Winkler advised, as she was dealing with all of this, she gave birth to her second child, Sienna, on March 15, 2005. Around 2005/2006, Winkler advised Direct Electric wasn't doing very well. Winkler explained she started making loans from her law office to help sustain Direct Electric employee salaries and all the fest of the expenses. Winkler provided these loans to Direct Electric from her law firm from July of 2005 clear through September of 2007. Winkler advised this wasn't trust money at this point in time. In 2008/2007, Direct Electric couldn't rebound and was forced to close. Winkler advised Direct lectric didn't have any outstanding bills because neither her or her husband wanted others to be jarmed because they had been victims of someone taking money from them. Questioning continues and the following is quoted transcript from Mr. Warhola's direct examination of Winkler during the hearing: "Q"(Warhola) “A’(Winkier) Q. Do you recall the first time you took money from the trust account? A. Ido. Q. Can you just tell us which time that was and how much it was, if you recall? A. The first time was approximately January of '07 and | had just returned back from Christmas vacation in Illinois with my husband's parents. | had already made — | had been approached in December to put some money into~ | call it an investment because that's how it was presented to me. Q. Let me stop you right there. | have a question. Was your misappropriation of money in the trust account triggered by, I'm sorry this was previously stated, but what was triggered by? Was it triggered by financial strain in the office or was it triggered by you wanting to make this investment? A. It was triggered by the financial strain that | was under, but | made a mistake. Q. Can you describe briefly the nature of this investment and how it was presented to you, how you were introduced to it? ‘A. From the time the money was stolen from Direct Electric or shortly thereafter, | was. friends-became friends with a judicial officer at family court. I had went to him on numerous occasions and he knew of the situation with the financial strain. He tried to put us in touch with eople that could employ my husband so that he could close the business and stil have income ming in that we didn't have after Kelly stole money. We were putting out, but we didn't have any coming in from Direct Electric. He tried to -he tried to help any way he could think of to help. And he told me that he had friends that were involved in an investment that he had talked to and they had agreed to help me.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 7 EVENT: 08022-1656 Q. Can you describe this investment? ‘A. What | thought it was then or what | know it is now? Q. What you thought it was then | think is relevant. ‘A. What | thought it was then was a ~ it was explained to me that it was a humanitarian effort or based on humanitarian efforts in other countries that was funded by World War | bonds having to do with the Chinese government and | don't even know if | can remember everything that was told to me, but | was shown copies of these bonds that had been issued in the 1920's, 1930's and it was explained to me that these bonds, there were bearer bonds, who ever held them, they were able to cash these in along with the interest which exponentially-allegedly exponentially increased every 10 years And that this person had about 100 of these bonds and they were secured by water rights, for valuable water rights by Hoover Dam and that there were various states involved with senators of those states because of the water rights. Q. And did you make an investment? A. did. Initially with my own money, but yes, | did. Q. How much initially with your own money? A. $18,000. Q. And then after that what was the next amount and what was the source fo those funds . Initially it was out of my general account so monies | had earned. | think it was by the third time hat | was — and you have to — well, you don't have to understand, but | was told that - specifically by people | trusted, implicitly, that this guy- Q. Let me ask you this— A. Go ahead. Q. What was you understanding as to what the yield would be if you invested in this? Would it be a ‘small yield or a large yield? A. Millions of dollars. Q. In how much time? A. When | made my first investment I was told that he just needed 18,000 and some-odd dollars to close the deal and that by Christmas Day he would have — | think that was like on the 18” of December, and by Christmas Day we would have the money back Q. When you say “he,” are you talking about the judicial officer or somebody else? ‘A. There was alittle bit of both. | can't tell you who said what. Q. But the point of its, is that you had to come up with the money in order to make this investment and you made the investment and you utilized the trust account money to do it, correct? ‘A, After a short period of time, yes. Q. Now, your use of those funds, you invested in a substantial amount of money, approximately how much did you invest including your own money and trust account money toward this investment? A. About $500,000. Q. And about how much of that was yours? About half of it? . Over half, | think, Well, it had to be over half because | took 233,000 from my trust account over ime. Q. Over what period of time did you take — without the trust account, I'm not talking about that, but over what period of time did you invest your own money, like, from what time to what time?LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 8 e EVENT: _ 80221-1656 A. Well, | started in December fo '06 and I tried to do as much as | could with my own money, but because | would take my money and invest, then | wouldn't have money to pay my own bills. So it became very convoluted, but it was all coming from the same place. Q. Now, 500,000, that's a lot of money. it seems like that could have gotten you out of your ~ | mean, obviously, some of that was trust account money, but at least more than half of that was your ‘own money. It seems like that could have gotten you out of your financial woes or if that's an incorrect statement and if so why? A. Looking back it probably could have, but that was over time and I didn't take a paycheck from my law office because — everything that | was making | was ~ | kept being told, if you just put in a little bit more, he’s closing, Jeanne, he's closing. And he would come — not the judicial officer, but his name is Tom Cecrle, he would come to my office and pick up cash or send someone else to do it. And he signed several things for me saying, if you just give me this money, I'l give you X dollars in a week or two weeks, Q. Let me ask you this: As he was saying that to you, obviously, there came a point where the money was not coming in from the investments, correct? A. Correct. Q. So there had to be some point where you got wise to that, | mean, why didn't - what took you so Jong t become — to kind of get wise to it for lack of a better way of saying? A. I don't think it took me too long to get wise to it. I think that ! had misgivings, probably beginning In March, February, March of ‘07, and | would voice those misgivings to various people that were involved that was also putting money in. And they would say, We'll go meet with him. And { swear on my children’s lives, he is the biggest con artist and the best talker | have ever, ever, ever come across. Q. Now, when you say “he,” who do you mean? A. Tom Ceerle. Q. So, obviously, it didn't yield anything, correct? A. Itdid not. Q. What was this investment to you? How did you view this investment? What was it to you in your life? A. Itwas my savior, my savior. Q. Save you from what? ‘A. From the bar, from myself, from everything Q. What was your plan if this investment yielded any funds? What was your plan, what were you going to do with those funds? ‘A. The very first thing | was going to do was put all of it back in my trust account. The second thing Iwas going to do is give all of my staff a very big bonus because they all had worked very, very hard. Q. Looking back, do you think you made rational decisions back then? A. Idon't think, | know | did not. Q. Why not? A. Because no rational person would have kept giving this person money. They just wouldn't have. @.%, 028324 describe anything that made you particulary susceptible to making tis investment? | ean, you know, we kind of touched upon some things, but regarding you personally, describe why you were particularly susceptible?LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Paged EVENT: 080221-1656 A. Well, | don't know about being particularly susceptible, but | can tell you that had it not been for the judicial officer who had represented to me that he had also put money into this investment, | would have never done it. Never. . Let me ask you this, are you blaming that judicial officer? No, 'm not. No, | am not . Was he the victim of this investment to your knowledge as well? As far as | know he is a victim. But as far as you know, he didn't invest to the extent that you did? . No, he didn't, as far as | know, (Questioning Continues...) The following is quoted transcript from Mr. Bare's cross-examination of Winkler during the hearing: “Q"(Bare) “A’(Winkler) Q. Ms. Winkler, | wanted to ask you about this investment again. | think | heard in your testimony that there was a point in time, | think | heard in your testimony that there was a point in time, | think you mentioned a December 18" date where you put the first $18,000 into the investment; is that right? eo | believe it was right around there. It was, yes. Q. Did | get your testimony correct that your testified earlier that - so it's December 18", I take it that's 2008? A. Right Q. That you put, the question | think on the table was, as posed by Mr. Warhola, when was the first time that you invested or put money into the investment, and correct me if I'm wrong now, but | think what you said was, again, December 18, 2006, you put $18,000 of your own money in; is that right? A. {don’t know the exact amount, but that amount sounds familiar and, yes, it was the latter part of December of (06. Q. And then I took it, and, again, correct me if 'm wrong, but | think you said that by Christmas you were going to get millions? A. That's what we were told, yes. Q. So that’s a week away? A. I know. Q. fs that right? A. Yes. Q. Sois that your testimony that you, you know, put whatever it was, | think you said $18,000, and then a week later you were going to get millions? A. |was fist told that | would get approximately a million dollars. Q. Aweek later? A. (Witness nods head.) ‘And then it went up from there. . What was your understanding as to how that could be that you could invest or put in less that 000 and then in a week it's a million? A. Rob, | know you don’t — I know you don't understand and it’s hard for everyone ~ it's hard for ‘everyone to probably understand, | had a judge that | trusted implicitly and | was told that I would get a million doliars because this was the final amount he needed and he didn't —“he," being Tom CecrleLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS, Page 10 EVENT: 080224-1656_ didn’t have any more ability to get money from anyone else and that he was willing to promise me a thousand or, excuse me, a million dollars because he didn't want to lose this deal. Q. Well, | mean, Christmas comes and goes and you don’t get the million bucks, right? A. No, I don't. Q. So what happens over time with this investment? A. Over time I'm told that, Oh, the numbers were just wrong. There were supposedly lockers at different airports in what was represented to me to be Homeland Security Office's that held — I know this sounds so out of this world — that held these original bonds and those lockers had — rent had to be paid on them and if they weren't paid within a certain amount, it would double and triple in hours. So it was always at the last minute I've got to have this amount. I've got to have this amount. I've got to have this amount. And | resisted many times only then to be told, Well, you're going to lose all that money you put in, Jeanne, every bit of it. ‘And | knew if | couldn't get that money back | would be sitting right where | am today. And | knew that the one thing that | had tried so hard to get | would lose. And that’s exactly what happened. And ''m going to tell you that 1 went to the authorities and | have cooperated fully with every authority. Q. Let me ask you, again, taking it from this scenario that it's around December 18", 2006, you put in some money, you think you're going to get a milion by Christmas, it doesn’t happen, time goes on, and it sort of almost looks like ~ 1 mean, who knows what we could hear next. | mean, we heard Qe World War I, Chinese government, water rights, senators, now it's lockers at airports, jomeland Security. What did you do, if anything, to sort of 1 mean, you're a lawyer at the time — to do some due diligence to try to figure out what was really going on with this investment? A. I didn't do a whole lot because | trusted first of all, | ~ | was so financially devastated | didn't have any money at all and | had 17 people relying on me for their jobs and their paycheck to feed their families, Q. So you didn't look at it Did you ever get anything in writing from anybody who is telling you to invest describing the investment, any sort of written documents? | mean, we have this exhibit book, do you have any written documents at all to substantiate the investment? ‘A. \do not have them in my book. | was shown them by various people that you've heard about today. Q. You were shown— ‘A. 1was shown copies of the World War I bond, | was shown copies ~ | was given numbers that equate that this was the rent for this locker. I've got e-mails regarding that and I've turned all of that over to the courts. ‘Q. What I'm asking you is, do you have any sort of security instrument or some sort of contract, or any sort of written document to show when you're giving all this money, | guess, you're saying you were giving this money to Mr. Cecrle, is that it? A. Orhis people, yes. Q. Do you have anything to show, like | say, a security instrument or any sort of written acknowledgment of the investment itself? A. If you will, let me see if | can find it. I've given most of it to various law enforcement, but | was ble to get one copy that | found and it's only much like a promissory note signed by Thomas Cecrle. (Mr, Ryan addresses Ms. Winkler)LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 11 EVENT: 080221-1656 Mr, Bare continues: Q. Here is what | want to ask you, then, your testimony is that, again, it's 18 December, you give ‘some money, you figure you're going to get a million by Christmas. Did the amount that you were going to get in your mind go up? Because | think we heard testimony that you thought you were going to get millions as opposed to a million? ‘A. It didn't go up in my mind. It was represented to me by Mr. Cecrle that it would be more. Q._So in your mind what did 1 t become over time? What did you think you were going to come into? A. Itwasn't in my mind, Mr. Cecrle told me 60 million by the time — Q. 60 milion. A. Yes. Q. Sois it fair to say, then, over time, again it’s Christmas of 2006, we know that you were taking money from the trust account starting in January ‘07, so shortly thereafter. Shortly within a month after you get involved in the investment you're using client money to fund the investment, correct? And that goes on — A. In part, yes. Q. =for a another year? A. Yes. |Q. So is it fair to say, then, that when you're taking your clients’ 200-something thousand, and Ms. jood's money too along the way, which is right in the middle of 2007, as far as your thoughts are concerned, you go from getting a million doliars at the end of 2006 and it progresses all the way to where you think this is going to turn into $60 million over that year's time; is that what we're talking about? A. That's what I was told Q. Did it just sort of progress over time? In other words, it starts that you think you're going to get a million, then you get to where, Oh, I'm going to get two or three, then five, then 10, then 20, is that how it worked? A. Yes. Q. So that’s what you thought you were coming into as you were taking this money fram your clients and putting it into the investment, that sort of progression of the amount you were going to. come into was what you thought you were going to look at, right? A. That's what I was told. And by the end, Rob, | didn't care if t got anything other than what | put in. I wanted nothing more to do with these people. Q. What's your thought regarding the investment now? | mean, today is it going to pay off? A. No. No. It's ascam. It's a scam of the biggest variety. It's a cam and people are stil putting money into it. Not me, but people that were still putting money into it then are still doing it. Q. When did you draw a conclusion, then, that it was a scam and, therefore, ! guess, stopped dealing with it? A. Probably about June of '08, July ‘08, right in there. Q. Did you ever do anything to take any legal action other than a criminal process conceming ‘ecrle or anybody involved? ‘A. No, because he has no assets that's in his name. | looked. | couldn't find any. Q. Do you know what happened to the - you put 270,000 of your own money in, right, and 230 of you clients’ A. Right in that amount.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 12 e EVENT: _080221-1656 __ Q. -that's 500,000, right? A. Yes Q. What happened to that 500,000 bucks, do you know? A. [have not the slightest idea. It's in somebody's pocket or it's in a gambling machine, but it's not available to me. And if | could change it, | would. But I can't. (Questioning Continues...) Mr. Bare continued his cross-examination of Winkler and asked her questions relating to Ms. Geib. Winkler, in summary, explained again that she hired Geib to work in the office of Direct Electric after she represented Geib on a felony theft case. Geib eventually became the bookkeeper for Direct Electric and between August 2002 and December of 2003 Winkler and her husband discovered Geib had stolen $369,000 from the company. Winkler stated she worked with the police which caused Geib to receive another felony conviction, Bare asked Winkler, “Did you want her to get five years in prison for stealing $369,000? Winkler responded, "Yes, I did. if | were to tell you any different, | would be lying.” On May 10", 2010, the State Bar of Nevada Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board submitted their findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations reference the State Bar of Nevada @&erPiainant) vs. Jeanne Winkler (Respondent) The findings included, but not limited to, the following: "15. ....respondent then retained Rebecca Miller, Esq. Respondent, through Ms. Miller, called Bar Counsel to request a meeting 16. The meeting was held on February 1, 2008. At the meeting, Respondent admitted to misappropriating money from her trust account to fund an investment that was expected to yield enormous returns in a very short period of time. Respondent stated that the investment involved a governmental program that funded humanitarian efforts throughout the world and was based, in part, on World War | Bonds and water rights around Hoover Dam.” 17. A substantial amount of money had been invested by Respondent. The investment had not paid off. 18. More specifically, in approximately January of February 2007, Respondent began to use funds from her trust account to fund the investment with the hope of realizing a large return. Respondent withdrew monies from the trust account and, typically, transferred the money to her general account. Respondent would then write checks either to herself or others on her staff, coded as dividends, or to cash for purposes of funding the investment. 19. Respondent admitted to misappropriating money from her attorney-client trust account from january or February 2007 through the end of January 2008. Not all of the money she misappropriated was invested in the alleged governmental program, however. Other misappropriated funds were used to defray office expenses.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 13 EVENT: _080221-1656 20. Respondent informed the State Bar that her trust account should have had a balance of $216,167.05, however, there was only approximately $3,000 in the account on January 27, 2008. Respondent stated she had not reconciled the account at the time of her meeting with the State Bar. 21. Respondent stated that, in November 2007, she began experiencing serious financial difficulty and was “robbing Peter to pay Paul.” Numerous checks, including paychecks, had been retumed for non-sufficient funds. 22. Respondent stated that she had taken care to ensure that Social Security and Medicare were properly withheld and paid to the government. She also stated that she withheld the federal income taxes from the payroll for the past year but had not filed the 941 forms or paid withholding amounts to the Internal Revenue Service as required for 2007. 23. Respondent cooperated with the State Bar and prepared an affidavit to submit with the Joint Petition for Temporary Suspension pursuant to SCR 102(4)(a) filed with the Supreme Court on February 25, 2008. 24. Respondent agreed to pay for a forensic audit of her trust account so that the clients who had or harmed by the misappropriation could be determined. 25. The results of the forensic audit of Respondent's trust account were provided to the State Bar on January 18", 2009. The audit revealed that, as of January 12, 2009, $11,346.76 remained in the account, whereas $160,762.04 should have been in the account. The sum of $149,415.28 had been misappropriated by Respondent. It also appeared from the audit that approximately fifty-six clients were affected by Respondent's misappropriation.” In conclusion, the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Panel unanimously recommended that the Respondent be disbarred from the practice of law. Victims Thompson, Juanita (Event Number 1656) $49,221 On April 26, 2009, Detective Hunkins and Detective Downing met with Juanita Thompson who advised she was a victim of Jeanne Winkler. Juanita explained she hired attorney Jeanne Winkler, Esquire to handle her divorce proceedings between her and her husband John Thompson. Juanita explained Winkler stole in excesses of $70,000 of monies owed to her through the divorce proceedings. Juanita couldn't pin point when the actual theft took piace until Winkler responded to a State Bar of Nevada complaint dated 10/23/08 which explained, in summary, Winkler had stolen money that was owed to her. @ Thompson provided documentation of correspondence she gave and received for the State Bar of Nevada which are listed as follows:LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 14 EVENT: _ 08021-1656 1) Letter: On October 23, 2008, Jeanne Winkler sent a correspondence, via hand delivery, to attorney John Shook, Esq. of the law firm Shook and Stone whom was representing Juanita Thompson. Winkler responded to a complaint that Thompson filed with the Nevada State Bar Clients Security Fund stating monies was still owed to Thompson from Jeanne Winkler. Winkler communicated, in summary, she owed Juanita Thompson a substantial amount of money. Winkler gave an overview that she was retained by Juanita Thompson, in April 2006, to serve as Thompson's attorney in a divorce proceeding that lasted from Apri! 5, 2006 to February of March 2007. On April 5, 2008, Juanita Thompson paid Winkler an initial retainer of $6,000.00 which was placed in Winkler's attorney-client trust account. Winkler reports the $5,000.00 was depleted quickly and was transferred to her general account as payment for fees and costs incurred. Winkler stated she provided Juanita Thompson with invoices of charges on a monthly basis which reflected the remaining amount of retainer on deposit at the end of each billing cycle. In March 2008, Winkler stated she was ordered by Judge Art Ritchie, Clark County Youth and Family Court, to provide documentation of the monies she was suppose to have on behalf of Thompson. Winkler outlined the accounting of Thompson's account, as follows: the amount of $1,076,536.03, which was the net proceeds from the sale of the Thompson's marital residence, was deposited into a money market account that Winkler opened specifically for the Thompson's monies, with the intent that the accruing interest would be attributable to the parties. Winkler explains from the amount pursuant to agreement between Winkler and Denise Gentile, Esq (John Thompson's attorney), Winkler disbursed the amount of $19,276.00 to Winkler's IOLTA (attorney- client trust account), which was paid to the internal Revenue Service on behalf of the Thompson's as and for their 2005 tax liability. Winkler also pursuant to an agreement with Gentile, disbursed the amount of $200,000.00 to her 1OLTA trust account, from which $100,000.00 was disbursed to each of Juanita Thompson and John Thompson, as a partial distribution of proceeds from the sale of the marital residence. On September 8, 2006, again with the agreement of Denise Gentile, Esq., Winkler transferred the sum of $789, 195.47 to her IOLTA trust account, which was then distributed as follows: $477,630.01 to Juanita Thompson, $279,630.02 to John Thompson, $20,804.81 to the Dickerson Law Group for attorneys fees through 07/31/06, $3,630.63 to Winkler's firm for equalization of attorney's fees (to bring Winkler fees to the same amount as John Thompson's fees as ordered by the Court), and $7,500.00 to Juanita Thompson as and for spousal support due her, by order of the court, for July, August and September 2006. ‘On December 29, 2006, Winkler distributed from her IOLTA trust account, another $7,500.00 to Juanita Thompson, again with the agreement of Denise Gentile, Esq., as and for spousal support for the months of October, November, and December 2006, as well as $2,500.00 to Juanita Thompson on January 14, 2007, as and for spousal support for January 2008. The amount of $10,000.00 to cover those expenditures was transferred from the non-IOLTA trust account (“alternate trust”) to Winkler's IOLTA trust account on January 14, 2007. Finally, Winkler reports on January 26, 2007, she paid the sum of $2,500.00 for Juanita’s expert. Winkler addresses the issue of the interest that should have been paid on the said monies. Winkler advised she reviewed the rate of interest that was reflected on her various bank accountLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 15 EVENT: _080221-1656 statements for the non-IOLTA trust account, and when she consulted with Bank of Nevada, with respect to the applicable rates for the various time periods given the amount that should have been on deposit. The interest attributable to the non-IOLTA trust account, as reflected on the accounting, was the exact amount to interest that was credited by the bank until Winkler began removing money in approximately February/March 2007. Afterwards, Winkler advises she determined the amount of interest that would have accrued on the remaining monies, had they not been removed from the interest bearing account. Winkler reports that as a result of her accounting, she believes that there is an amount of $53,403.72, due to the Thompson's, as of March 31, 2007. Winkler believes the amount is divisible between Mr. and Mrs. Thompson, a division to which she is not privy too. Winkler concludes her correspondence by stating, while she has not been able to make restitution at this time, she was notified that she is to receive funds either next week or the following week which will allow her to pay the approximate sum of $50,000.00 as and for restitution to the Thompson's. Winker states she intends to submit that amount directly to Denise Gentile, Esq., and The Dickerson’s Law Group's trust account to be distributed in accordance with the Courts orders, With respect to the remaining amount, she is continuing and will continue to pay restitution as she does not now, nor did she ever intend, that her clients be harmed by her unfortunate financial decisions. Winkler stated that she will advise the committee, should it wish the information, the exact amount that she has been able to pay in restitution and would respectfully requests that those amounts be utiized to reimburse clients before any amounts from the Client Security Fund be utilized, The correspondence ends and is signed by Jeanne Winkler. 2) Letter: On April 14, 2006, Jeanne Winkler requested Robyn Bell of Fidelity National Title of Nevada to release proceeds from the sale of John and Juanita's Thompson home, escrow number: 05-184942, property address: 10219 Gilespie St, Las Vegas, NV 89123 in the amount of $1,076,536.03. Jeanne Winkler requested the said money to be distributed to the trust account of Jeanne Winkler and Associates. The request was documented on Jeanne Winkler and Associates Letterhead and signed by Jeanne Winkler, Esq. and Denise Gentile, Esq, and sent via facsimile. 3) Letter: On October 4, 2007, John Thompson's attorney Denise L. Gentile, Esq. from The Dickerson Law Group requested, via facsimile, Jeanne Winkler to disburse the remainder of the funds to include interest from the sale of the Thompson's residence which was being held in Winkler's attorney-client trust account. In addition, Gentile requested Winkler to provide accounting documentation of the already disbursed funds from Winkler's trust account. LVMPD Financial Analyst Nancy P. Sampson conducted a financial analysis on Jeanne Winkler's bank accounts reference Juanita Thompson and found through bank records that Winkler should $e" 2 284 of $49,221.20 remaining in Thompson's cient accountLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 16 EVENT: 08021-1656 ‘Thompson, John (Event Num! ‘On June 2, 2009, Detective Downing and Detective Hunkins met with John Thompson and his attorney Denise Gentile of Dickerson Law Firm. Thompson stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm stole approximately $14,000.00 of his money which was placed in Winkler's attorney-client trust account. ‘Thompson explained, on April 18", 2006 during a divorce proceeding, the Honorable Judge Richie of Clark County Youth and Family Courts ordered his ex-wife's attorney, Jeanne Winkler to hold proceeds of $1,076,536.03 from the sale of their home in her attorney-client trust account. The proceeds were then to be disbursed accordingly to John and his ex-wife/Juanita Thompson as ordered by the courts through Winkler’s attorney-client trust account. John advised portions of the money was disbursed to him and Juanita as ordered by the court then the disbursements stopped. John learned Winkler actually stole his money which was owed to him. Winkler stole approximately $53,000.00 from the proceeds that were deposited. John stated approximately $14,000.00 of the $53,000.00 was owed to him. John stated his attorney Denise Gentile attempted to contact Winkler on several occasions via phone calls and correspondence Qitrout prevail. On October 4", 2007, John Thompson's attorney Denise L. Gentile, Esq. from The Dickerson Law Group requested, via facsimile, Jeanne Winkler to disburse the remainder of the funds to include interest from the sale of the Thompson's residence which was being held in Winkler's attorney-client trust account. in addition, Gentile requested Winkler to provide accounting documentation of the already disbursed funds from Winkler's trust account. Gentile contacted the State Bar of Nevada and filed a grievance on behalf of John Thompson. ‘The State Bar of Nevada notified Winkler and she responded by stating she had misappropriated the funds as aforementioned in the response Winkler gave to Juanita Thompson. Carolyn (Event Numi 90601-2711) $2,860.52 ‘On 06/01/09, Detective Downing met with Carolyn Kafantaris who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm embezzled $3,500 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Kafantaris explained, around October 2007, she paid attorney Tracy Itts of Jeanne Winkler’s and Associates Law Firm a $3,000 retainer for legal services. The $3,000 went into Jeanne Winkler's trust account and associate attorney Tracey itts was assigned to handle her legal matters. Kafantaris advised she received an invoice dated 12/18/07 for $139.48 which she doesn't dispute. Then fantaris explained months went by and she noticed nothing was happening with her case, at which fe, she contacted Winkler's Law Firm and was told that Tracey Itts was no longer employed with the Firm. Katantaris contacted Itts who stated she left Winkler's firm and opened an office of her ‘own. Itts advised Kafantaris she would represent her for free since Winkler had taken her retainer of $3,000. Itts also informed Kafantaris if she wanted to recoup her money from Jeanne Winkler thenLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 17 e EVENT: _ 080221-1656 she needed to file a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada. Kafantaris advised her case went to court in April 2008 after she retained Itts for representation. Katantaris submitted billing statements she received from Winkler’s Law Firm. A statement dated 12/11/2008 showed Winkler's last transaction reference Kafantaris’ account was on 01/27/2008 for $1,081.20 from Winkler’s trust account which left a zero balance. On 11/04/08, Kafantaris filed a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada. Kafantaris documented within the complaint that she knew Winkler was suspended on March 7, 2008 for misappropriation of client funds. Kafantaris advised after a year of corresponding with the State Bar, they determined and reimbursed her $2,860.52. Kafantaris submitted a copy of a check registry receipt #1791, dated 10/17/07, in the amount of $3,000, paid to the order of Tracy Itts for attorney fee. Kafantaris also submitted copies of check registries, #1909 and #1915, dated 07/15/08 and 07/31/08 in the amounts of $703.60 and $109.20 to Tracey Itts for legal representation after Itts left Winkler’s Law Firm. Documents subpoenaed from the State Bar of Nevada reference Kafantaris include the following: @ 2) Letter: Carolyn Kafantaris sent a letter to Mr. Rob Bare, Office of Bar Counsel, dated October 24", 2008 outlining her complaint against attorey Jeanne Winkler. Kafantaris also enclosed a billing statement she received from Winkler's office in the amount of $139.48, dated 01/02/08 which Kafantaris doesn't dispute. Kafantaris. also provided a carbon copy of her Bank of America check registry that she paid Winkler's Law Firm: Check#1791, dated 10/17/07, in the amount of $3,000.00. 2) Letter: Rob Bare sent Kafantaris a letter, dated October 27", 2008, advising Kafantaris, in summary, the State Bar of Nevada received her grievance and would be looking into the matter. Bare also notified Kafantaris that Winkier was under suspension as of March 7", 2008 as ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court. Bare provided Kafantaris with a copy of Jeanne Winkler’s Order of Temporary Suspension which was filed on March 7", 2008. 3) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Carolyn Kafantaris’ submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated November 4°, 2008. 4) Letter: Phillip J. Pattee, Assistant Bar Counsel, sent a letter to Carolyn Kafantaris dated January 6, 2009, advising Kafantaris that the Bar received correspondence from Winkler in response to Kafantaris’ complaint. 5) Letter: Jeanne Winkler sent Rob Bare a letter, via facsimile, dated December 11, 2008, printed ‘on Jeanne Winkler letterhead, as a response to the grievance Carolyn Kafantaris filed against her. in summary, Winkler stated work was performed on behalf of Ms. Kafantaris in the amount of $1,220.68, at which time, money was transferred from her attomey-client trust account to herLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS. Page 18 EVENT: 00221-1656 general fund. The remaining amount of $1,779.32 was still in her attorney-client trust account and she couldn't release the funds owed to Kafantaris because approval was needed from the State Bar of Nevada since she was under suspension. Winkler attached invoices and a billing statement as proof of work performed on behalf of Carolyn Kafantaris. 6) Letter: Rob Bare sent Kafantaris a letter, dated February 11, 2009 advising Kafantaris that the Screening Panel of the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board concluded that the grievance held merit and the matter was going to proceed to a formal disciplinary hearing. 7) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Jennifer Henry, Esq a letter dated November 24”, 2008 assigning her to review and investigate Kafantaris grievance against Jeanne Winkler. 8) Letter: Jennifer Henry, Client Security Fund Committee Member sent Kafantaris a letter, dated March 11, 2009, advising Kafantaris, in summary, she had been assigned to investigate her claim against Winkler and her investigation was complete. 9) Letter: Georgia Taylor sent Kafantaris a letter dated May 19, 2009 advising Kafantaris, in @ _ surmmay, that the State Bar of Nevada's Clients’ Security Fund Committee held a meeting on April 24", 2009 and approved her claim against Winkler and awarded her the amount of $2,860.52. LVMPD Analyst Sampson's analysis showed a $3,000 check from Kafantaris, dated October 19,2007 was deposited into Winkler's Bank of Nevada IOLTA Trust account. No checks were paid to Kafantaris from any of Winkler’s business accounts. Holland, Joy (Event Number: 090601-2708): $3,081.10 On 06/01/09, Detective J. Downing met with Joy Holland who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law firm stole $3,500 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Holland explained, in November 2007, she paid Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law firm a $3,500 retainer for attomey services. The $3,500 went into Jeanne Winkler's attorney-client trust account and associate Tracey Itts was assigned to handle her legal matters. On January 18, 2008 Holland contacted Winkler’s Law Firm and was told Tracy Itts was no longer employed with the Firm. Holland was given an option to stay with Winkler’s Law Firm or have the retainer be transferred to Tracey Its. Holland requested the retainer be transferred to Tracey Its. On February 27”, 2008, Holland made contact with Itts and learned the retainer hadn't been transferred In March 2008, Holland learned Winkler misappropriated funds from Winkler's attorney-client trust count and filed a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada. The Nevada State Bar forwarded the ‘complaint to Winkler and she responded, in summary, that $418.90 of legal services were rendered to Holland and the remaining $3,081.10 was misappropriated from her trust account. Holland didn't dispute this fact.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 19 e EVENT: 080221-1656 Documents subpoenaed from the State Bar of Nevada reference Holland include the following: 1) Letter: Holland sent a letter to Mr. Rob Bare, Office of Bar Counsel, dated March 28", 2008 ‘outlining her complaint against attorney Jeanne Winkler. Holland explained, in summary, on November 15, 2007, she hired Jeanne Winkler and Associates and gave a retainer of $3,500.00 to associate attorney Tracey Itts. Holland attached a copy of her credit card statement, credit card receipt, and a receipt from Jeanne Winkler’s firm reflecting the $3,500.00 charge On January 18, 2008, Holland advised she received a message from Jeanne Winkler's Law Firm explaining the law firm was downsizing and Tracy Itts no longer worked for the firm. On January 22, 2008, Holland spoke with one of Jeanne Winkler's employees who told Holland she could either stay with Winkler’s firm or have Itts continue to represent her. The employee advised Holland if she chose to stay with Itts then Winkler would forward her retainer. In February, Holland left several messages for Itts with a phone number given to her by Winkler's employee. Holland contacted Winkler's law firm and was told by an employee that she didn’t know who had Holland's retainer. Holland finally made contact with Itts and signed a Substitution of Attorney form on February 27, 2008. On March 25, 2008, Holland was informed by Itts’ assistant, Leann DiSanti that the Substitution of Attorney form was signed by Jeanne Winkler and returned. Holland explained, as of the date of the correspondence, Tracy Itts hadn't received any monies relating to Holland's retainer. 2) Letter: Rob Bare sent Holland a letter, dated April 7th, 2008, advising her, in summary, the State Bar of Nevada received her grievance and would be looking into the matter. Bare also notified Holland that Winkler was under suspension as of March 7, 2008 as ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court. 3) Letter: Jeanne Winkler sent Rob Bare a letter, via facsimile and US Mail, dated April 30th, 2008, printed on Jeanne Winkler letterhead, as a response to the grievance Holland filed against her. In summary, Winkler stated “As you know, | have been suspended from the practice of law based upon misappropriation of funds with regard to my trust account.” Winkler informed Bare that Tracy Itts was employed by her law firm until January 15, 2008. Winkler advised Holland did pay her firm a $3,500.00 retainer. Winkler attached invoices and statements showing $418.90 of legal services were rendered by Tracy Itts and her support staff, leaving $3,081.10 left on retainer. Winkler explains why the money was no longer in the account: “While this amount should be in my trust account, as you know, | misappropriated funds from my trust account.”LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 20 EVENT: _080221-1656 Winkler continues her correspondence by stating, “While | agree that Ms. Holland should be made whole, at this point in time, | do not have the money to give her. However, | am in the process of making arrangements which will allow me to make my clients whole. While I do not have a specific date for the reimbursement, | will deposit any and all monies available for repayment with the bar and allow them to determine whom should be paid. Signed Jeanne Winkler.” 4) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Joy Holland submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated May 30, 2008. 5) Letter: Glenn M. Machado, Assistant Bar Counsel sent Holland a letter, dated June 18, 2008 and nofified her that a grievance file had been opened regarding her complaint against Winkler. Grievance file #08-096-2076. 6) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Jennifer Henry, Esq a letter dated August 7", 2008 assigning her to review and investigate Holland's grievance against Jeanne Winkler 7) Letter: Georgia Taylor sent Holland a letter dated December 15, 2008 advising Holland, in summary, that the State Bar of Nevada's Clients’ Security Fund Committee held a meeting on November 14, 2008 and approved her claim against Winkler and awarded her the amount of $3,081.10. Enclosed is a brief summary of findings of Holland v. Winkler dated November 10, 2008. 8) Letter: On January 13, 2009, Georgia Taylor sent Holland a fetter advising the State Bar of Nevada received her signed Subrogation Agreement and would be awarding her a check in the amount of $3,081.10 in reference to her grievance against Jeanne Winkler. Also enclosed is a signed Subrogation Agreement dated December 30, 2008. 9) Reimbursement Check: The State Bar of Nevada awarded Holland a check, #1506, dated 01/12/2008, in the amount of $3,081.10 from the State Bar of Nevada Client Security Fund. LVMPD Analyst Sampson's analysis showed Winkler’s bank accounts didn't reflect a payment made by Holland in the form of a check. Sampson advised credit card transactions wouldn't reflect in the bank statements. Bank records also didn't showed any reimbursement to Holland from Winkler's. accounts. Holland attached a copy of her credit card statement, credit card receipt, and a receipt from Jeanne Winkler's firm reflecting the $3,500.00 charge.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 21 EVENT: __080221-1656 Harwick, Adeline (Event Number: 090604-2508) $30,429.12: Victim 60 years of age or older On 06/01/09, | Detective J. Downing, P#7042, met with Adeline L. Harwick who stated, in summary, Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law firm stole in excess of $30,000 from her after she Tetained Winkler for legal representation. Harwick explained, on April 21*, 2003, she retained Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm to handle a personal injury accident case. On March 15”, 2006 Harwick was awarded an undisputed amount of $30,000 from the UM/UIM policy and the full amount of $30,000 was transferred to Winkler's attorney-client trust account. Harwick advised Winkler was entitled to $12,690.11 for fees and services rendered but failed to release the remaining $18,884.89 to her. Harwick also advised, on June 6, 2003, "U.S.A.A." insurance paid out a settlement of $15,000 as the result of the accident which was deposited into Winkler’s attorney-client trust account. Harwick hasn't received any proceeds from Winkler’s Law Firm as the result of these settlements. Harwick advised she should have received in excess of $30,000 because Winkler stole her money and didn’t see the case through to the finish as promised. Harwick’s total loss from Winkler’s actions was $30,429.12. Harwick also advised that her birthday was 02/11/35 which shows her to be a victim 60 @ezis of age or oider. On March 10, 2010, Adeline’s husband, David Harwick testified on behalf of Adeline Harwick at the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board Hearings reference the State Bar of Nevada vs. Jeanne Winkler. Adeline Harwick was present at the time of the hearings. David was questioned by Rob Bare and stated, in summary: David advised he and Adeline were married for 55 years and together for 59 years and did things together all the time. David recalled Adeline was involved in an automobile accident in 2003. After the accident, David and Adeline found and retained Jeanne Winkler for legal services. David advised Winkler thought she could possibly get up to $100,000 for them from their case. Rob Bare asked David to view an exhibit of Winkler’s response to the Bar and a reconciliation of the accounting relating to Adeline’s case. David reviewed the exhibit and advised on March 15, 2006, they received a letter from Winkler stating the insurance company sent them a check for (830,000.00) thirty thousand dollars. The exhibit also showed that on April 14, 2006, Winkler advised she received the sum of $1,575.00 as a medical payment from Adeline’s insurance carrier. David advised he was unaware of the $1,575.00 payment. David indicated he and Adeline didn't initially pursue collecting the $30,000 because they were under the impression that Winkler deposited the money into her attorney-client trust account and would settle and disburse the money once the case was over. Winkler communicated to them that she was seeking more money from the lawsuit for them. @ _Cavia advised, around March, 2008, they were approached by a friend who told them that Weanne Winkler was on the news and was being investigated by the State Bar for stealing from her attorney-client trust account. David stated they attempted to contact Winkler on several occasions but she never returned their phone calls. David did advise they received a letter from Winkler outlining that she had been suspended from practicing law in the State of Nevada and that Harwick’s{LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS, Page 22 e EVENT: 080221-1656 file had been sent to a different lawyer. David stated this was the time frame when they suspected ‘Winkler might have stolen their money. Harwick provided documentation to support her claim against Jeanne Winkler. The documents include the following: 41) Agreement to Employ: Harwick provided a contract to retain Winkler as her attomey, “Jeanne L. Winkler, CHTD.- Attorney Fee Agreement’ signed by Harwick and Jeanne Winkler on April 23, 2003. 2) Letter: Phillip Pattee, Assistant Bar Counsel sent Harwick a letter, dated August 27, 2008, advising Harwick, in summary, the State Bar of Nevada received her complaint and would be looking into the matter. Pattee also notified Harwick that Winkler was under suspension as of March 7, 2008 as ordered by the Nevada Supreme Court. 3) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Harwick submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated June 11, 2009. Harwick advises in her application that she wasn't aware Winkler was stealing money until she read the story in the newspaper. 4) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Lawrence E. Mittin, Esquire a (etter, dated July 6, 2009 assigning her to review and investigate Harwick's grievance against Jeanne Winkler. 5) Letter: Jeanne Winkler sent Rob Bare a letter, via facsimile, dated October 9, 2008, printed on Jeanne Winkler letterhead, as a response to the grievance Harwick filed against her. In summary, Winkler stated Harwick was a client of hers whom she represented in a personal injury claim. Harwick was a fault free passenger as a result of an automobile collision. In 2005, the tortfeasor's policy was paid and exhausted, with those monies being paid to Harwick. On or about March 15", 2006, the UM/UIM policy paid an undisputed amount of $30,000.00. Winkler explains the disbursement of the $30,000.00 to include: -On April 14", 2006, Winkler received $1,575.00 as a med pay payment from Harwick’s insurance carrier. -On April 26", 2006, Winkler transferred $12,690.11 to her general account pursuant to Harwick's fee agreement with the firm leaving a balance of $18,884.89. Winkler continued to pursue additional monies in the case which the insurance companies disputed. An agreement was reached for the matter to be mediated. However, the process took a substantial period of time because the mediators couldn't accommodate the request from the various parties. Winkler conducted a medical records review which wasn't favorable to Harwick's case so the mediation was never scheduled.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 23 EVENT: 080221-1656 Winkler advised Harwick contacted her via cellular phone in late July/early August and, in response to Harwick's request, pulled her file and had the file readily available for her. The file remains ready to be picked up from the offices of R. Clay Hendrix, 6900 Westcliff Dr., Ste.515, Las Vegas, NV 89145. Letter is signed "Jeanne Winkler.” 6) State Farm Check: On 03/02/2006, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company issued a check, #124427613J, dated March 02, 2008, Pay to the order of: Addie Harwick & Jeanne Winkler Esq, her attorney, 5200 Wapiti Point Ct, Las Vegas, NV 89130-1589, in the amount of $30,000.00. 7) Letter: On February 22, 2008, Brent Hellewell, Claim Representative for State Farm Insurance Companies sent Jeanne Winkler correspondence reference Addie Harwick's settlement. 8) Letter: Merilee Milner/Paralegal of Jeanne Winkler, Esq. sent a letter to Harwick, dated January 29", 2008 advising Harwick, “This letter is for no purpose other than to keep you abreast as to the status of your case.” The letter advises Harwick that they will continue to keep her informed as information is learned. Letter is signed, Merilee Milner. e 9) Disbursal Sheet: Disbursal sheet, dated October 21, 2003 and signed Adeline Harwick showed a gross recovery of $15,000.00. An itemization of the $15,000.00 showed deductions totaled $5,030.77 and the sum of $9,969.23 represents Harwick’s portion of the recovery. LVMPD Analyst Sampson enclosed copies of Winkler's bank records i.e. checks and deposit slips reference the $30,000 settlement from State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and $1,575 medical payment from Mutual Omaha. Richards-Boeckle, Leigh (Event Number: 090601-2712): $8,000.00 On 06/01/09, Detective J. Downing met with Leigh Richards-Boeckle who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm stole $8,000.00 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Richards-Boeckle explained, on October 1, 2007, she paid Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm a $8,000 retainer for attorney services. The $8,000.00 was deposited into Jeanne Winkler's trust account and associate attorney Louis Schneider was assigned to handle her legal matters. Several months later, Richards-Boeckle contacted Winkler’s Law Firm and was told Louis Schneider was no longer employed with the Firm. Richards-Boeckle was given an option to stay with Winkier's Law firm or have the retainer be transferred to Louis Schneider. Richards-Boeckle requested that the retainer be transferred to Louis Schneider. Richards-Boeckle made contact with Schneider and 2765 the retainer was never transferred. Richards-Boeckle then leamed Winkler had stolen the money from Winkler's clients-attorney trust fund, at which time, she filed a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada. On 02/21/08, Richards- Boickle wrote a letter to Rob Bare and, in summary, outlined her situation with Winkler and asked forLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 24 EVENT: 08022-1656 his advice. Richards-Boeckle then filed an application for reimbursement with the State Bar of Nevada signed and dated 03/29/08. The State Bar of Nevada stamped the application received on 05/16/08. Documents subpoenaed from the State Bar of Nevada reference Richards-Boeckle complaint against Jeanne Winkler include the following: 1) Agreement to Employ Attomey: Richards-Boeckle provided the State Bar of Nevada with a contract “Agreement to Employ” Jeanne Winkler and Associates which was signed by Richards- Boeckle and Jeanne Winkler’s associate Louis Schnieder on October 10, 2007. 2) Letter: Richards-Boeckle sent a letter to Mr. Rob Bare, Office of Bar Counsel, dated February 21, 2008 outlining her complaint against attomey Jeanne Winkler. Richards-Boeckle enclosed the Agreement to Employ with her grievance letter to Bare. 3) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Richards-Boeckle submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated March 29", 2008. wit: On April 18", 2008 Louis Schneider, Esq. signed a notarized affidavit that Richards-Boeckle gave him a $8,000.00 check for retention of the firm’s services which was deposited into Jeanne Winkler’s attorney-client trust account. 5) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Jennifer Henry, Esq a letter dated May 19°, 2008 assigning her to review and investigate Richards-Boeckle grievance against Jeanne Winkler 6) Letter: Georgia Taylor sent Richards-Boeckle a letter dated December 16", 2008 advising Richards-Boeckle, in summary, that the State Bar of Nevada's Clients’ Security Fund Committee held a meeting on November 14”, 2008 and approved her claim against Winkler and awarded her the amount of $6,915.00. 7) Reimbursement Check: The State Bar of Nevada awarded Richards-Boeckle a check, #1510, dated November 18", 2008 in the amount of $6,915.00 from the State Bar of Nevada Client Security Fund 8) Letter: On January 13, 2009, Georgia Taylor sent Richards-Boeckle a letter advising the State Bar of Nevada received her signed Subrogation Agreement and would be awarding her a check in the amount of $6,915.00 in reference to her grievance against Jeanne Winkler. Also enclosed is a signed Subrogation Agreement dated December 30", 2008. e LVMPD analyst Sampson enclosed Winkler's bank records showing that Winkler received a check from Thomas Boeckle for $8,000 on October 2, 2007. There were no checks written to either Leigh or Thomas Boeckle as a refund.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS, Page 25 EVENT: _080221-1656 Wesam (Event Number: 100408-1120): $5,250.00 On 04/08/10, Detective Downing met with Wesam Heilig who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm embezzled $5,250.00 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Heilig explained, in November 2007, she paid Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm a $5,250.00 retainer for attorney services. The $5,250.00 went into Jeanne Winkler's trust account and associated attorney Louis Schneider was assigned to handle her legal matters. In the days leading up to April 12, 2008, Heilig learned Winkler’s Law Firm was stealing money from their clients. Heilig contacted Schneider and leamed he was no longer employed with the firm. Schneider told Heilig he would assist her in filing a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada against Jeanne Winkler for the money she had taken and he would continue representing her through her divorce proceedings. Heilig advised she lost all trust in lawyers and attempted to proceed with the divorce proceedings herself. On June 26, 2008 Heilig filed a complaint against Jeanne Winkler with the State Bar of Nevada Clients Security Fund. On January 12, 2009 the State Bar of Nevada found in favor of Heilig and Qervurses her $5,250.00. Documents subpoenaed from the State Bar of Nevada reference Heilig's complaint against Jeanne Winkler include the following: 1) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Heilig submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated June 6, 2008. 2) Receipts for Payment: Heilig made two payments to Jeanne Winkler's Law Firm and provided copies of those receipts to the Nevada State Bar. Heilig paid a consultation fee of $250.00 to Jeanne Winkler’s Law Firm which she paid by check. Heilig provided a carbon copy of her check register and an on-line banking transaction history to verify her payment. On November 8, 2007, Hellig paid $5,000.00 as a retainer to the firm. Heilig paid the $5,000.00 in cash and provided a receipt for proof of payment. Louis Schneider confirmed the authenticity of the receipt. 3) Electronic Mail between Heilig and Louis Schneider: Heilig provided the State Bar of Nevada with a printout of an email response sent to her, on April 12", 2008 by Louis Schneider. Schneider stated, in summary, he was aware Jeanne Winkler took Heilig’s money and was willing to testify that Heilig paid the money to the firm. Schneider acknowledges Winkler took her money and reported it to the State Bar of Nevada once he found out. 4) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Jennifer Henry, Esq a letter @ ized uy 3”, 2008 assigning her to review and investigate Heilig’s grievance against Jeanne Winkler.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 26 EVENT: 080221-1656 5) Letter: On November 10", 2008, a summary of the investigation, Heilig v. Winkler, was submitted. A recommendation was given to reimburse Heilig from the Client Security Fund in the amount of $5,250.00. 6) Letter: Georgia Taylor sent Hellig a letter dated December 15, 2008 advising Heilig, in summary, the State Bar of Nevada's Clients’ Security Fund Committee held a meeting on November 14”, 2008 and approved her claim against Winkler and awarded her the amount of $5,250.00. 7) Letter: On January 13, 2009, Georgia Taylor sent Heilig a letter advising the State Bar of Nevada received her signed Subrogation Agreement and would be awarding her a check in the amount of $5,250.00 in reference to her grievance against Jeanne Winkler. Also enclosed is a signed Subrogation Agreement dated December 30, 2008. 8) Reimbursement Check: The State Bar of Nevada awarded Heilig a check, check number 1505, dated January 1*, 2009 in the amount of $5,250.00 from the State Bar of Nevada Client Security Fund, verstret lenwater, vent Number: 100105-2203): $3,500. On 05/05/10, Detective Downing met with Natasha Overstreet-Gillenwater who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm embezzled $3,500.00 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Overstreet-Gillenwater explained, on November 20, 2007, she paid Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm a $3,500.00 retainer for attomey services. The $3,500.00 went into Jeanne Winkler’s trust account and associate attorney Tracey Itts was assigned to handle her legal matters, Approximately a year later, Itts informed Overstreet-Gillenwater that her $3,500.00 retainer was taken by Winkler and Itts was locked out of the law office and didn’t have access to any of her clients files. Itts informed Overstreet-Gillenwater to file a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada if she wanted to be reimbursed. At some point, Overstreet-Gillenwater was informed she could only file a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada or LVMPD but not both. Overstreet-Gillenwater filed a complaint with the State Bar of Nevada in May of 2009. The State Bar of Nevada told Overstreet-Gillenwater they received correspondence from Winkler’s attomey stating Winkler admitted to taking $3,200.00 of the $3,500.00. As of January 5, 2010, Overstreet-Gillenwater stated she hadn't received any reimbursement of money from Jeanne Winkler and/or the State Bar of Nevada. Documents subpoenaed from the State Bar of Nevada reference Overstreet-Gillenwater include the @iowes 1) State Bar of Nevada Application for Reimbursement: Overstreet-Gillenwater submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated November 4, 2008,LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS, Page 27 EVENT: _ 080221-1656 2) Discover Credit Card Statement: Overstreet-Gillenwater submitted her Discover Credit Card Statement showing a charge of $3,500 to Jeanne L. Winkler CHTD Las Vegas NV with a transaction date of November 20, 2007. 3) Agreement to Employ Attomey: Overstreet-Gillenwater provided the State Bar of Nevada with an Agreement to Employ Attorney contract which was signed by her on November 20, 2007. vent Number: 100113-2400) $750. On 01/13/10, Detective Downing met with Paula Suarez who stated attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm stole $750.00 from her after she retained the law firm for legal services. Suarez explained, on October 31, 2007, she paid Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm an $750.00 retainer to have the firm draft her a “Will”. The $750.00 went into Jeanne Winkler’ trust account and associate attorney Tracey itts was assigned to handle her legal matters. Suarez advised she waited several months for the "Will’ to be completed and finally requested Winkler's Law Firm to refund her money. Suarez contacted the firm and spoke to whom she thought was It’s jaralegal who told her that the firm didn’t have any money to pay her. Suarez also advised her irthday was 09/28/39 which shows her to be a victim 60 years of age or older. In April 2008, Suarez assumed Winkler was never going to return her money so she contacted the State Bar of Nevada and filed a complaint against Jeanne Winkler. Suarez advised, in the early months of 2009, she received a reimbursement of $750.00 from the State Bar of Nevada Subpoenaed records from the State Bar of Nevada, Client Security Fund showed Suarez was awarded a check in the amount of $750.00 on January 12, 2009. The State Bar provided additional documentation to support Suarez’s claim to include: 1) Agreement to Employ Attorney: Suarez provided the State Bar of Nevada with a contract “Agreement to Employ Attorney” Jeanne Winkler and Associates which was signed Suarez and Jeanne Winkler's associate Tracy Itts on October 31, 2007. Clients’ Security Fund Application: Suarez submitted an application for reimbursement to the State Bar of Nevada Clients’ Security Fund dated April 10, 2008. Enclosed is credit card receipt showing $750.00 was paid to Jeanne L. Winkler CHTD dated October 31, 2007. Suarez also attached two billing statements from Jeanne Winkler & Associates in the amount of $2.50. 3) Letter: Georgia Taylor, Client Security Fund Coordinator, sent Kari L. Stephens, Esq a letter dated April 25, 2008 assigning her to review and investigate Heilig’s grievance against Jeanne Winkler. 4) Letter: Kari L. Stephens, Client Security Fund Committee Member sent Suarez a letter, dated August 12, 2008, advising Suarez, in summary, she had been assigned {o investigate her claim against Winkler.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 28 EVENT: 08021-1656 5) Letter: Kari L. Stephens sent a letter to Jeanne Winkler, dated August 12, 2008, advising Winkler he was investigating a complaint filed against her by Paula Suarez. Stephens advised ‘Winkler to respond within (30) days with a response and documentation for him to take into consideration. 6) Letter: Kari L. Stephens, Esq, sent a letter to David C. Amesbury, Esq, dated November 12, 2008 outlining his investigation findings involving Paula Suarez grievance against Jeanne Winkler, ‘Stephens recommended the Client Security Fund approve Suarez’s application for reimbursement of $750.00. Stephens advised he sent written correspondence to Jeanne Winkler’s Law Firm and no response had been received. 7) Letter: Georgia Taylor sent Suarez a letter dated December 15, 2008 advising Suarez, in summary, the State Bar of Nevada's Clients' Security Fund Committee held a meeting on November 14, 2008 and approved her claim against Winkler and awarded her the amount of $750.00. 8) Letter: On January 6, 2009, Georgia Taylor sent Suarez a letter advising the State Bar of Nevada received her signed Subrogation Agreement and would be awarding her a check in the ‘amount of $750.00 in reference to her grievance against Jeanne Winkler. Also enclosed is a signed Subrogation Agreement dated December 22, 2008. 9) Reimbursement Check: On January 12", 2009, the State Bar of Nevada awarded Suarez a check, check number 1499, in the amount of $750.00 from the State Bar of Nevada Client Security Fund n, Theresa {Event Number 100830-1305) On 03/30/10, 1 met with Theresa Brown who stated Attorney Jeanne Winkler from Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law firm stole $40,000.00 from her after she retained the Firm for legal representation. Brown explained, on June 5, 2007, she retained Jeanne Winkler and Associates Law Firm for legal services pertaining to a guardianship case, probate case, as well as, a wrongful death and personal injury case after the death of her husband. Winkler negotiated the case and on July 26, 2007, Brown was issued two separate checks for a total amount of $40,000.00 from the insurance ‘companies to settle the case. The checks were from National Guaranty Insurance Company in the amount of $15,000.00 and State Farm Mutual automobile Insurance Company in the amount of $25,000.00. Brown advised she signed both checks over to Winkler expecting her to deposit them in her attorney-client trust account and, in return, Winkler was going to issue a check to Brown. Brown advised she never received any payments from Winkler. Brown explained, around July or August, 1009 she was notified by the State Bar of Nevada that Winkler had misappropriated the money that jas owed to her. Brown advised this was the first time she was aware of Winkler stealing her money. After Brown was notified of these acts which were committed by Winkler, she filed a complaint with the State Bar of NevadaLAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 29 EVENT: _080221-1656 Brown provided a copy of the cancelled checks that the insurance companies issued as well as Winkler’s deposit slips where the money was deposited into Winkler’s trust account, Brown also provided a transcript of her testimony she gave to the State Bar of Nevada, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board hearings. Brown advised to refer to her testimony which is true and accurate for a more in depth explanation of the events that transpired. Supporting documentation that Brown submitted is as follows: 4) Jeanne Winkler & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, RE: Wrongful Death/Personal Injury, dated June 5, 2007 and signed by Theresa M. Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 2) Jeanne Winkier & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, as guardian for George Franklin Price Ill, RE: Wrongful Death/Personal Injury, dated June 5, 2007 and signed by Theresa M. Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 3) Jeanne Winkler & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, as guardian for Ryan Steven Price, RE: Wrongful Death/Personal Injury, dated June 5, 2007 and signed by Theresa M, Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 4) Jeanne Winkler & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, as guardian for Madelyn Rose Price, RE: Wrongful Death/Personal Injury, dated June 5, 2007 and signed by Theresa M. Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 5) Jeanne Winkler & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, RE: Probate/Estate, dated June 5, 2005 and signed by Theresa M. Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 6) Jeanne Winkler & Associates - Attorney Fee Agreement for Client: Theresa Price, RE: Guardianship and Post-Divorce/Cusody, dated June 5, 2007 and signed by Theresa M. Price and Attorney Jeanne Winkler. 7) Copy of Settlement Check: State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company; Check number 1240251 16J; Date 07-26-2007; In the amount of $25,000.00; Pay to the order of Theresa Price & George Price Sr, as legal guardians of George Price. 8) Copy of Deposit Slip: Deposit Ticket: Jeanne L. Winkler & Assoc, Trust Account, 500 S. Rancho Dr, Suite 1, Las Vegas, Nevada 89106; Date 7/27/2007; in the amount of $25,000.00. 9) Copy of Settlement Check: National Guaranty Insurance Company; Check number AC1180201759; Date 07/26/2007; In the amount of $15,000.00; Pay to the order of Theresa Price and her attorney Jeanne Winkler, Esq. 10) Copy of Deposit Slip: Deposit Ticket: Jeanne L. Winkler & Assoc, Trust Account, 500 S. Rancho Dr, Suite 1, Las Vegas, Nevada 89106; Date 8/2/2007; in the amount of $15,000.00.LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT DECLARATION OF WARRANT/SUMMONS Page 30 EVENT: __ 080221.1656 11) Copy of Theresa Price's testimony, pgs. 177 - 195, for the State Bar of Nevada, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board formal hearings into the matters relating to the State Bar of Nevada vs. Jeanne Winkler which was held on March 2, 2010, 12) Letter; Rob Bare, State Bar of Nevada Bar Counsel sent Lisa McGrane, Manager, Clients’ Security Fund a letter advising, in summary, that Theresa Price wanted to supplement her pending Clients’ Security Fund claim with exhibits admitted during Jeanne Winkler's formal hearings. Bare also advised it was his opinion that he proved by clear and convincing evidence, that Winkler misappropriated forty (40) thousand dollars from Ms. Price. The letter was dated April 9, 2010. In conclusion, Jeanne Winkler swore to an oath as an attorney and was entrusted by her clients to uphold that oath. Winkler was entrusted by her clients to protect their money which by her own testimony she used for her own personal use. Winkler's victims who filed complaints with LVMPD were at a total loss of $143,091.94. Based on the foregoing, | submit there is probable cause to believe that Jeanne Winkler has, committed 7 counts of Embezzlement N.R.S. 205.300 to include 2 counts of Embezzlement with a ictim 60 years of age or older N.R.S. 193.167. Embezzlement states (1)"Any baile of any money, joods or property, who converts it to his own use, with the intent to steal it or to defraud the owner or owners thereof and any agent, manager or clerk of any person, corporation, association or partnership, or any person with whom any money, property or effects have been deposited or entrusted, who uses or appropriates the money, property or effects or any part that for which they were deposited or entrusted, is guilty of embezzlement, and shall be punished in the manner prescribed by law for the stealing or larceny of property of the kind and name of the money, goods, property or effects so taken, converted, stolen, used or appropriated.” Wherefore, declarant prays that a Warrant of Arrest be issued for suspect WINKLER, JEANNE on a charge(s) of Embezzlement and Embezzlement with a Victim 60 years of age or older. I dectare under penalty of perjury under the law of the State of Nevada that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this 15th day of February, 2011. DECLARANT: PON. ures: 30 pate: 22/15 [zouDEPT = acRTL aenannantnennenaanaanee SERVED Saaaananaeetenaaenaanae Aenanunanananee NCJIS WANTED PERSON SYSTEW seunteestzansae PIN-0209 NCJIS WARRANT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY CLEARED CLEARING AGENCY /NVOL60005 - WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE ARRESTING AGENCY /V0160000 ~ WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE ENTERING AGENCY /NVLVJCOO1 ~ CLARK CO INFO SERVICES CONFIRMING AGENCY/NVO020L35 ~ CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER WARRANT RECORD NUMBER/2112128 NIN/we04845160 paTe/02/22/11 SE /004 RBASON/SERVED ‘TIME/22: 09:29 WARRANT NAWE ——/WINKLER, JEANNE BASE RECORD NANE/WINKLER, JEANNE COURT CASE #/11F02970x COURT/NV0O2A53I ~ LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING WARRANT HAS BEEN SERVED BY ARRESTING/CONTACTING THE DEFENDAN? * BY JOHNSTON 1643 ON 02/22/11 *DEPT = gcRTL senansaaaeaenaaAMn AAs SERVED Rasta R REE Anaasannuaneexe NCJIS WANTED PERSON SYSTEM exeeannnenaeeee PIN-0209 NCJIS WARRANT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY CLEARED * CLEARING AGENCY /XVO160005 - WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE * ARRESTING AGENCY /NVO160000 - WASHOE COUNTY SHERIFFS OFFICE * ENTERING AGENCY /NVLVJCOO1 - CLARK CO INFO SERVICES * CONFIRMING AGENCY/NVCOZ0135 ~ CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER * WARRANT RECORD NUMBER/2112127 * NIN/w804845160 pare/02/22/ 11 * $BQ/003 REASON/SERVED ‘TIME/22:09:29 WARRANT NAME /WINKLER, JEBNNE BASE RECORD NAME/WINKLER, JEANNE COURT CASE #/11F02970x COURT/NVO02A53J ~ LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ABOVE AND FOREGOING WARRANT HAS BEEN SERVED BY ARRESTING/CONTACTING THE DEFENDANT * BY JOHNSTON 1643 ON 02/22/11. *wae © e Courtesy Copy LAS VEGAS JUSTICE COURT "Y, NEV, a a § DEPT #: 1 JUDGE: LIPPIS: CUSTODY STATUS wane. Wut. OY anne case — [FOTO prexonnrsine LOFSIET [ COUNT(S) CHARGE BAIL RESET AMENDED TO 23.47] Hed G4 uy uo nbn, allo) PTE 30646 ee Remand on all Counts Cl Remand on Counts © Remand (NLVDC/HDC Billing Purposes) SENTENCE TO CCDC. MONTHS DAYS Flat Time C No House Arrest/No Early Release | 2Contempt of Court Concurrent Consecutive O Casett | —— Days with Days CTS | 0 Specifie CTS __ Days Concurrent O Consecutive (1) CFS, this ease, this lodging 1 2) Total CTS, this case, all lodgings 1103) Any CTS. all cases, this lodging To Case# (4) Maximum CTS, this case - all lodgings; and all cases - this lodging If no complaint filed, defendant to be released on: — CO FUGITIVES - Court orders Defendant to be released 30 days from this date (IF THERE ARE NO LOCAL CHARGES) OR released 30 days after all local changes have been resolved. ‘House Arrest (if qualifies), then Court Ordered Release with conditions House Arrest —— Days Pre Trial to Interview NEXT COURT DATE: TIME: PT CHANGE OF CUSTODY STATUS CTS Dismissed Sentenced andor Fine $_ Cl Found Not Guilty C1 No Probable Cause Found 0 PAD ‘Court Ordered Release CO O/R OOIR with Intensive Supervision Cl Deft. Released from Intensive Supervision Ci Court Ordered Release to House Arrest/Scram ) Defi. Released from House Arrest No Contact with Victim ‘O Released due to DA Delayed Filing next courr bare: S17 JU TIME: ‘This form is not to be altered without consent of Clark County Justice Courts and Detention Center's Administrations JeamCaoe DISTRIBUTION: —WHIITE-Tobe fared CANARY - Court© Amertcan Contractors Indemnity Company man 11 2 | FPG OnE route seochetecieneor tema § §— F 765944 > sown, AU - 2.072347 t ante WIntlefi Saragossa, Defendant An order having been made on the 2. 1 Coy ie d 1 pon whictfejbhe has been duty admit to bat in Sipe a thivty - Ding thoiasamel —— CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY, 4 “Undertaies ‘above-named fondant wit V2. @ Approves mattis, day of.x a 9 a e 9 9 < > 0, Oo] OQ b c 2 0 O fly organized dnd exshng andar Be Ta Te Sa a -RNOW ALL’ MEN, ican Contractors. Indemnity ‘Company, a-corporation ele yo 9 Onan ge eh 1990 which sla esluton has not been amended Int and id appoint the named : “on | Lames does constitute and. ac 2 er os al tid ed bail cannot be ‘conateued Ato: urine dda ou ntl cote adherence: . tae Bk oh Ba ts, ra ngenBands Ths poner Vo saa re SE oi of the Sa not exceed mee a % £ ‘@ American Contractors Indemnity Company cermin OF 20rd ay

_, the Honorable Judge Deborah Lippis Presiding, onthe 23 day of March 2022 I heteby certify chat am familiar with, axd will comply with Supreme Court Rules 229-249, inclusive, If this requests being submited less thea seventy-two (72) hours before the above-described proceedings commence, the following fects $rovide good cause for the Court to grant the request on such short notice: iis further understood that any media camera pooling arrangements shall be the sale responsibility af the media and zoust ‘be arranged prior to coverage, without asking for the Cour to mediate disputes, Dated this *4 day of MAFER » 29 32 702-792-2882 = == == SIGNATURE: SUy DeMarco PHONE: ITIS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: [1] The media request is denied because it was submited less than 72 hours before the scheduled proceeding was to commence, and ne “good cause” has been shown 1o justify granting the request on shorter notice. [1 The media request is dented forthe following reasons: [A The medis request is gramted, The requested media access remains in effect for cach and every bearing in the above- calited case, atthe Giscretion ofthe Cour, andunless there notified, Tis Order is made in eoordance with Supreme Cour Rules 229-24, inlusve et the dscrion of he judge, andi subject to reconsideration upon rnoton of any party tothe action Medi acess may be revoked ifs show te! secss i isracting the participants, impairing the dignity of the Court, or otherwise materially interfering with the administration of Jee [] ormer: ITISFURTHER wil tht this dorument shal be mace a parof theresa of the procedings in his ke Dated i a3, ABT ys _Matab—alt. FTCK OF THE PEACE Any written objection to the Court’s order should be filed at least 24 hours prior to the subject hearing,JUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA ‘THE STATE OF NEVADA, case No: 12028 70% DEPT. NO, PLAINTIFF “vs. NOTIFICATION OF MEDIA REQUEST Jeanne Winkler DEPENDANT. ‘TO: COUNSEL OF RECORD IN THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED CASI ‘You are hereby notified pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 229-249, inclusive, that media spsenaiv res from, have requested to obtain permission to broadcast, televisp/fecord or take L / nicl. vol! ~ J eR i fs vegds Township Justice Court cerrieicare oF SEPT BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION ‘hobo ante yt sei afte aig ws mae Plaintift Defendant District Actorney Public Defender 455-2296 455-5112Powared by GoldFax 12/13/2011 2 5 RECEIVE?’ RTC a I / (2 pec 14 2001 Hozaat COE JUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP ! | | ill | | CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA, ‘THE STATE OF NEVADA, crt case No: 12702970% PLAINTIEE pert.No: 2 MEDIA REQUEST AND ORDER ALLOWING CAMERA ACCESS TO COURT PROCEEDINGS * Please fax to (702) 671-4548 to ensure thatthe request will be processed as quickly as posible) Jeanne Winkler DEFENDANT ee uy Deltarco __Goamey of 8 Hews HOW > > ) > vs. ) ) > ) ) _— (media organization), hereby requests pension 10 brondeast, record, photograph or televise proceedings in the kbove-enitled cas in 2 acs Deborah LApps Februsz; 2022 \_the Honorable Judge, ‘hereby certify that am familiar with, and will comply with Suprome Court Rules 229-249, inclusive. Hf this req being submitted tess than seventy-two (72) hours before the above-described proceedings comme, the following facts provide good cause for the Cour to grat the request on sich dhert neice: 1s further understood that any snes camere pooling arrangements shall be ie sole responsibilty ofthe media and must Dearranged prior to coverage, without asking for the Court to mediate disputes, Dated this 23, day of December ae SIGNATURE; YY DeMarco pune: 792-792-8882 IL1S HEREBY ORDERUD THAT: {1 Themadia request is denied because it was subsite les than 72 hours before the schoduled proceeding wes to commence, an no “good cause” has been shown fo justify granting the request en shower notice [] The media request is denled for the following reasons: aa ‘The media request is gramted. The requested media access vemains in effect for each and every hearing in the above- nttled cose at he dscetion ofthe Cov, and uesscherwise noted. This Oxdt is nade aocordance wih Supreme Court Rules 229-249, ineusive tthe iveretion ofthe judge bd Se ebjet fo econdderten upon tation of any party to the ation. Media aoess may be cevoked ifs show tet access is distracting the pasticpans, impaling the igity af he Court, or etberwise mately stesfering wits the ediinsration of Rises oruer: VP 1S FURTHER ORDERED that this document shall be made art ofthe record ofthe proceedings in this case ICE OF THE PEACE ‘url's order should be filed at least 24 hours prior to the subject hepeingIVED JAN 10 20:2 JUSTICE COURT DEPT oy CHANGERSJUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA ‘THE STATE OF NEVADA, PLAINTIFE ws. Jeanne Winkler SECS DEFENDANT ‘TO: COUNSEL OF RECORD IN THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED CASE: ‘You are hereby notified pursuant to Supreme Court Rules 229-249, inclusive, that media representatives from RAS have requested to obtain permission to broadcast, televise, record or take Photographs ofall hearings in this ease. Any objection should be filed a least 24 hours prior tothe subject hearing. DATED this A_ day of Yonuates 202 Las Vegas Township Justice Court CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION ‘hereby ceity that on the A day ot Sanuony 20{% service ofthe foregoing was made by facsimile transmission only, pursuant to Nevada Supreme Court Rules 229-249, inclusive, this date by faxing a ‘rue and correct copy ofthe same to each Attomey of Record addressed as follows: Plaintitt Defendant District Attorney Auguetas Claus 455-2296 463-4800 SS Fvas'Vegas Township Justice Courtome sirazo70x Mono Media Request 7 ‘ vospes cog scecrceezos ~~ TMM RI < OOT-04-2012 THU 10:21 AhLAs 7 gman. tate of fe ady CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA ASR ef Peale > CASEINO.: Plaintiff, DEPT: NO. . . MEDIA REQUEST & ORDER ALLOWING Sjoarite beat CAMERA ACCESS TO.COURT Je : PROCEEDINGS — (Rev. 8722/12) Defendant. Civit Cases: Fax 10 (702) 388-4461 Criminal Cases: Fax 10 (702) 671-3175 : Demerce (eae), of ; [asain orinnration), Bescoy Huts permission 10 begin (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY: ) {7 FatevisingReconding | | Photographing [ ] Broadcasting/Recording (eudio only) |) Other, proceedings inthe sbove etd casein Department No.__/|__, he Honombte uage De bores Lopors presiding, on the. day of. ) T30_{3 erthe hour of —M. Thereby certify tat Tam fazalier with, and wil comply with, the Nevada Supreme Coun's RULES ON ELECTRONIC COVERAGE OF COURT PROCEEDINGS (Supreme Cour Rules 229-246, incisive, 1 this zequest is being submitted less than twenty-four (26) Bours before the above-described proceedings commence, the fallowing facts provide goed cause for the Court o grant the request on such short notice Ikis further understood that any media camera pooling arrangements shall be the sole esponsibility ofthe media and must be arranged prior to coverage, without asking for the Court ro mediate disputes. paedihis _Yaayor_2CbobS a0, Zecteororor— Pea~ 77A-LB5% ADDRESS: cee Yn Cas Vege Aw FAX: cas arte 2909 sebeteecenererrsnnatnn nersieemnrimrreninenenenrenteneenererryeniucmerrecmianeresesecanianan IT Is HEREBY ORDERED THA’ SIGNATURE: PHONE: [1 The media request is denied because it was oubmitted tess than 24 hours before the scheduled proceeding, ‘was to commence, and no “goat! cause” has been shown to justify granting the request an shorter notice. ‘The media request is denied far the following reason(s): (The aaedin request is granted The requested media access will remain in effect foreach and every hessing, inthe ebove-enttled case, atthe discretion ofthe Court, and unless owerwise ordered. This Order is made in accordance with Supreme Court Rules 229-246, inclusive, tthe discretion of the judge, and is subject to econsideration upon moilon of any pasty tothe action. Media access may be revoked if itis shown tht access is distracting the participants, impairing he dignity of the Coust, or otherwise meterally interfering swith the edministration of justiee [] OTHER: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ghat this document shall be made a part of the regord of the proceedings in this case. yw RECEWED Dated this 7 _ day of, 2 EOF TAE PEAGET g& 2012 Jusnice court DEPT #1 CHAMBERSF oavoer2016 CMe ra nunnone 26 27 28 18:53 ain (FRQTISSZEENG .001/004 iT NevadaBarNo. 10004 | FILED IN OPEN COURT 205 N. Sa D221 DATE: ie Fan rs Caunass 4900 Phone CLERK: (702)463-4800 Fax Attomey for Defendant JUSTICE COURT, LAS VEGAS TOWNSHIP (CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA STATE OF NEVADA, CASE NO. 11F02970X. Plaintiff, DEPT. NO. 1 OF WAIVER OF APPEARY AT PRELIMINARY H ‘UNCONDITIONALLY WAIVE PRELIMINARY HEARING COMES NOW, Defendant, JEANNE WINKLER by and through her attorney of record, 'T. AUGUSTUS CLAUS, BSQ., from the firm Legal Resource Group, LLC., hereby files this waiver of her appearmoe at the Preliminary Hearing and Unconditional Waiver of Preliminary Hearing of this matter pursuant to State v. Sargent, 128 P.34 1052 (Nev. 2006) and NRS 178.388. Upon arraignment in District Cour, itis expected that the Defendant will plead guilty ‘to one count of Theft (B, 1-10) with the parties retaining the right to argue at sentencing and the a # - -~ ((s1ea2970% 7 1 Mae : FAM3 oafogi2016 18:53 xm FANTISSZZEA6 P.o021004 et ES immiiaieieal DATED this Peay (702)463-4900 Phone (702)463-4800 Fax 10 Attomey for Defendant es3 oarosi2016 18:54 atnin FAQTISSZZEG 0037004 ot ee COUNTYOFCLARK IBANNE WINKLER, being first duly swom deposes and states as follows: 1, Tama resident of the State of Neveds, am competent and understand the charges ‘and the consequences of this unconditional waiver, 2, That T, Augustus Claus, sq, has been retained as my attomey to represent me in the above captioned case and has answered all my questions regarding this waiver and its ‘consequences to my satisfaction. 3. Thereby waive both my presence at my preliminary hearing and unconditionally ‘waive my preliminary hearing, understanding that I will be bound up to District Court, 4, The waiver of my appearance and unconditional waiver of my preliminary hearing is made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily after consultation with my attomey, with the expeotation of entering into negotiations in District Court, 5, understand that upon arraignment in District Court, if T choose not to enter into the contemplated negotiations, I will not retumn to Justice Court for a preliminsry hearing, but instead will proceed directly to trial in District Court, 6. The district court negotiations contemplate a plea of guilty to one count of Theft , 1-10) with the parties retaining the right to argue at sentencing and the State having no objection to this case running concurrent to my federal charges. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me “er hist” aay of RES 2016. ¢Y PUBLIC in and for said County and State> gaio6r2016 eC orwaueun 18:54 atnin FANTISSZZEAG P.004/004 AFFIDAVIT OF T, AUGUSTAS CLAUS STATEOFNEVADA —) es COUNTY OF CLARK) ‘T. AUGUSTUS CLAUS, being first duly swom deposes end states as follows: 1. That 1 em an attorney duly licensed to practice in all the Courts of the State of Nevada and that in such capacity I have been retained to represent the interests of Defendant JEANNE WINKLER in the above captioned matter, 2. ‘Thatafter discussions with my client, she will be waiving her appearance at the Preliminary Hearing of her case and unconditionally waiving her right to a preliminary hearing with the expectation of entering into negotiations in District Court, ae Aeon NOTARY. ee in and a said County and State [My Ant. Exp, June 28, 2017 5