The essentials
D4vd faces formal first-degree murder charge plus sexual abuse and remains mutilation charges; defense denies culpability.
Singer D4vd faces multiple formal charges including first-degree murder, lewd and lascivious acts with a person under 14, and unlawful mutilation of human remains in connection with the death of 14-year-old Celeste Rivas Hernandez. Prosecutors allege the sexual abuse and murder occurred in April 2025 in the Hollywood Hills area of Los Angeles.
The charges include special circumstances allegations, which carry heightened legal significance in California criminal proceedings. D4vd's arrest followed the discovery of the victim's dismembered remains in an abandoned Tesla registered to the artist, found in Hollywood, Los Angeles.
D4vd's defense team has stated that evidence will demonstrate his innocence in the case. The formal charges represent a transition from initial arrest on suspicion of murder to specific criminal allegations, establishing the prosecution's legal framework for pursuing conviction. A Los Angeles County grand jury investigation that began in February 2026 preceded these formal charges, evaluating evidence presented by authorities before determining sufficient cause to proceed.
Other ways to read this story.
Alternative framings generated by SigNews. These are not independent sources or attributed quotations.
Formal Charges Mark Transition from Arrest to Prosecution Phase
The formal charges represent a critical legal transition, establishing the prosecution's specific allegations and legal framework for proceeding to trial. Grand jury findings preceded the charges, indicating prosecutors presented sufficient evidence of probable cause. Special circumstances allegations carry enhanced penalties under California law, reflecting the severity of the charges. This phase establishes the formal parameters of the case moving forward through the judicial system.
Defense Team Pledges Evidence of Innocence in Murder Case
D4vd's defense attorneys have denied both the murder charge and any culpability, maintaining the artist's innocence. The defense has stated that evidence will demonstrate innocence, though specific details of their strategy remain under legal privilege. This perspective represents the formal opposition to charges and reflects the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings, where both prosecution and defense present competing narratives supported by their respective evidence.