By Roselyn Poommai
SACRAMENTO, CA – After dodging accumulated probation jail terms for the past five years and disappearing on his probation officer, defendant Patrick Batad was seriously lectured in court on Monday by Judge Kevin McCormick.
In 2016, Batad was given probation for 120 days in the county jail after being convicted of possessing meth to sell.
Three years later, he was convicted for domestic violence charges and was given another probation for 180 days in the county jail, and the completion of a treatment program.
Then, in 2019, Defendant Batad was ultimately convicted of knowingly receiving a stolen vehicle and faced five years of formal probation.
However, over the course of five years, Batad has violated his probation terms three times and has failed to respond to his probation officer since their last interaction on Nov. 17, 2020.
“Whatever number and address [Batad] provided, he hasn’t responded in any way to probation,” Judge McCormick remarked, adding, “In fact, it would appear from reading the notes from the probation officer, they have no idea where he is or what he’s been up to.”
Defendant Batad quickly reacted, shaking his head and looking down.
Judge McCormick remarked, “I can see you shaking your head.”
He then went on to express his disappointment in the defendant’s disappearance, noting, “You and I had a long conversation before I ever agreed to put you on probation.”
“Yes, we did, sir,” Batad said.
The judge added, “It just has the look of one that I was really reluctant to do in the first place, and I said I’d take a chance on you. I probably used those words.”
Batad mumbled, “Yes, sir, you did.”
McCormick appeared visibly confused as he looked over his notes, attempting to formulate “what in the world is going on. The address you gave was a family address, and they said they haven’t seen you in a very long time,” he pointed out, adding that his family had reportedly been concerned about his homelessness.
Judge McCormick commented, “I know you know how to do it, even if you were homeless because you’ve been able to do it in the past.”
The judge then quickly made a personal comment, “I would’ve hoped that our conversation would’ve had more significance to you…It’s confusing for me.”
However, Batad’s Assistant Public Defender Samir Ali indicated that Batad had been consistent with his terms until he was allegedly informed that his case’s status was reduced, requiring fewer check-ins.
She also indicated that his financial hardships at the time had caused his phone service to be temporarily disconnected.
McCormick’s stance did not budge, arguing, “Well, the main thing is he had time to go get his phone hooked up. He should’ve been connecting with the probation department, not the phone company.”
He pointed out, “They’re the ones (probation) that have the ability to bring you back before me. The phone company doesn’t.”
Judge McCormick was unable Monday to make a decision with the current information provided and is set to meet with Batad’s probation officer.
The judge said he’s “not sure how that’s going to go,” after Batad had already received three probation violations. If Batad violates his subsequent probation terms, he faces commitment to state prison.
Roselyn is a second-year undergraduate double-majoring in Psychological Science and Criminology, Law and Society at the University of California, Irvine. A native of Los Angeles, California, she is passionate about the role of human behavior in the criminal justice system.
To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
“In 2016, Batad was given probation for 120 days in the county jail….” So, was he given probation or 120 days in jail. It’s one or the other!
Actually often a term of probation comes with time in county jail. They can often avoid serving actually time if it is less than a certain amount by arranging for a work program.