By Ramneet Singh
WOODLAND, CA – Yolo County Superior Court Judge Tom Dyer late Friday denied supervised release without bail to *”A***” based on charges of elderly endangerment with a drug and mental health history, although A*** can be released from custody for potential treatment.
* The Vanguard will not use the accused’s real name because the charges are misdemeanors.
Based on the court calendar and records, A*** had two different cases listed.
The first was one count of elderly or “dependent adult” endangerment from 2017, listed for a pretrial conference. The second was two counts of elderly or “dependent adult” endangerment from November of this year, listed for arraignment.
Dyer led with the second case and noted that A*** had a public defender for the 2017 case.
Deputy Public Defender Daniel Hutchinson represented A***, and noted the listing of these counts as misdemeanors. “I believe the concern is that Mr. A*** would have to return to live with his parents, who are the alleged victims in this case.”
He noted the various options for A*** and proposed his being “released on either straight OR or supervised OR with a stay-away order” from the victims.
Once directed, a witness named Weiss objected to this due to the same offenses, and “the daily use of methamphetamine and the diagnosis mentioned in the mental health history” were factors to be considered.
She stated a more “comfortable” option would be through a “dual diagnosis system or treatment.”
When questioned by Dyer, the probation officer indicated unfamiliarity with the potential residential locations. She affirmed Weiss’s points and potential treatment.
After it was requested, Hutchinson referred back to the 2017 case and noted the temporal distance from the 2021 case. He noted that, with custody, there would be a potential “trial within 30 days, he’s not going to be placed within that time.”
Again noting that these are misdemeanors, he advocated for “supervised OR with a stay-away order.”
In the 2017 case, Dyer read the father’s statement, saying “he’s always yelling at me and my wife, threatening us, in the past, he’s made threats to kill us.”
In the same case, Dyer stated the father was “punched once in the face with a closed fist.” The parents wanted the defendant to leave the residence.
In the 2021 case, Dyer stated “there was a verbal argument, punching on the right side of the head.”
The parents are “in their mid-70s, they require assistance walking, too old to protect themselves, and they’re opposing release, and are in fear for their safety.”
Dyer noted the misdemeanor nature, but the circumstances made him “not confident that a stay away or even a GPS is going to be enough to ensure the safety of mom and dad.”
Dyer noted the time he has lived with them and that “it sounds as if there’s more out there than even the two cases that the court’s recited.”
Also noting the drug use, Dyer denied supervised release and ordered a protective order for the parents. A*** will be “eligible” for treatment.
In assigning further proceedings, there was a question whether the 2017 case already had set proceedings, which was initially in Dept. 8.
Dyer decided for a jury trial for both cases on Dec. 20 in Dept. 7 at 8:30 a.m. The TRC is on Dec. 15 in Dept. 7 at 9 a.m. The “Pandemic Readiness Conference” is on Dec. 9 in Dept. 12 at 9 a.m.
Concerning bail, Hutchinson relayed A***’s income status.
Dyer noted that the bail “for both of these matters is $5,000, misdemeanors involving domestic violence. I am noting that Mr. A*** appears to have lived with his parents for the past 40 years, does not remember the last time he had a job, receives 800 a month in SSI, does not own a house, or a car, and does not have a bank account.”
Dyer reduced “bail in both matters per Humphreys [a recent case on bail reform] to $4,000 for each case.”
