By Daniella Espinoza and Dani Kim
YOLO, CA— A judge here in Yolo County Superior Court this week released—despite the court’s expressed doubts—a young man on supervised own recognizance release with no bail.
This means that the young man will be able to leave jail but remain under the supervision of his probation officer(s).
On Oct.19, the deputy district attorney filed a complaint against the accused, charging him with a felony of inflicting corporal injury on his partner that resulted in a minor or serious traumatic condition.
This charge was then enhanced due to a prior felony conviction for the accused, who is currently on felony probation and has had two prior felony convictions.
By arguing in favor of the release, the accused’s deputy public defender, David L. Miller, argued the accused has “scored low on criminal history” and that the witness is “not afraid of him and in fact would be encouraging of his release.”
Shortly after DPD Miller’s statement, the witness affected by the incident was allowed to address the court. During her testimony, it was stated that she did not want to press charges because “it was just a misunderstanding.” 
In response, Judge David Reed reminded her that “the charges are not filed because you are pressing charges. The charges are filed because police became involved and the District Attorney is prosecuting them.”
In an attempt to make it clear to the witness, Judge Reed added “while your input is welcome and considered, you don’t control whether charges are prosecuted or not.”
Following the witness testimony, Judge Reed then expressed his concerns for the accused due to his youth and prior history of crimes.
Instead of moving along with the session and next steps for the case, Judge Reed took a moment to add that due to the accused’s prior history, “for today’s purpose” he has to “assume the new charges are correct.”
However, despite these concerns, Judge Reed decided to release the accused on supervised own recognizance (OR) release under the condition that he regularly report to his probation officers and respects the newly-issued criminal protective order.
The arraignment then closed when Lee was ordered to appear in a pre-hearing conference Nov. 18. 
