MODESTO, CA – A Stanislaus County Superior Court judge Friday granted pretrial freedom to an accused on a no bail “own recognizance” release, overruling the desire of the prosecutor to hold the accused in jail with bail.
The defense requested an unhoused man with transportation issues facing non-violent charges to be released on his own “OR,” but was met with opposition from the prosecution, who cited the accused’s past failures to appear (FTAs).
Judge Elena Ramos Ratliff eventually granted the request for OR, although noting a lack of “confidence” in the accused returning to court, referencing the accused’s “track record.”
The accused, who was present in the Stanislaus County courtroom and was being assisted by a Spanish language interpreter, is charged with multiple non-violent offenses involving two failures to appear, possession of an illicit substance and paraphernalia, and false identification to police.
Asserting to Judge Ratliff that the accused was ultimately only charged with “mostly non-violent offenses,” Alternate Public Defender (APD) Patrick Tat-Long Shum requested the accused be released on OR since the accused would be “unable to afford bail.”
The defense argued the accused struggled with being unhoused and was “having some sort of housing-related difficulties,” which APD Shum noted as causing the accused’s prior two failure to appear charges.
Judge Ratliff expressed doubts about the accused’s unhoused status, asking APD Shum if the accused had “some type of a plan” if released.
APD Shum explained that, if granted OR, the accused would “take the bus…for all future court hearings” and would stay at a shelter in Turlock, called “WeCare.” APD Shum assured Judge Ratliff his client would be able to procure a free bus pass from the Public Defender’s Office.
The prosecution opposed the request by detailing the accused’s criminal history.
“He (the accused) actually provided false identification to the police,” stated the prosecution, adding that granting the request for OR will allow the accused to violate the court orders again, stating, “We’re just afraid that he will try to evade police again.”
After hearing arguments from APD Shum and the prosecution, Judge Ratliff expressed her concern about not having the accused required to attend court until after Christmas.
“I’m not absolutely confident that he would come back to court if we gave him such a long time period,” said Judge Ratliff. Despite the court’s concerns, the judge agreed she was “willing to OR him (the accused).”
The accused is ordered to appear at his next hearing date Friday, Dec. 20.
