WOODLAND, CA – Superior Court Judge Paul K. Richardson here Thursday in Yolo County Superior Court denied the defense request to modify bail conditions or grant supervised release, citing public safety concerns.
The accused is facing a felony conviction of grand theft with an enhancement for circumstances in aggravation.
While referencing the cash bail set at $5,000, Deputy Public Defender Martha Sequeira requested the court release the accused on “bail conditions that are non-cash,” citing affordability concerns.
DPD Sequeira urged the court to consider the least restrictive means that “protect the interests of the government and the court,” suggesting the court should “conduct analysis pursuant to due processes,” suggesting that the accused be released on supervised own recognizance (S.O.R.) with no required bail.
While referencing the case, DPD Sequeira pointed out that the “incident occurred well prior to the hearing date…in 2023,” and claimed the case was not filed for a while, adding, “He (accused) wasn’t put on notice that this case existed.”
DPD Sequeira acknowledged that, since the 2023 incident, the accused had been charged in other counties, but “these cases had been litigated as misdemeanors…he (accused) was released from those counties on supervision.”
DPD Sequeira requested the court not to consider “if he is a threat to the public” as she remained adamant “these cases should not keep the accused from being released to the community, especially since this (the felony charge) was done before.”
In an effort to inform the court about the factors at play, DPD Sequeira noted that “he is a gentleman well in his fifties…these actions reflect monetary issues rather than intent to cause harm to the community.”
DPD Sequeira further maintained the accused’s actions covered a broad range of time including “the post-covid world…when times were different,” suggesting this was a “motivating factor” for the accused’s actions, but “not an excuse.”
Speaking on behalf of her client, DPD Sequeira said “he promises he won’t steal” and is willing to abide by staying away from stores and businesses. DPD Sequeira added the accused works at a Mexican restaurant and emphasized “he (accused) wants to go to work at the Mexican restaurant…the only establishment he cares about.”
In conclusion to her request to the court, DPD Sequeira said “he (accused) has no prior felony convictions” in requesting the court to release the accused on supervised O.R.
While referencing the accused’s criminal history, District Attorney Daniella Dunham noted the accused has “at least two prior felony convictions” and numerous convictions of theft. DDA Dunham added that “based on multiple thefts…his threat for committing future theft hindered public safety.”
In the same sentence, DDA Dunham asserted that “the court should go through analysis for least restrictive means…but the court can’t be confident that he (accused) will keep his promise.”
Judge Richardson noted in context of the accused’s history, “this is a 2023 case but the record in 2024…six violations, all thefts,” adding there was also a previous theft case the court heard where the accused “took 21 cases of floor material.”
Judge Richardson expressed his concern for “public safety,” stating the “interests of protection of the public here is a problem…six cases of misdemeanors in 2024,” ruling it was clear the accused engaged in theft when released and asserted that “the public won’t be protected if he is back on the streets on O.R. or supervised O.R.”
In response, DPD Sequeira questioned, “Does your honor not think supervised O.R. can monitor him (accused)?”
Judge Richardson responded the accused’s criminal history “speaks for itself” even though other courts had rendered these cases as misdemeanors which were “not as serious regarding his previous conduct.”
The judge added, “I haven’t seen these many convictions in one year, even if they are misdemeanors,” noting the accused “lives in Stockton…no connection to Yolo county per-se…taken in total, the court would be concerned having him released on O.R.”
While considering an alternative given the accused financial difficulty, Judge Richardson noted “but the question is, is there an alternative, while recognizing the accused cannot afford the current cash bail set at $5,000?”
DPD Sequeira suggested the court release the accused with conditions of GPS, supervised O.R. and terms and conditions that include the accused to stay away from businesses and stores.
Probation asserted that “on January 31st…probation found him (accused) unsuitable for supervised O.R.,” reporting they could not verify the accused’s address or employment as a full-time chef.
Judge Richardson determined there was no alternative and deemed the current $5,000 bail as “appropriate,” and, referring to the accused’s criminal history again, stating, “2024 cannot be repeated again.”
DPD Sequeira asked, “Is there an offer from the prosecution…will my client be released today if he pleads to the felony?” Judge Richardson advised the attorneys to discuss the matter.
