San Francisco, CA – Deputy Public Defender Charlie Dixon on Monday requested that bail be reduced for a man facing financial hardship, arguing that his client was unable to meet the current amount. However, Judge Rhoades overruled the request and instead set bail at $200,000.
The accused currently has six recent cases, including one filed on May 13. Four of the six cases, including the most recent, are misdemeanors involving allegations of slapping or punching the victim.
DPD Dixon asked for bail to be set at $200, citing the accused’s lack of financial resources. He explained that the accused now has stable housing with his uncle—at a location away from the victim—and has been offered part-time employment through his uncle as well. While the accused did not currently possess the $200, Dixon argued that he could raise it with the help of his family.
Dixon claimed that if bail were set at a manageable amount, the accused would be able to follow a structured plan established by a social services worker, which the accused reportedly understands and is committed to. Dixon emphasized that this plan is a new intervention not attempted in any of the previous cases. He also stated that the accused is committed to staying away from the victim.
The Deputy District Attorney countered that the accused’s history demonstrates a concerning pattern of violent behavior and argued that previous attempts at intervention, including court-ordered classes, had either failed or not been taken seriously.
Judge Rhoades sided with the prosecution, referencing the pattern of past incidents and describing the offenses—particularly the repeated acts of slapping and punching—as too serious to overlook. He concluded that the accused posed a danger to the victim and to the community.
Judge Rhoades acknowledged that the accused could not afford the $200,000 bail but stated explicitly that he was setting bail at that amount as a means of detention until further notice.
In response, DPD Dixon objected, arguing that using unaffordable bail as a means of pretrial detention violates legal precedent and due process. Dixon also requested to cross-examine the alleged victim in the case, asserting that such an examination is a legal requirement. Judge Rhoades denied both the request for cross-examination and the objection regarding bail.
