Woodland, CA – The trial of former UC Davis student Carlos Reales Dominguez proceeded Thursday in Department 14 of Yolo County Superior Court before Judge Samuel T. McAdam. Dominguez is charged with two counts of murder in the stabbing deaths of David Breaux and Karim Abou Najm, and one count of attempted murder in the stabbing of Kimberlee Guillory in the spring of 2023. He also faces sentence enhancements for the alleged use of a deadly weapon.
The day’s proceedings resumed with the continued cross-examination of Detective Stephen Ramos, who had placed Dominguez under arrest following a roughly six-hour interview. Ramos confirmed under questioning by Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson that he did not personally collect evidence from the scene—Officer Torres handled that responsibility. DPD Hutchinson pressed Ramos on inconsistencies in police reports, particularly conflicting timestamps between his report and those of another detective. It was also noted in court that Ramos had been demoted from sergeant to officer, although Judge McAdam did not allow additional questions on the matter.
Following Ramos, the prosecution called multiple witnesses, including a Davis resident and Davis Police Department Officer Jacob Story, who responded to the scene when Dominguez was detained. Officer Story testified about the numerous tip calls the department received around that time and agreed with the defense that the tip identifying Dominguez matched the suspect description “to a tee.”
The jury was shown several body-worn camera (BWC) clips from Officer Story, which depicted Dominguez providing a false name and address and offering conflicting information about his living situation. DPD Hutchinson highlighted multiple instances where Officer Story deactivated his camera during interactions with Dominguez and other officers, raising concerns about transparency and procedure.
One video clip showed Story discussing Dominguez’s case in front of him while the camera was rolling—despite having claimed uncertainty about the nature of conversations when turning the camera off. When asked why he left the BWC running during some conversations but not others, Story replied, “I don’t know.”
In another video, Officer Story was seen stating, “Let me turn off my body-cam,” before a conversation with another officer. Story later testified that he had reactivated the camera only after Dominguez was already in handcuffs. He explained that department policy requires BWCs to be activated during significant events like arrests but does not mandate they remain on during inter-officer conversations. However, he acknowledged that there is no policy requiring officers to deactivate them.
During the afternoon session, Officer Story returned to the stand for further cross-examination. DPD Hutchinson played a longer segment of body camera footage in which Dominguez, already in handcuffs, was surrounded by officers from various agencies. Hutchinson questioned Story about a mistaken address mentioned in the video, asking, “Even with the wrong address, the officers were still able to locate the accused within minutes?” Story responded, “Yes.”
Hutchinson continued to probe delays in detective response time and asked why Story removed his body camera before speaking with detectives. Story replied, “So I could have a private conversation away from the detained suspect.” He added that he was unsure what might be said and didn’t want the conversation recorded. Hutchinson summarized: “You didn’t want this sensitive information on your body camera,” to which Story agreed.
The defense also raised concerns about whether Dominguez had been informed of his Miranda rights. Story testified that there was no discussion of Miranda rights and distinguished between being detained, arrested, and taken into custody.
Hutchinson concluded by emphasizing the implications of failing to log calls or activate cameras, noting that such omissions could result in a lack of record. Story agreed, stating that there were indeed times when calls went unlogged.
During redirect, Deputy District Attorney Matthew De Moura asked Story why he deactivated his BWC. Story reiterated that policy requires camera use only when interacting with subjects. He also testified that Dominguez had been holding a bag in a way that obscured its contents. On recross, Hutchinson questioned whether the bag had handles and suggested that if it were heavy, it would need to be held from the bottom. Story agreed.
Judge McAdam thanked Story and dismissed him from the stand.
Next, the prosecution called Assistant Director Joyce Fernandez from the College of Biological Sciences advising unit at UC Davis. Fernandez testified about the department’s process for reviewing academic performance and disqualifying students. She stated that the department has around 6,000 students and typically sends out 250 to 400 academic notices each term.
However, during questioning by DDA Frits Van Der Hoek regarding Dominguez’s academic appeals, DPD Hutchinson objected, arguing that the proper foundation had not been established to allow Fernandez to testify about the appeals process. Judge McAdam agreed, and court took a 20-minute recess to address the issue. Upon returning, the judge ruled that Fernandez could not testify to matters for which she lacked foundation.
Still, Dominguez’s transcript was reviewed in court, showing a steady decline in academic performance leading up to the incident. Van Der Hoek raised questions about Dominguez’s GPA and standing. Hutchinson asked if Fernandez had a copy of the disqualification email sent to Dominguez. She did not, but Van Der Hoek indicated he had it, though the document was not reviewed during Thursday’s session.
The trial is scheduled to resume Friday, May 16, at 9:30 a.m.
