By Hannah Kaminker, Audrey Sawyer
WOODLAND, CA – During a jury trial Tuesday in Yolo County Superior Court, police officers testified about their use of force while detaining and arresting a man now facing misdemeanor charges of resisting arrest and alleged possession of burglary tools and paraphernalia. Deputy Public Defender Courtney Leavitt argued that officers used excessive force on the accused—who, after being searched, was found not to possess burglary tools—and that their police reports omitted critical details, including that an officer placed a knee on the man’s neck.
According to testimony, two officers arrived on scene and used force that was neither included in official reports nor aligned with Woodland Police Department’s Policy 300, which governs the use of force.
Officer Martinez, a witness, was questioned about body-worn camera footage submitted as evidence. The video showed the accused running from Officer Martinez, who pointed his firearm at the man and shouted, “If you grab anything, I’ll shoot you.” Martinez also stated he would tase the man, though the footage showed he was only holding a firearm—no taser was ever drawn. The accused, facing away from the officer and away from nearby bushes, did not appear to pose a threat. Under direct questioning, Officer Martinez admitted he had no information at the time to indicate the accused had a weapon.
The footage then showed Officer Martinez ordering the accused to the ground. A second officer, Corporal Mark Gojkovich, arrived in an unmarked silver truck and out of uniform. According to Martinez, Gojkovich had been en route to the police station when he responded to the scene. Despite his role in the arrest, Gojkovich was not mentioned in the official police report.
Bodycam footage showed Gojkovich placing his knee on the accused’s neck while handcuffing him on the concrete. Officer Martinez testified that he assumed a supplemental report would be filed to document the force used, but acknowledged none was.
Another officer, Corporal Dulai, also arrived later, but his involvement and the use of force that evening were likewise not documented in police reports. Officer Martinez conceded that these omissions—along with the failure to notify a supervisor or file a required Use of Force report—violated Department Policy 300.
Policy 300 states: “Officers shall use only that amount of force that reasonably appears necessary given the facts and circumstances perceived by the officer at the time of the event to accomplish a legitimate law enforcement purpose. Excessive force is not permitted at the Woodland Police Department.” The policy also requires all uses of force to be reported and investigated by a supervisor, including documentation of the justification for the force.
DPD Leavitt emphasized that the pointing of a firearm constitutes a use of force under the policy and argued that the officers failed to comply with basic reporting requirements. Leavitt also criticized the lack of any attempt by Corporal Dulai to identify witnesses or investigate why force had been used, including why a gun was drawn.
Officer Martinez confirmed under oath that he did not observe Dulai conduct any investigation into the use of force.
DPD Leavitt further questioned the officers’ conduct during the search. “While the accused was lying on the ground, the end of the video shows him rolled onto his side on the concrete sidewalk,” she said. “Officer Griffin assisted Officer Martinez with the search. The accused was not helped to his feet, nor was he provided a pad or cushion—he remained on the hard surface throughout.”
She argued that the accused, handcuffed behind his back, was deliberately left in an uncomfortable position. Officer Martinez denied that this was intentional, but Leavitt pointed out that in the video he had said, “Keep him on his side for a little bit, he can be uncomfortable for running.” Martinez acknowledged making the statement.
After that, Officer Griffin conducted a search of the accused. Despite the high level of force used, Martinez had called a “Code One” over the radio—typically reserved for violent incidents such as stabbings or shootings. However, no weapons or burglary tools were recovered from the accused.
During cross-examination, Deputy District Attorney Zach Gazda asked why Officer Martinez had told the accused he would tase him. Martinez admitted it was a bluff, claiming it was “way less dangerous than a firearm” and intended as a deterrent.
Martinez said the accused eventually complied but explained he had concerns the man might have a weapon because his hands were near his waistband. “The logical inference is that he could have a firearm, but there was no way to tell in that moment,” he said. He described the area as potentially dangerous, which he said justified drawing his firearm.
Martinez testified that the accused complained about tight handcuffs, prompting officers to loosen them. He also stated that although Corporal Dulai did not ask for an explanation for why the firearm was pointed, he voluntarily offered one.
Leavitt pressed the officer further on whether the bluff was solely to facilitate detention, to which Martinez replied that it was. Leavitt noted that the accused had never advanced toward the officers, never raised a fist, and had simply turned his head before lying on the ground.
The jury trial is set to resume for closing arguments on June 4 at 9 a.m. in Department 9.
