By Riya Vyas
WOODLAND, CA – On Wednesday in Yolo County Superior Court, Deputy District Attorney Candance Guthmiller and Deputy Public Defender Roberto Villa delivered closing arguments in a petty theft case involving $23.74 worth of merchandise.
Despite the low value of the alleged theft, the case proceeded to a jury trial that lasted three days.
The accused was charged with petty theft of retail merchandise and trespassing. On Feb. 8, 2024, she visited a Walmart, purchased several items, and was stopped upon leaving by a Loss Prevention Associate who accused her of stealing fishing lures, allegedly hidden in her bag.
Security camera footage showed the accused placing the lures in her bag, Villa said. However, the accused’s former husband, who was shopping with her, testified that he saw her put the lures back on a shelf in another aisle.
Villa argued it is common for shoppers to pick up and return items while browsing and maintained that the prosecution failed to prove the third element of theft—intent to permanently deprive the store of property.
Guthmiller countered that the accused had kept the lures in her bag and failed to purchase them at checkout. She said that when asked to open her bag, the accused tried to avoid the Loss Prevention Associate, which constituted circumstantial evidence that “she had something she should not have.”
Villa responded that while it may be reasonable to think the lures were hidden, it was equally reasonable to believe she returned them to the shelf. He cited California Criminal Jury Instructions No. 224, stating that if two reasonable conclusions can be drawn from circumstantial evidence, and one points to innocence, the jury must adopt that interpretation.
Villa also questioned the credibility of a prosecution witness who was a former Walmart employee fired for violating company policy. He said the employee had shown “a pattern of attacking potential shoplifters” and lacked certainty in her testimony, quoting her as saying, “I don’t know if she was trespassing.”
Guthmiller said the employee’s firing was unrelated to this case and argued the witness had been effective in investigating potential shoplifting incidents, even if her actions violated company policy. “Her being fired has no bearing on this case,” she said.
Villa emphasized that after the accused was stopped, she drove directly to the police station. “Why would she drive to the police department and talk to Officer Souza if she really did take these lures?” he asked. “A person who steals something doesn’t go straight to the police department to get arrested.”
He showed jurors a photo of the accused’s Walmart receipt and another showing the items found in her car, which matched the receipt. The fishing lures were not among them. He also noted that the accused had withdrawn $60 in cash. “She had the money to pay for the lures if she needed to,” Villa said.
Villa quoted Officer Souza, a prosecution witness, as saying, “I cannot say 100% there was fishing lures in that purse.”
Guthmiller argued the accused went to the police station because the Loss Prevention Associate told her the police would be contacted. “It would have been better to go there directly than be hunted down,” she said, adding that the lures could have been discarded in the two miles between the Walmart and the station.
Villa reminded the jury that the prosecution’s burden is to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which he defined as requiring an “enduring, lasting, firmly held belief” in the accused’s guilt. “You have the power to hold the prosecution to their burden,” he said.
“If you review the exhibits, there will be no doubt in your mind,” Guthmiller told the jury.
Villa pointed out that the case revolved around just $23.74. “That’s the amount for which everyone has gathered,” he said. To illustrate the trivial nature of the amount, he told the jury that the world’s richest family is worth over $400 billion. “You as jury members are the last line of defense,” he said.
“Just because someone has more money than you doesn’t mean you’re entitled to steal from them,” Guthmiller responded. She cited the $9 billion in annual theft statewide and said, “It’s unacceptable to steal.”
According to Scott Graves from the California Budget and Policy Center, shoplifting is currently “well below” pre-pandemic levels. In 2022, the rate was 210 per 100,000 Californians, down 17 percent from 2014, Graves wrote.
Following the closing arguments, the judge instructed the jury to begin deliberations. Sentencing will follow once the jury reaches a verdict.
I am a mother of 2 and unfortunately a Yolo County resident. The justice system in this county is ran with ignorance and greed. Not Proof by far!. Especially when for 2 decades I have never been talked to by law enforcement or been in trouble. I found out about this ONLY be requesting to join Yolo Countys’ re=entry program to fix my past of 20 years ago for my career purposes. The response from the county was I had a warrant to fix first!! What person goes to the DA to enter such a program if they are breaking the law???? The injustice of this county speaks volumes alone. This injustice that day ended with a physical attack that the ER confirmed injury to both of us. But i’m told there “was not enough abuse” on record to go after Walmart. Yet a year later I’m going through this. It’s crazy and downright terrifying to see this happen to an innocent law abiding citizen for over 20yrs.