Judge Dismisses Charges in UC Davis Vandalism Case in Interest of Justice

WOODLAND, CA – Yolo County Superior Court Judge Sonia Cortés on Tuesday dismissed all charges in the widely watched case involving the vandalism of UC Davis’s iconic “Egghead” sculptures, ruling that dismissal was warranted “in the interest of justice.”

Judge Cortés announced her decision, concluding a year-and-a-half legal saga that had drawn attention across the Davis community. 

The case stemmed from a 2024 protest on the UC Davis campus connected to outrage over violence in the Middle East. 

Protesters had spray-painted messages such as “Divest” and “Free Palestine” on several of the university’s Egghead sculptures, a series of public art pieces by late UC Davis professor Robert Arneson.

The three individuals charged had faced felony vandalism and conspiracy counts after a Yolo County grand jury indicted them in May 2024. 

Prosecutors had resisted efforts to resolve the case through diversion, insisting that the acts of vandalism represented a “coordinated event” across the campus and were not protected by free speech.

Deputy District Attorney Jesse Richardson argued in court that Penal Code section 1385, which allows judges to dismiss cases in the interest of justice, was “not the correct vehicle” for resolution. He told the court that dismissal “amounts to an end-around the usual process of prosecution,” contending that the matter should have proceeded to trial or through a plea agreement. 

Richardson described the vandalism as “a coordinated event involving multiple people,” which he said caused damage to dozens of locations, including doors, walls, and beloved campus art.

Richardson said that while the protest messages were directed at UC Davis Chancellor Gary May and university leadership, “the people who actually are affected by this” were staff members—custodians, museum workers, and maintenance employees—who spent hours cleaning and restoring the campus. He said their voices would “not be heard if a trial doesn’t happen.”

Defense counsel presented a different picture. 

Deputy Public Defender Danielle Craig told the court that her clients had already taken full responsibility and completed all steps requested by Rachel Teagle, director of the Manetti Shrem Museum of Art. Craig said Teagle had outlined a restorative path forward, including restitution, community service, and education about the artwork’s cultural importance.

According to court records, the restitution totaled $4,203.28, covering the costs of restoring three Egghead sculptures—“Stargazer,” “Yin & Yang,” and “Hear No Evil/See No Evil”—to their original condition. The work was done by professional art conservators under the direction of the museum. Craig submitted documentation showing that the payment had already been made in full.

In addition to restitution, the defendants each completed more than 12 hours of community service, exceeding the recommendation made by Teagle. They volunteered with the Davis Night Market, a mutual aid organization that combats food insecurity, and with Cool Davis, an energy conservation group that helps residents lower their carbon footprint.

They also watched a UC Davis documentary titled “Unexpected Legends,” which explores the history, meaning, and cultural significance of the Egghead sculptures. 

Craig said the effort reflected “a genuine desire to understand the importance of what was damaged and to give back to the community.”

She told the court the actions were taken “without any specific promise” from the court or the prosecution. 

“They completed every expectation that was outlined within two weeks,” she said, adding that the case had become “a powerful learning experience.”

Defense attorney David Nelson echoed those sentiments, saying the protest occurred “during a time of global outrage” and that his clients’ actions, while misguided, were not malicious.

“They understand their anger washed over on people who work very hard and are proud of what they do,” Nelson said.

Attorney James Granucci said the university and the museum never sought prosecution. “Neither the regents nor the chancellor wanted to see this result in a conviction,” he said. “They made suggestions, our clients took those suggestions to heart, and they made the victims whole.”

Craig argued that dismissal was the only remaining option because the District Attorney’s Office had refused to permit any form of diversion. “When prosecutorial discretion is abandoned, we are left with other avenues,” she said. “The law provides this court with authority to dismiss a case in the interest of justice. That’s the only opportunity for justice here.”

Judge Cortés said she considered the arguments carefully and noted that the museum and university representatives were open to alternative resolutions rather than criminal prosecution. She recognized that the vandalism had caused real harm but found that the defendants had taken meaningful steps to make amends.

“The victims were in agreement that the traditional prosecution route is not what they wished to pursue,” Cortés said from the bench. “They have completed the community service hours, watched the educational film about the significance of the Eggheads, and paid restitution in full.”

In delivering her ruling, the judge told the three young people that, while their intentions may have been rooted in protest, the law requires that such expression remain peaceful and lawful. 

“It’s important that while you may want to exercise free speech rights, you need to do it in a lawful manner,” Cortés said. “Holding a sign is appropriate. But once you move onto someone else’s property, that’s where the problem arises.”

She urged them to share what they had learned with others.

“If you are in any groups where there may be protests, educate them about what is appropriate and what is not appropriate so there won’t be vandalism,” she said. “The court is not condoning your behavior, but you have taken steps to remedy it.”

With that, Cortés granted the motion to dismiss under Penal Code section 1385 and ordered the case closed. She instructed defense counsel to ensure that the restitution check was delivered to the museum.

The ruling marks a rare use of the “interest of justice” provision, which gives judges discretion to dismiss charges when continued prosecution would serve no public benefit.

The decision was greeted quietly in the courtroom, signaling relief after months of hearings and public debate over how the justice system should respond to acts of political protest.

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Tags: