WOODLAND, Calif. – On Friday at Yolo County Superior Court, a man charged with first-degree murder filed a motion under Penal Code section 995, seeking to reduce the charge to second-degree murder or manslaughter. Deputy Public Defender Jonathan Opet argued that there was no premeditation to qualify the killing as first-degree murder.
In addition to the murder charge, the accused faces allegations of aggravation, enhancement for use of a deadly weapon, and habitual crimes.
The accused was charged with first-degree murder after allegedly stabbing the victim in a parking lot. Surveillance footage reportedly showed the accused driving past the victim, going to a Rite Aid, and then returning to the scene armed with multiple knives. Before the accused arrived, Opet argued that footage also showed the victim holding a weapon.
Deputy District Attorney Adrienne Chin-Perez stated that the accused admitted there had been an altercation between him and the victim the night before the killing. That encounter allegedly involved the victim threatening the accused with a knife, escalating tension between them. The accused later described the killing as occurring in a “heat of passion.”
After hearing arguments from both sides, Judge Clara M. Levers questioned the defense about why the 995 motion had not been filed earlier. Opet responded that there was uncertainty about the charge at the start of the case. He explained that the preliminary hearings did not address premeditation, leaving the defense unsure whether the murder charge would be first-degree or a lesser degree.
Chin-Perez argued that the accused acted with premeditation and deliberation. She said that even if the victim had a knife, the accused’s decision to go home to retrieve his own knives demonstrated premeditation. Contrasting that with a hypothetical case of an unplanned altercation, she introduced the concept of “implied malice,” arguing that by arming himself, the accused knew his actions could result in the victim’s death.
Opet countered by applying Chin-Perez’s argument to the victim, asserting that if the victim armed himself with a knife, that action could also be interpreted as “implied malice.”
Judge Levers highlighted the debate between implied malice and express malice, noting that this distinction added complexity to determining the accused’s intent. The prosecution emphasized that the accused’s decision to return to the scene after going to Rite Aid—despite his history with the victim—demonstrated intent with malice. Opet maintained that this theory was not supported by substantial evidence.
In the end, Judge Levers denied the defense’s motion to reduce the charge but granted the prosecution’s motion to amend the information. The accused’s charge remains first-degree murder.
An arraignment is scheduled for Dec. 5, 2025, at 9 a.m. in Yolo County Superior Court.
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.
