WOODLAND, Calif. — A judge this week ordered a man to answer to a felony drug sales charge and denied a request to modify his probation status following a preliminary hearing in Yolo County Superior Court.
During the hearing, the court heard testimony from Deputy Hernan Vega, a detective with the Yolo County Sheriff’s Office, who said the accused was found in possession of 108 grams, or “approximately $2,000 worth of methamphetamine,” at the time of his arrest.
Vega testified that the quantity exceeded what he considered typical for personal use, stating that individuals who use methamphetamine may consume up to one gram per day. Based on that assessment, he concluded the amount indicated an intent to sell.
Deputy District Attorney Ashley Harvey also noted that the accused was unemployed at the time of the arrest, asserting that the amount of methamphetamine in his possession was inconsistent with personal use.
During cross-examination, Deputy Public Defender Sarah MacDonald pointed to a discrepancy in Vega’s testimony regarding daily substance consumption. Vega stated that users may consume up to one gram per day, but earlier said users may consume two grams per day, which he later characterized as a mistake.
MacDonald also asked whether it was possible that the accused and another individual could have “pool[ed] their money to share [the substance],” which Vega acknowledged was plausible. She further noted that the accused was arrested while driving a friend’s vehicle.
MacDonald emphasized that no large sums of cash, packaging materials, or other items commonly associated with drug sales were found at the time of arrest, arguing that the absence of such evidence supported a charge of simple possession rather than possession for sale.
Despite the defense arguments, Judge Catherine Hohenwarter ruled to uphold the charge of possession for sale.
Following the ruling, MacDonald requested a modification of the accused’s probation status from Supervised Own Recognizance Release to Own Recognizance, citing the accused’s efforts to engage in treatment. According to the defense, the accused had regularly appeared for probation appointments and court hearings and had not violated probation terms.
MacDonald stated that the accused was currently on a waitlist for admission to Walter’s House and requested that his status be changed upon entry into the program. She also noted the accused had generally complied with probation conditions, with one failure to appear attributed to a separate arrest.
Harvey opposed the request, stating the accused was “not a good candidate for SOR” and that the failure to appear was the accused’s responsibility.
Judge Hohenwarter characterized the absence as a “willful failure to appear” and said she was inclined to “take [the sales intent] as true,” despite the defense’s arguments regarding the lack of direct evidence of intent to sell and the accused’s post-arrest efforts. The request for release on own recognizance was denied, and an arraignment hearing was scheduled for Jan. 27, when the accused will answer to the sales charge.
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.
