WOODLAND, Calif. — A Yolo County Superior Court judge on Friday granted judicial diversion to an accused person facing multiple misdemeanor charges who is participating in an addiction treatment program, rejecting prosecution arguments that the accused’s criminal history made them unsuitable for diversion.
At a motion hearing, Judge Sonia Cortés approved diversion despite the prosecution’s position that the accused was “eligible but not suitable” for what it characterized as the “privilege” of judicial diversion.
The accused previously experienced homelessness and faces several misdemeanor charges, including petty theft, shoplifting and drug possession. Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson filed the motion for judicial diversion, arguing that it would allow the accused time to complete treatment and stabilize their living situation.
Hutchinson explained that the residential treatment program could last from six months to a year, depending on participation. As a condition of the program, the accused would attend weekly group meetings and one-on-one counseling sessions. He emphasized that treatment would give the accused “a chance to change their life.”
Deputy District Attorney Zach Gazda argued that judicial diversion is typically intended for people with limited criminal histories who are unlikely to commit future offenses, describing diversion as a “privilege, not a right.”
When asked how long the accused had been in treatment, Hutchinson acknowledged that there had been “ups and downs.” The accused’s counselor has recommended a residential treatment program instead of the current outpatient program, but the accused requested to continue in the outpatient setting.
Hutchinson said that if judicial diversion were granted and the accused did poorly in the current program, the court could require a transition to residential treatment or resume criminal proceedings. The defense also noted that despite the accused’s “ups and downs,” they had made significant progress.
Responding to the prosecution’s argument that the accused’s record should preclude diversion, Hutchinson said diversion is commonly granted to people with more extensive records when they are “on the right path.” The defense also noted that the accused has committed no new offenses and cited stable housing and continued participation in treatment.
“Once again, this is an individual who was homeless and severely drug addicted when he picked up all these charges,” Hutchinson said.
Cortés acknowledged the prosecution’s concerns about the accused’s criminal history but granted judicial diversion, noting that the accused had no new violations within the past year and had shown progress in treatment.
The judge also said relapse is a common part of addiction recovery and, despite the prosecution’s argument that diversion should be limited to those unlikely to reoffend, emphasized that judicial diversion is an important tool for reducing recidivism.
Diversion was granted on the conditions that the accused successfully complete the treatment program, transition to residential treatment if required, pay restitution and stay away from the stores involved in the thefts, among other terms.
A judicial diversion review hearing is scheduled for March 17 at 9 a.m.
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.
