YOLO, Calif. — A Yolo County judge on Friday denied a request to release a homeless caretaker charged with felony petty theft, citing a history of failing to appear and repeated probation violations as reasons to keep him in custody.
This Friday, in an arraignment hearing at the Superior Court of Yolo County, the court denied the defense’s request to release the accused onto supervised own recognizance. The accused faced one felony count for petty theft with circumstances in aggravation.
Deputy Public Defender Roberto Villa stated that the circumstances of the theft were that the accused was “taking groceries to sustain his partner and himself.” However, Deputy District Attorney Carolyn Palumbo explained that not all of the stolen goods were groceries and necessities for sustenance; among the stolen items was makeup.
DDA Palumbo brought up the accused’s history, including being released on supervised own recognizance and failing to report, being uncontactable, and giving a “bogus address so probation didn’t know where he was and had to issue a warrant for him.”
DDA Palumbo added, “He is on three grants of misdemeanor probation continuing to commit crimes, and he is unable to be supervised.” The prosecution asked that the accused remain in custody because of his unlikeliness to return to court.
DPD Villa explained that the accused was experiencing homelessness during the period DDA Palumbo had referenced. The accused now has stable housing in Davis and a working phone number.
DPD Villa noted, “This is not a violent crime where public safety is at risk. This is a crime of poverty, somebody taking food to sustain themselves,” asking for less restrictive means of addressing the accused’s ability to come to court. “He’s in a more stable place now, and that’s what’s going to be different this time.”
Additionally, it was brought to light that “[the accused’s] husband has a medical condition that he wants to be present for” in order for the accused to take care of him, forming the basis of the defense’s request for release onto supervised own recognizance.
Judge Danette Brown expressed concern that the accused had violated probation multiple times. Though DPD Villa explained that the accused was not in contact because his phone had been cut off, she stated there were alternative ways the accused could have reached out.
“But you could have borrowed a phone or done something to call and reach out to probation but he didn’t do that,” Judge Brown said. “I mean you know that you’re under supervision, and yet you’re not making these efforts. I mean, it’s on you to make these efforts, and you’re not doing that.”
She empathized with the accused’s focus on “surviving out on the street,” but she returned to the point that he was on supervision at the time.
The prosecution added its concern, saying, “He doesn’t comply with probation and he’s not supervisable because he’s been given an opportunity at SOR. He was on probation for theft when he committed theft again.”
“Him having housing and a phone, I don’t know if that’s going to provide any assurances that he’s going to comply with supervision this time around. I don’t think anything’s different.”
In her ruling, Judge Brown said, “As much as I hate to do this, I just don’t have any reasonable assurances that he’s going to appear in court.” Due to the accused’s failure to follow supervised own recognizance, the court ruled to keep him in custody and set bail initially at $25,000 before reducing it to $10,000.
The next court date will be a preliminary hearing on March 2 at 9 a.m. in Department 7.
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.
