WOODLAND, Calif. — During a competency hearing Friday morning in Yolo County Superior Court Department 10, Judge Catherine A. Rayhill ordered the release of the accused on his own recognizance after reviewing a mental health report finding him incompetent to stand trial.
The accused was charged with one felony count of resisting arrest.
Assistant Chief Public Defender Andrea Pelochino explained that the accused is not eligible for pretrial detention under the recent California Supreme Court case, People v. Kowalczyk.
She further stated the significant concerns that justify his release: the accused is at risk of losing housing if incarcerated, is diagnosed with a mental health condition and has a case manager who can help with transportation.
DPD Pelochino said he has been stable in the past and has people who can assist with his restoration in the community, though he has been resistant to getting help from social workers.
DPD Pelochino emphasized that the store manager of the liquor store where the accused was buying cigarettes at the time of his arrest was not asking to have him arrested, but rather for him to leave the store.
Deputy District Attorney Aimee McLeod argued that although the case falls outside Article I, Section 12 of the California Constitution, it does not mean automatic release. She added that the court should ensure protection of the public and consider less restrictive means.
DDA McLeod expressed concerns about the accused’s criminal history, which involved aggravated battery in another state and a felony charge of resisting arrest.
She continued that the accused was upset when he entered the liquor store and that the manager wanted him to leave. She added that the accused took a fighting stance and resisted arrest.
DDA McLeod noted that the court had previously released the accused on his own recognizance to comply with court orders and stay away from the liquor store. DDA McLeod added that while he stayed away from the store, the accused failed to attend court hearings.
DDA McLeod argued that the court should consider “what is objectively attainable for him,” noting that the accused failed to appear in court, leading the court to issue a bench warrant. She said she did not believe there were any other restrictive means the accused would follow.
She also questioned whether treatment in the community would be successful, considering the objective symptoms the accused had shown in court. The accused responded to the DDA’s arguments by stating, “Very false information right there.”
DPD Pelochino countered that the court should provide “one more opportunity,” emphasizing the importance of the accused’s housing and community support. She added that he followed the most important rule by staying away from the complaining witness.
She pointed out that while the accused had a hard time listening to what he disagreed with, he settled down when she redirected him.
DPD Pelochino emphasized that the absence of stabilizing factors might make the accused’s symptoms worse and requested that the court consider what is best for him and the community.
Judge Rayhill ruled that the accused should be released on his own recognizance. She said she believed he would fully cooperate and made sure to provide him with any necessary support.
She ordered that the accused meet with a representative from the Conditional Release Program, or CONREP, a state-mandated outpatient treatment and supervision program.
The accused said he does not trust the person he would be meeting with, and the judge allowed a “comfort person” to be present with him during the meeting.
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.
