NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. — An accused woman who pleaded guilty to a probation violation in Harbor Justice Center on June 5 later returned to court without her attorney and asked to change her plea, insisting she did not want to admit guilt for conduct she maintained she did not commit.
During the probation hearing, the accused pleaded guilty to the violation as recommended by her attorney, resulting in a three-year extension of her probation. However, she later returned and asked to change her plea, citing that she did not want to plead guilty to a crime she stated she never committed.
The accused was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol on Aug. 28, 2021. She was sentenced to probation, which she pleaded guilty to violating in court on June 5.
Despite pleading guilty, the accused emphasized her innocence in the probation violation case, as well as in two other separate cases. She stated that she had already served time in jail on related matters after being remanded into custody during a previous court hearing.
In the original hearing, Deputy Public Defender James Henshaw advised the accused to plead guilty to the probation violation because it would result in no additional punishment beyond three more years of probation. The accused also requested diversion, which Judge Prickett approved.
Following the diversion, the accused was told that if she completed all requirements, she could return to Judge Prickett’s courtroom after one year and argue for her probation sentence to be terminated. Judge Prickett said he would likely consider ending probation, citing her extensive Alcoholics Anonymous attendance and the self-help work she had completed.
However, after pleading guilty, the accused later returned to Judge Prickett’s courtroom. Unaccompanied by her attorney, she asked to change her plea, stating that her lawyer had advised her to plead guilty but that she did not want to admit to something she did not commit.
The accused cited her other cases, in which she claimed innocence, and said she believed they would be dismissed. She expressed concern that a guilty plea to the probation violation would negatively affect those cases and subject her to undue punishment.
Following this, the accused requested that her case be continued to trial so that her other two cases could be resolved and so she would not have to face probation.
Judge Prickett first advised her to appear with her attorney, which she refused. He then advised her that despite receiving three additional years of probation, the outcome was preferable to the potential one-year jail sentence that could result from a trial.
Judge Prickett reiterated that upon successful completion of diversion, the remaining probation time could be terminated.
However, the accused remained adamant that she did not commit the violations, stating that she “was not driving, he was,” while pointing to a man seated with her.
She also cited the hundreds of AA meetings she had attended, her nine months of sobriety, and her need to regain her driver’s license for work. Based on those arguments, the accused requested that her probation be reduced to one year, which Judge Prickett denied.
Judge Prickett assured the accused that she should adhere to her original guilty plea and that if her other cases were dismissed, she could return to argue for probation to be terminated and charges to be dismissed.
The accused continued to argue her innocence and express confusion about the law until Judge Prickett stated, “We’re done here miss,” and dismissed her from the courtroom.
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.
