WOODLAND, Calif. — During a review hearing Wednesday in Yolo County Superior Court, defense counsel argued the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office failed to promptly enter a warrant after the accused sought to surrender, resulting in his arrest days later despite efforts to comply with court instructions.
Deputy Public Defender Jose Gonzales told the court Sacramento County was scheduled to pick up the accused that afternoon for transport. Gonzales then requested that the Sacramento County District Attorney’s Office enter a warrant into the record on behalf of the accused.
The accused was charged March 28, 2026, with one felony count of obstructing or resisting an executive officer and one felony count of making criminal threats with the intent to terrorize.
During Gonzales’ initial argument, a no-bail warrant was issued, and he specifically requested that the warrant be entered as soon as possible to avoid future consequences.
The accused then followed instructions by checking into Sacramento Superior Court regarding his probationary terms, but the warrant had not yet been entered into the system as Gonzales had requested before the accused checked in.
After describing the discrepancies, Gonzales stated, “On Tuesday, the accused stopped by to clear his warrant or to surrender, yet the warrant was still not in the system.” The comment followed his earlier remarks that the accused had complied with the court’s probationary terms while staying with a relative until receiving further instructions.
After the warrant was not entered into the system, police waited outside the accused’s adoptive sister’s home and arrested him without incident. Gonzales said he was surprised by the arrest because the warrant had not yet been processed, and the accused was taken back into custody.
Gonzales challenged the arrest, stating, “The accused had acknowledged and shown responsibility towards doing the right thing, despite the circumstances at hand.”
In response, Deputy District Attorney Aimee Carrazco stated, “There is serious concern for the accused being out of custody for a week and a half as he is a danger towards public safety.”
In response to Carrazco’s argument, Gonzales said the accused had demonstrated he would not flee while out of custody and had shown initiative in trying to do things “the right way.”
Gonzales also requested that the accused be considered for a mental health diversion program to address substance abuse and mental health issues. He requested an order granting access to ASAM (American Society of Addiction Medicine), to which Judge Clara M. Levers responded, “I have done that for other people, and it does not happen.”
Gonzales also noted the accused had been accepted into the Jericho Project, which was located farther away than his current residence. Gonzales emphasized his request to keep the accused nearby, despite his earlier argument that the accused had not attempted to flee while out of custody.
When Gonzales sought pretrial release for the accused, Judge Levers said she was not prepared to address the request at that time. However, she added, “Getting him far away from where he has deep-rooted problems is favorable and could benefit public safety and himself.”
A motion for pretrial release is scheduled to be heard July 13, pursuant to an order issued by Judge Levers.
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.
