Newsom Commutes Sentences of Four Sacramento County Men, Opening Path to Parole Consideration

Newsom touring the learning center at San Quentin in February

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Gov. Gavin Newsom commuted the prison sentences of four men convicted in Sacramento County shootings, including three fatal attacks, citing their rehabilitation and accomplishments while incarcerated and opening a path to parole consideration without guaranteeing their release.

The four men — Jeremy Chiu, Gerald Ellis, Ronald Prasad and Ro Vo — were among 30 people whose sentences Newsom commuted Oct. 22 as part of a broader clemency announcement that also included 27 pardons.

According to the Governor’s Office, the decisions followed reviews of the applicants’ rehabilitation, institutional conduct, educational accomplishments and potential for successful reintegration into society.

The commutations do not overturn the men’s convictions or establish their innocence. Instead, they modify their sentences to provide opportunities for parole consideration that were previously unavailable or more distant.

According to the Sacramento Bee, Chiu was convicted of murder and other offenses stemming from a 2001 robbery in Sacramento County during which he fatally shot a person.

Chiu was sentenced in 2002 to life without the possibility of parole and additional prison terms for related offenses.

Newsom commuted his sentence to 25 years to life, making him eligible to seek parole.

During his incarceration, Chiu earned a GED, completed college coursework and became a certified drug and alcohol addiction counselor.

The governor’s commutation order cited Chiu’s efforts toward rehabilitation, including his participation in educational programs and his record of accountability while incarcerated.

Ellis was convicted of murder following a 2005 home-invasion robbery in Sacramento County during which an accomplice fatally shot a person.

He was sentenced in 2007 to life without the possibility of parole.

Newsom commuted Ellis’ sentence to 25 years to life, allowing him to seek parole consideration after approximately 21 years of incarceration.

According to the Governor’s Office, Ellis earned associate and bachelor’s degrees while incarcerated, maintained a positive disciplinary record and worked as a peer support specialist.

His application also received support from the Board of Parole Hearings and the California Supreme Court.

The governor cited Ellis’ age at the time of the offense, his conduct during incarceration and his prospects for successful community reentry.

Prasad was convicted of attempted murder and robbery following a 2004 incident in which he and an accomplice robbed a person at gunpoint before Prasad shot and wounded another person while fleeing.

He was sentenced in 2005 to 10 years to life, plus an additional 50 years to life for sentencing enhancements.

Newsom commuted Prasad’s sentence to 60 years to life, modifying his parole eligibility while leaving the underlying convictions intact.

During approximately 22 years of incarceration, Prasad completed vocational training, earned a GED, attended college courses and worked as a companion dog trainer.

The governor cited those accomplishments and Prasad’s institutional conduct as factors supporting clemency.

Vo was convicted of murder and assault with a firearm after fatally shooting a rival gang member during a 1998 confrontation in Sacramento County.

He was sentenced in 2000 to life without the possibility of parole.

Newsom commuted his sentence to 28 years to life, allowing him to seek parole consideration.

According to the Governor’s Office, Vo earned a GED, participated in prison programs and received positive evaluations from correctional staff for his work ethic and conduct.

Although the four commutations modify the men’s sentences, none requires the Board of Parole Hearings to approve their release.

Under California’s parole process, commissioners must separately evaluate whether an incarcerated person can safely return to the community.

That assessment includes the circumstances of the original offense, conduct during incarceration, evidence of rehabilitation, public safety considerations and input from victims, survivors and prosecutors.

The governor’s clemency authority is distinct from the parole board’s responsibility to determine suitability for release.

According to the Governor’s Office, commutation applications undergo a review that may include criminal history, court records, institutional conduct, rehabilitation and the potential impact on victims and the community.

California law also requires the governor to obtain approval from the California Supreme Court before granting clemency to an individual convicted of more than one felony.

Sacramento County District Attorney Thien Ho did not publicly comment on the four commutations in the reporting reviewed.

However, district attorneys may provide input during the clemency process, and prosecutors and victims may participate in subsequent parole proceedings.

The Governor’s Office said its clemency decisions consider both the seriousness of the original offenses and the extent to which applicants have demonstrated rehabilitation and accountability.

The administration described clemency as a mechanism for recognizing rehabilitation while maintaining public safety protections through the parole review process.

Newsom’s Oct. 22 announcement brought his total clemency actions since taking office to 303 pardons, 199 commutations and 45 reprieves.

The four Sacramento County cases illustrate how executive clemency can modify sentences imposed decades earlier while preserving the convictions and leaving decisions about eventual release to the parole board.

For the individuals receiving commutations, the decisions create an opportunity for reconsideration based on their conduct and rehabilitation during incarceration.

For victims and surviving family members, the parole process provides an opportunity to present information and express concerns before any release decision is made.

The next significant development in each case will be the determination of parole eligibility and, where applicable, a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings.

Until those proceedings occur, the four men remain subject to their modified prison sentences, and none has been guaranteed release.

To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/

X: https://x.com/davisvanguard

Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social

Subscribe to 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.

Categories:

Breaking News Everyday Injustice

Tags:

Author

  • Niobe Martinez

    Niobe is a 4th-year student at UC Irvine, majoring in Criminology, Law, and Society. She is a native of the Inland Empire and lives in San Bernardino County. Her interests span criminal law, juvenile law and investigative journalism. Niobe seeks to reveal the injustices in her underserved community, often overlooked in mainstream news media. She plans to continue this path by receiving her paralegal certification and attending law school in the future.

    View all posts