WOODLAND, Calif. — An accused man appearing in custody for a pretrial conference in Yolo County Superior Court was ordered released on his own recognizance with continuous alcohol monitoring after the prosecution raised allegations involving another DUI case and the defense disputed whether anyone had been injured.
The accused appeared before Judge Paul K. Richardson on charges including driving under the influence, an excessive blood alcohol concentration or refusal enhancement, an enhancement alleging a blood alcohol concentration of 0.20% or greater and driving without a valid license.
Deputy Public Defender Jake Hadden requested the accused’s release from jail while reserving his pretrial rights. While the conference concerned his second DUI case, the deputy district attorney raised a third alleged DUI incident during the discussion of release conditions.
“We may have an arraignment on a new case,” the prosecutor said.
The prosecution characterized the new matter as a third DUI and alleged that the accused had been released on his own recognizance in another DUI case before the current incident occurred less than six months later.
According to the prosecutor, the accused drove on the wrong side of the road and collided with another vehicle. The prosecutor also alleged that the accused had been uncooperative and that officers obtained a search warrant to collect a blood sample.
The prosecution said injuries were involved and requested that the accused be placed on continuous alcohol monitoring through a Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor (SCRAM).
Hadden challenged the allegation that anyone had been injured.
“I don’t believe there was any injury,” Hadden said.
The competing statements left the question of injuries unresolved during the observed hearing. Neither the prosecution’s allegation nor the defense’s response established whether anyone had been injured.
Hadden also stated that no SCRAM order had been in place at the time of the alleged incident. The defense explained that the accused was no longer driving, did not have a vehicle, was employed and was willing to pay for alcohol monitoring.
According to Hadden, the accused had also stopped consuming alcohol, and SCRAM monitoring would provide sufficient supervision upon release.
The prosecution emphasized the additional alleged DUI incident in arguing for release conditions, while the defense disputed the injury allegation and offered information supporting the accused’s release.
Richardson expressed concern during the hearing.
“Yes, I am concerned for him,” the judge said.
The judge ultimately ordered the accused released on his own recognizance, subject to conditions.
“He is released OR with the following conditions,” Richardson stated, ordering continuous alcohol monitoring, no alcohol consumption and no driving without a valid license.
The court also vacated the previously scheduled trial. With time waived in the cases discussed, the next appearance was set for Jan. 6 at 9 a.m. in Department 8 for trial setting or possible resolution.
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.
