![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Sac-Court-4-765x510.jpg\")
\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n
SACRAMENTO, Calif. \u2014 A Sacramento County Superior Court judge on Tuesday denied an accused man\u2019s request for release on his own recognizance pending trial on a petty theft charge, rejecting defense arguments that he needed to support his three children, including a 5-year-old son with autism.<\/p>\n
Deputy Public Defender Yuri Hill cited the accused\u2019s responsibility to provide for his family, including an autistic 5-year-old son, as well as the nonviolent nature of the charge, as reasons for release on his own recognizance.<\/p>\n
The matter began with a preliminary hearing, during which the prosecution called a single witness who reported interacting with the accused multiple times during the alleged theft at the store where the witness worked.<\/p>\n
The witness testimony centered on the events surrounding the alleged theft and whether the encounter could support a robbery charge. The witness testified that while he felt fearful during the incident, the accused did not make any verbal threats. When asked whether he had previously told police that the accused threatened him, the witness responded, \u201cNo.\u201d<\/p>\n
The deputy district attorney moved to amend the complaint to include a robbery charge. Judge McCormick denied the motion, finding that the testimony did not establish the element of fear required to elevate the offense. The court held the accused to answer on the petty theft charge and set the matter for trial.<\/p>\n
Following the preliminary hearing, Hill requested the court release the accused on his own recognizance pending trial. Hill cited the accused\u2019s role as a father and provider of three children, including a 5-year-old son with autism, and emphasized that the offense was nonviolent in nature.<\/p>\n
According to Hill, the accused has employment available upon release and would comply with any conditions imposed by the court, including electronic monitoring. Hill stated the accused was simply \u201cworried for his children who need his financial support.\u201d<\/p>\n
The deputy district attorney opposed release, arguing that the accused posed a risk to public safety. The prosecution cited three prior felony convictions over the past decade, prior probation violations, multiple failures to appear and the filing of a similar case while the accused was previously out on release.<\/p>\n
Judge McCormick stated he agreed with the prosecution\u2019s assessment that release presented a significant risk. The court noted the accused\u2019s prior felony history and failures to appear as indicators that he would not comply with court orders.<\/p>\n
Judge McCormick ordered the accused remanded to custody without bond pending trial.<\/p>\n
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media \u2013 X<\/a>, Instagram <\/a>and Facebook<\/a>.\u00a0 Subscribe <\/a>the Vanguard News letters.\u00a0 To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org\/donate<\/a> or give directly through ActBlue<\/a>.\u00a0 Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.<\/p>\n Categories: Breaking News<\/a> Court Watch<\/a> Court Watch<\/a> Northern California Court Watch<\/a> Sacramento Region<\/a> Vanguard Court Watch<\/a> Tags: Bail Reform<\/a> Court Watch<\/a> Petty Theft<\/a> Preliminary Hearing<\/a> Pretrial Detention<\/a> Public Defender<\/a> Sacramento<\/a> Sacramento County Superior Court<\/a>