By Gwynneth Redemann
WOODLAND, CA – Yolo County Superior Court Judge Timothy Fall denied Deputy District Attorney Aaron Rojas’s attempt to withdraw a plea offer after the prosecution confessed it “made a mistake in offering resolution” to the accused.
The driver—the Vanguard doesn’t usually divulge the name of misdemeanor accused —was charged with a misdemeanor for reckless driving, which is only considered to be an infraction.
The Deputy Public Defender, Katie Rogers, explained to the court that the DDA offered a plea agreement to her client, which the driver accepted.
After Rogers read the violation of the vehicle code, DDA Rojas admitted “the People actually made a mistake in offering this resolution and ask that the case be set for trial setting instead.”
Judge Fall interjected, “OK, so apparently there is no plea agreement?”
PD Rogers responded, “My client accepted this offer and only passed this to see what the sentence would be. He is pending sentence, the plea has already been entered, and the offer has already been made.
“At this point, it is completely inappropriate to withdraw the offer. My client is here based on the reliance of the offer,” continued Rogers.
Judge Fall then asked, “Is the withdrawal based on it being an illegal plea or just that the People should have done something differently?”
DDA Rojas responded, “The People should have done something different.”
“All right, too late for that. There has been reliance upon it,” stated Judge Fall.
The driver pleaded no contest to the charge and was ordered to pay the $400 fine and penalties.
DDA Rojas—not giving up—concluded by asking Judge Fall if the record could reflect the prosecution’s position that no plea had yet been entered and that “we would like to preserve the issue for appeal.”
Judge Fall finished by explaining that no plea had been entered but that his “finding was on reliance as opposed to the entry of plea.”