An Oakdale mother accused of driving drunk into an irrigation canal and causing the death of her 4-year-old daughter will stand trial on a murder charge after a Stanislaus County judge ruled Friday that prosecutors presented sufficient evidence to hold her to answer on all counts.

Following a preliminary hearing that stretched across four days over two weeks, Stanislaus County Superior Court Judge Valli Israels found there was sufficient cause to believe Juliette Acosta committed each of the eight charges filed against her, including second-degree murder, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, child abuse and multiple DUI-related offenses.

The ruling sends the case to trial in one of Stanislaus County’s highest-profile criminal prosecutions in recent years.

Acosta, 27, appeared in court Friday wearing an orange-and-white Stanislaus County Jail jumpsuit and shackles. Family members from both sides filled the courtroom as attorneys delivered closing arguments before Israels issued her decision.

The case stems from the March 8, 2025, crash that killed Acosta’s daughter, Reagan Herrin.

Judge finds evidence supports murder allegation

The central dispute throughout the preliminary hearing centered on whether prosecutors had presented enough evidence to support a murder charge based on implied malice.

Deputy District Attorney Vita Palazuelos argued Acosta knowingly engaged in life-endangering conduct by driving while heavily intoxicated with her young daughter in the vehicle.

Defense attorney Gil Somera argued the case amounted to a tragic mistake and gross vehicular manslaughter, not murder.

In announcing her ruling, Israels cited evidence showing Acosta’s blood-alcohol level was approximately 0.22% at the time of the crash — nearly three times the legal limit.

The judge also pointed to Acosta’s own statements captured after the crash. “There was evidence that she knew she should not have driven,” Israels said.

The judge referenced statements Acosta made to family members after the collision, including comments that she should have listened to her father and not driven.

Israels also noted testimony indicating Acosta told relatives she thought she was “fine to drive” and then added, “I usually am.”

“She was aware of the risks of not being OK to drive,” Israels said.

At the preliminary hearing stage, prosecutors are not required to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, the court must determine whether sufficient cause exists to believe the defendant committed the crimes charged.

“The standard at a preliminary hearing is sufficient cause,” Israels said. “It is less than probable cause.”

The judge ultimately held Acosta to answer on all charges, including murder, gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, vehicular manslaughter, child abuse and misdemeanor resisting or delaying a peace officer.

Prosecutors point to Acosta’s own statements

After the ruling, Palazuelos said Acosta’s own words were among the strongest evidence presented during the hearing.

“I think her own statements, ‘I knew I should not have driven,’ and then the jail call where her dad told her, ‘You shouldn’t have driven,’ implying that there was an earlier conversation about that,” Palazuelos said.

Palazuelos said she was pleased the court reviewed the evidence and agreed there was sufficient cause to proceed. “She absolutely knew what she was doing that night,” Palazuelos said. “Drinking and driving is dangerous, and it can cause tragic cases like this.”

She also pushed back against suggestions that Acosta was a victim in the incident. “It’s just offensive that Ms. Acosta was painted as some sort of victim in all of this, where she’s absolutely not,” she said.

The prosecutor said the case will next proceed to arraignment on the information before continuing toward trial.

Defense argues case is manslaughter, not murder

Somera expressed disappointment with the ruling and said he believes prosecutors failed to establish the mental state required for a murder charge.

“I’m extremely disappointed in her having to answer to a murder charge,” Somera said outside court. “This is a mother-daughter case. Murder is our highest crime that we have in our system.”

Throughout the hearing, Somera argued Acosta made a tragic mistake but did not act with conscious disregard for her daughter’s life.

“It was a misjudgment. It was a mistake. It was a tragic misjudgment,” he said Friday.

Somera criticized prosecutors’ reliance on Acosta’s conduct after the crash and argued the case should be prosecuted as gross vehicular manslaughter instead.

“It doesn’t rise to the level of having a conscious disregard for your daughter,” he said.

During closing arguments, Somera repeatedly told the court the investigation failed to fully examine factors that could have affected Acosta’s condition and perception, including what she had eaten, when she drank alcohol and whether she suffered head trauma or hypothermia after the crash.

He also emphasized statements Acosta made shortly after the collision, including comments that she believed she was OK to drive.

“I thought I was OK to drive. I normally am,” Acosta was heard saying in body-camera footage played during previous days of the preliminary hearing.

Somera argued those statements reflected poor judgment rather than implied malice. “This is bad judgment. This is bad decision-making,” he told the court. “This is a vehicular manslaughter case and not a murder case.”

After the ruling, Somera said he remains confident in the defense’s position.

“I have faith in the public,” he said. “And when they hear the real facts of it, they’ll understand this is certainly a tragic misjudgment, but not a conscious disregard for her daughter.”

Four days of testimony

The preliminary hearing began May 18 and was originally scheduled for two days before extending into a third day of testimony and a fourth day for arguments and ruling.

The court heard testimony from Stanislaus County sheriff’s deputies, CHP officers and investigators, a forensic alcohol expert, a deputy coroner and a district attorney investigator.

Prosecutors also played body-camera footage from the night of the crash and introduced a jail phone call between Acosta and her father, Cliff Acosta.

In that call, played in open court, Acosta repeatedly apologized after learning Reagan had died.

“You f---ing killed her,” Cliff Acosta told his daughter.

“I’m so sorry,” Juliette Acosta responded multiple times during the emotional conversation.

Prosecutors argued the call demonstrated Acosta’s awareness that she should not have driven.

Defense attorneys argued it reflected grief and regret after the tragedy rather than proof of implied malice before the crash occurred.

What happens next

Acosta is scheduled to return to Stanislaus County Superior Court on June 26 for arraignment on the information, where she will formally enter pleas to the charges that survived the preliminary hearing.

If convicted of the murder charge, Acosta could face a sentence of 15 years to life in prison.

modesto-instagram

One dead in Modesto when car crashes into house during pursuit. Driver arrested

Get unlimited digital access

#ReadLocal