Within weeks of graduating high school and turning 18, Abraham Salgado‑Alfaro pulled the trigger in an East Oakland confrontation that left a man dead. Now, a judge has handed him a nine-year state prison sentence for the killing of 29-year-old Ernesto Herrera on the 9000 block of E Street in June 2020, a case that has stirred debate over youth, impulse, and how the justice system treats barely legal defendants.
Plea, sentence, and custody
Salgado‑Alfaro pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter and received a nine-year term in state prison, according to The Mercury News. The outlet reports he finished his studies at Rudsdale Continuation High in May 2020 and turned 18 about a week later, shortly before the June 24, 2020, shooting that killed Herrera.
Court filings cited in that reporting indicate he had already served most of the nine years in custody while the case wound its way through the courts, and that a restitution hearing is scheduled for May. The sentence now shifts his case from the slow churn of local proceedings to the state prison system.
What prosecutors and witnesses said
According to prosecutors, the deadly encounter started when Herrera allegedly catcalled Salgado‑Alfaro’s girlfriend on the street, sparking a confrontation that quickly turned physical. In court, the girlfriend admitted she initially lied to police to make it seem as if Herrera had backup nearby.
Salgado‑Alfaro later told detectives that Herrera appeared to be pulling a weapon as he reached toward his waistband, a detail quoted by The Mercury News. Defense attorneys pushed to have the case handled in juvenile court and challenged the intellectual assessments used in pretrial proceedings, underscoring how much turned on whether the system treated him as a teen or an adult.
Oakland’s 2020 surge in shootings
The killing unfolded during Oakland’s broader 2020 spike in gun violence, when pandemic disruptions coincided with a rise in shootings that hit young people especially hard. Local reporting and public health analysis documented how the surge strained street outreach and hospital-based intervention programs, a backdrop that advocates say influenced how officials approached cases like this one. For more on that landscape, see reporting by The Oaklandside.
Court rules and juvenile-transfer law
Under California law, attempts to move serious cases into juvenile court are governed by transfer rules that require judges to consider factors such as a defendant’s criminal sophistication and potential for rehabilitation. Recent appellate decisions have stressed careful use of psychiatric and developmental evidence when courts decide whether to keep a case in juvenile court or send it to adult criminal court. For an overview of that legal framework and recent rulings, see Justia and related analyses.
Next steps in the case
The court calendar lists a restitution hearing in May. Meanwhile, county officials will determine when Salgado‑Alfaro is transferred from county custody into state prison to formally begin serving his sentence. Alameda County jail records identify Santa Rita Jail in Dublin as the facility that handles pretrial detainees and processing, where defendants typically remain while paperwork and court hearings continue, according to the county roster…