Adam Lawson Woodrum pled no contest to two counts of felony lewdness with a child June 30, 2025
” data-medium-file=”https://i0.wp.com/www.carsonnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/woodrum-scaled.jpeg?fit=300%2C234&ssl=1″ data-large-file=”https://i0.wp.com/www.carsonnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/woodrum-scaled.jpeg?fit=780%2C609&ssl=1″ />

On Monday, Adam Lawson Woodrum, a former attorney with the Carson City Public Defender’s office, pled no contest to two counts of lewdness with a child under the age of 16 in Carson City District Court today, and was taken into custody to await sentencing.

Editor’s Note: Carson Now has edited some information from the arraignment hearing for victim privacy. 

A no contest plea essentially means that the defendant does not admit guilt, but attests there would be enough evidence to find them guilty of the charges at trial. 

In December 2024, a child related to Woodrum came forward with information that Woodrum had been inappropriately touching them on a number of occasions. A report was filed with the Carson City Sheriff’s Office, and the child was taken to the Community Assistance Center in Reno to be forensically assessed. 

Soon after, charges were filed against Woodrum for two counts of felony lewdness with a child under the age of 16, category B felonies, accusing Woodrum of touching the child’s genitals on a number of occasions both within Carson City and in Mono County, Calif. 

During arraignment hearings, a representative from Mono County, Calif. also zoomed into the meeting as charges had been filed in California as well relating to that incident. 

The hearing was overseen by Judge Thomas Gregory of Douglas County due to Woodrum’s ties with the justice system in Carson City relating to his previous employment. 

As part of his no contest plea to two counts of lewdness with a child, Woodrum is facing 4-10 years on each count, and the court has the discretion to choose to have those served either consecutively or concurrently. What that means is, Judge Gregory could choose to sentence Woodrum to either 4-10 years for both charges served at the same time, or 8-20 years with the charges served one at a time. 

He also faces a $10,000 fine for each charge, as well as the potential for paying restitution.

Due to the nature of the charges, state law enforces a mandatory prison sentence, meaning the court cannot offer probation as an alternative to serving time in custody for the crimes.

Bail debates

The case originally made headlines due to an “oversight” in which Woodrum was able to bail out hours after his initial arrest with inadequate bail conditions. 

His release, which was overseen by a staff member at the Carson City Jail and not the courts, included a $20,000 bail and typical release conditions relating to following all laws, but it did not include having no contact with the victim(s), submitting to search and seizure without a warrant, agreeing to not possess alcohol, drugs, or weapons, GPS monitoring, and monitoring from the Department of Alternative Sentencing.   

He was arrested on Jan. 22, 2025, and six hours later he allegedly began sending push notifications to the victim and their family members. A Temporary Protective Order was granted the next day, ordering Woodrum to have no contact with the victim or their family members. 

He did not have his first hearing on the case until early March 2025, at which point the state (prosecutors) asked for an increase in bail, GPS monitoring, search and seizure, etc. Carson City Justice Court Judge Melanie Bruketta denied the increase to bail, but approved DAS supervision and the proposed conditions.

However, defense attorney Orrin Johnson argued against GPS monitoring, since Woodrum had maintained contact with DAS. The court ordered for Woodrum to wear a GPS device anytime he was in northern Nevada.

His initial arraignment date was scheduled for May 22, but it was continued until today, June 30. 

After he entered his pleas of no contest, the state asked for him to be taken into custody to await sentencing. 

They argued that Woodrum has no ties to any community, recently sold his home and since he is facing the possibility of significant prison time, these indicate he could be a flight risk. 

Johnson vehemently argued against Woodrum being remanded into custody. During his justice court appearance, Johnson stated Woodrum was an upstanding member of the community who had been “shattered” by the charges, and leaned on similar arguments during the arraignment hearing today.

Johnson argued that since he had not been given notice that the state intended to ask for the defendant to be remanded, the court should not entertain the request, stating it would be “unusual” if the court would agree.

However, Gregory said that it is very typical for bail conditions to be revisited after a plea has been entered while awaiting sentencing, similar to after a jury trial ended with a guilty plea. 

Second, Johnson emphasized that Woodrum has made all of his court appearances, has been cooperating with DAS, and is not transient as the state said. Johnson said that Woodrum has been living in Tempe, Ariz. with his mother and sister “full time” since he obtained the money from his house sale. 

However, the state pointed out that Woodrum’s house only officially sold last Tuesday, which does not support the claim that he’d been living full time within Arizona. 

Johnson also said that both he and Woodrum needed time to prepare for the sentencing and get their affairs in order. For example, he said that Woodrum has a dentist appointment next week in Carson City to have a crown fixed. 

The state said that since Woodrum has been out on bail for over six months on these felony charges, he had more than enough time to settle any affairs and wrap up any appointments, especially because he has not been employed since he was charged. 

He said that if Woodrum was going to “skip out” on his bail, it would have been prior to entering his plea of no contest. He said that he is not a danger to the community, and there is no indication that he will not appear. 

He said that instead, Woodrum is “here to take responsibility for his actions,” indicating he is not a flight risk.

However, the state argued that the fact that Woodrum is entering a no contest plea as opposed to a guilty plea does not support that he is taking any responsibility for the crimes.

He said that Woodrum’s background shows that he can be trusted, and that it’s traditionally individuals who have proven they cannot be trusted to show up for their court hearings through their criminal histories. 

He argued that Woodrum should be rewarded for his adherence to bail conditions, not punished, which would encourage others awaiting their arraignments to also follow the law. 

“If we want to get more of that behavior from defendants who are out of custody, then we need to reward the behavior that is in conformance with the court orders, just as we punish behavior that is not conforming to the court orders,” Johnson argued. 

Hearing from victims

Three family members of Woodrums who were affected by the crimes asked for bail to be revoked and for Woodrum to be taken into custody. 

The victim’s mother said that she lives in constant fear for her and her child’s safety, and said that Woodrum physically abused her for 19 years before she finally asked for help. She said he strangled her into unconsciousness on a number of occasions. 

She told the court she lives in fear for her and her child’s safety, and does not feel that the court has been keeping her and her family members safe, especially because she claimed Woodrum had threatened murder-suicide. 

During the justice court hearing, she said that Woodrum claimed he’d just been “joking” about the murder-suicide, and that the victim’s mother “couldn’t take a joke.” 

She also said that she was deeply upset by the claim that Woodrum should be “rewarded” for his good behavior, and that he had already been rewarded by having such lenient bail conditions in the first place.

“Mr. Johnson said we should reward people who behave like him, but he’s already had more than he deserves, and he has nothing to lose,” she said. “He’s talked a lot about running away to Mexico, and we are concerned with him harming us.” 

She said that she feels there is a credible threat to their safety, especially because Woodrum allegedly went to DAS and convinced them to change the geofencing for his GPS device to allow him to access a previously inaccessible location due to court orders. 

A child related to Woodrum said that Woodrum is a “dangerous person” who has gotten into many fights with family members, and that they are all scared of him. The child said they check the license plates of cars that drive past, and are afraid of anyone who walks past their house, because they fear what Woodrum might do to them or their family. 

The victim also spoke, stating they did not believe the community would be kept safe with Woodrum out of custody. They said that he’s proven to be “erratic,” that he gets into fights, and that the family only learned Woodrum was back in town for the first time after posting bail was because he drove past in his car. 

“Think about being afraid of someone you’ve [known] your entire life, and now he has reason to harm you or the people you love,” the victim said. “He doesn’t even need to get a GPS monitor when he enters Nevada; he could just not get his anklet put on, and that’s terrifying.” 

Judge Gregory said that the court takes in all circumstances and facts to determine whether or not a defendant poses a risk to the community, or is at risk of not showing up for sentencing. 

He said that in this case, he finds it appropriate to have Woodrum held without bail. The plea deal initially stated Woodrum would be held in Douglas County, but he told the court that he’d “rather be there than Douglas” indicating he wanted to remain in the Carson City Jail while awaiting sentencing. 

Woodrum became visibly upset when the judge ordered him to be taken into custody, and the court bailiffs moved forward. However, he began taking off his clothes, apparently in preparation for changing to jail clothing, and was taken into custody without issue. 

His sentencing is set for August 22, 2025. Judge Gregory will continue to preside over the case through sentencing. 

The post Former Carson City Deputy Public Defender pleads ‘no contest’ to child molestation charges, held without bail  appeared first on Carson Now.