Ricardo Castellano Jr. Killed in Hit-and-Run Truck Accident near Dunnigan, CA

Update (November 6, 2025): Authorities have identified the man killed in this accident as 37-year-old Ricardo Castellano Jr. of Seattle.

Yolo County, CA — October 21, 2025, a pedestrian was killed in a hit-and-run truck accident at about 8 p.m. on Interstate 5/West Side Highway.

Authorities said a white semi-truck with a grille guard hit a pedestrian while heading south in a construction zone near the rest area at County Road 8.

Witnesses said the truck slowed down after the collision, but then continue driving, according to authorities.

The pedestrian, a man whose name has not been made public yet, was pronounced dead at the scene of the crash near Dunnigan, authorities said.

Authorities have not released any additional information about the Yolo County crash at this time. The accident is still under investigation.

Commentary by Attorney Michael Grossman

When people hear that a pedestrian was killed by a hit-and-run semi-truck on a major interstate, their first thought is usually: how could a truck driver not stop after hitting someone? It’s a fair question, but it’s just the beginning. To get real answers, we have to look past the shock of the truck leaving the scene and start asking what the evidence can actually tell us.

At the moment, all we know is that a white semi-truck with a grille guard allegedly hit a man in a construction zone on I-5, then slowed briefly before driving away. That tells us something may have gone wrong, but not why it happened, or who should ultimately be held responsible.

Let’s start with the most basic questions: What was the pedestrian doing in the road, and why didn’t the truck avoid him? Was the man walking within a closed-off work zone? Was there signage? Reflective clothing? Good lighting? We don’t know yet. But if the pedestrian was where he wasn’t supposed to be, that’s one kind of case. If he was exactly where he was supposed to be, and the truck hit him anyway, that’s a very different situation.

Next, we have to ask: What was going on inside the cab of the truck at the time of the collision? Was the driver distracted: on the phone, eating, adjusting GPS? That kind of thing doesn’t get figured out by guesswork. It takes actual records: cell phone logs, in-cab camera footage and black box (engine control module) data that show the truck’s speed, braking and steering in the moments leading up to the crash.

And then there’s the fact that the driver didn’t stay. If the truck really slowed down, the driver might have known they hit something but not realized it was a person. Or they might have known exactly what happened and left the scene anyway. Either possibility is serious, but only one is criminal. Whether this turns out to be an intentional evasion or an unfortunate mistake depends on what the investigation turns up.

There’s also a company somewhere that owns this truck, or hired this driver. Their policies, training and hiring decisions matter too. Was the driver properly vetted? Were they pushed to drive long hours or cut through risky areas? I’ve handled enough of these cases to know that a driver’s conduct on the road often reflects how seriously, or not, their employer takes safety and accountability.

Until investigators gather dash cam footage, GPS logs, employment records and driver history, there’s no way to say for sure who should be held accountable. But this much is clear: when a truck driver kills someone and leaves the scene, it’s not just about punishment. It’s about making sure we get the full truth, because if we don’t, there’s no guarantee something similar won’t happen again.

Key Takeaways:

• It’s not yet clear whether the pedestrian was where he was supposed to be at the time of the crash.
• Determining why the truck hit the pedestrian requires ECM data, dash cam footage and cellphone records.
• Whether the truck driver knowingly fled or didn’t realize a person had been hit is an open question.
• Trucking company hiring and training practices may play a role, depending on what the investigation finds.
• Real accountability starts with evidence, not assumptions.