People v. Cannon CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 15, 2025E083378California2,643 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

I. Pretrial

In November 2022, the People charged Cannon with stalking Ms. Yang.1 Cannon

had retained counsel for his preliminary hearing. The minute order for a pretrial

conference in February 2023 states: “Off the record, Court and counsel confer in

chambers. [¶] Matter continued; Mental Disorder Diversion work up.” The record does

not contain a mental disorder diversion workup.

The trial court relieved Cannon’s retained counsel in March 2023 and appointed

counsel to represent him. In August 2023, Cannon informed the court that he wanted to

represent himself. In discussing that request, the court stated: “I guess you have an

active case in another state where you have some requirements that would be similar to

what your requirements would be here, and it would sort of be a diversion situation. And

I think if you were still interested in that, you could still participate in that.” The court

asked Cannon whether he wanted “to pursue that any further,” and he replied that he did

not. The court then inquired: “And I understand there was also a misdemeanor offer

made to you, which you rejected. You’re also rejecting to participate in diversion, which

…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.