People v. Cato CA6

I. INTRODUCTION

After the trial court denied defendant Roddy Neil Cato’s application for mental health diversion, defendant pleaded no contest pursuant to a plea agreement to assault with a deadly weapon, a knife (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1); count 2),1 misdemeanor threats to commit a crime resulting in great bodily injury (§ 422, subd. (a); count 3), inflicting corporal injury on a former cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a); count 4), and misdemeanor contempt of court for violating a protective order (§ 166, subd. (c)(1); count 7). The trial court placed defendant on probation for three years. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his mental health diversion application because substantial evidence does not support the trial court’s finding that he posed an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. For reasons outlined below, we will affirm the judgment.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

II. BACKGROUND

Defendant was formerly engaged to R.P.,2 and the two had lived together for a period until defendant moved out before the charged offenses. After defendant had moved out, according to R.P., he entered R.P.’s residence on…