People v. St. John CA6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 12, 2026H052360California3,869 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lie, J.

I. BACKGROUND

In November 2022, St. John approached a woman and her child, slapped a laptop out of the woman’s hands, and took the laptop to a different location.2 The Santa Cruz

1 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 St. John stipulated to these facts when he pleaded no contest to grand theft. County District Attorney charged St. John with robbery (§ 211), further alleging that St. John had a prior conviction that qualified as a strike (§ 667, subds. (b)–(i)). A. St. John’s Request for Mental Health Diversion

In February 2024, St. John applied for mental health diversion under section 1001.36, based in part on an evaluation prepared by Gregory L. Katz, Ph.D. Diagnosing St. John with “Bipolar Disorder, Most Recent Episode Manic, Severe,” alcohol use disorder, and stimulant use disorder, Katz opined that St. John’s mental health was a significant contributing factor to the charged offenses and that treatment with psychotropic medications and ceasing alcohol and drugs would improve his condition. Katz’s report summarized St. John’s extensive mental health history, including a prior Welfare and Institutions Code section 5150 hold in August 2020 and…

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.