Labelle

People v. Labelle

Good Law
117 Cal. Rptr. 3d 882·190 Cal. App. 4th 149·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1962
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 18, 2010No. B223468California976 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Yegan, J.

*151 Opinion

Matthew Labelle appeals from the judgment after the trial court found that he was a mentally disordered offender (MDO). (Pen. Code, § 2960 et seq.) 1 The commitment offense was felony vandalism. (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(1).) Appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the trial court’s finding that the commitment offense met the force or violence criterion of section 2962, subdivision (e)(2)(Q). The contention is without merit and we affirm the judgment.

Commitment Offense

A hotel employee notified the police that appellant “was challenging people to fight and trying to get into other people[’]s vehicles.” Appellant attempted to flee when the police arrived. Officers chased him, ordered him to stop, and ultimately handcuffed him. He was placed in the backseat of a patrol car and began kicking a back door window. A police officer “grabbed hold of the door handle and advised [appellant] not to kick the window again.” Appellant “kicked the window again causing the window to shatter and continued kicking the shattered window.” The police officer “raised his arm to protect his eyes” from flying shards of glass. A small shard of glass punctured 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.