People v. Smith CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 13, 2024G062785California1,230 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

In April 2018, Smith was charged by information with the four crimes; he was later convicted of them. The information also alleged Smith had served two prior prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b), and had a prior serious felony, i.e., a conviction from August 6, 2010 for a violation of section 422, within the meaning of sections 667, subdivisions (a), (c) and (e)(1), and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(1).

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 The charges arose out of an incident in which Smith broke into his father’s home while his father was at work. His presence and movements were captured on security cameras. The next day Smith’s father observed Smith attempting to enter the home through a window. Before trial, Smith’s counsel requested that he be placed in a mental health diversion program pursuant to sections 1001.35 and 1001.36. The court made a preliminary finding that Smith met several diversion criteria, including the diagnosis of a mental disorder. The trial court referred Smith’s case for a behavioral health assessment and scheduled a hearing to determine his eligibility for diversion. At the outset of the hearing,…

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.