Panel Victories

The Court of Appeal found that the trial court abused its discretion by denying appellant's request for mental health diversion because its finding that he was ineligible was not supported by substantial evidence. The trial court’s speculation about appellant’s gang motivation for committing the offense was not evidence "'from which a reasonable fact finder could have found it highly probable’” that his mental health disorders were not a causal, motivating, or contributing factor in the offense. (Lacour v. Superior Court (2025) 110 Cal.App.5th 391, 401-402.) The matter was conditionally reversed and remanded for reconsideration of appellant’s application for mental health…

The Court of Appeal agreed with the parties that the trial court abused its discretion in denying appellant's request for mental health diversion, as there was insufficient evidence of an unreasonable risk that appellant will commit a super strike offense if treated in the community. There was no evidence appellant had been previously charged with a super strike offense, and his current offense was not a super strike. Appellant’s criminal history consisted of two nonviolent felonies and four misdemeanor offenses. At the time of the hearing on his application, appellant was doing well in an outpatient program. He had successfully…