People v. Riddle

Filed 10/21/25 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C101539

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23FE007007)

v.

EDWARD JOSEPH RIDDLE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Lawrence G. Brown and Satnam Rattu, Judges. Affirmed.

Conness A. Thompson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Kimberley A. Donohue, Assistant Attorneys General, Christopher J. Rench and Kelly E. LeBel, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Edward Joseph Riddle appeals a judgment entered following his no contest plea to arson of a structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (c)).1 He contends that the trial court abused its discretion by terminating his mental health diversion (§ 1001.36)

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

and refusing his request for public funds to pay for his private mental health treatment program. We will affirm. BACKGROUND At approximately 11:30 p.m. on May 12, 2023, Riddle was high on methamphetamine and woke his sister by banging on the wrought iron gate to her home. She looked out her front door and saw her brother set her doorbell on fire. She extinguished the flames with a container of water. Riddle started another fire in the street gutter, and his sister called the fire department. She was worried about the amount of brush and the possibility that the fire would spread to a tree. The People charged Riddle with arson of an inhabited structure (§ 451, subd. (b)) and alleged that he had suffered a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), specifically, a conviction for assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). In November 2023, Riddle requested mental health diversion under section 1001.36. He stated that he had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and substance abuse disorder. He had received substance abuse treatment and maintained his sobriety for five months. He was chronically homeless without a support system but did receive public assistance. His motion attached an assessment by a mental health professional noting, among other things, his long history of using “Methamphetamines/Other Stimulants.” The assessment opined that Riddle required treatment in a residential facility, described in the report as a “level 3.1 Clinically Managed Low-Intensity Residential” facility. The People opposed diversion, arguing that Riddle’s mental illness, addiction to methamphetamine, and criminal history raised doubts that he could be treated safely in the community. The People were also concerned that it would be difficult to secure a residential rehabilitation placement in light of Riddle’s particular needs.