People v. West CA1/4

Filed 10/25/23 P. v. West CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A165170 v. JACKSON WEST, (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. 21-NF-006825-A) Defendant and Appellant.

Jackson West set one car on fire and vandalized a second car, and the prosecution charged him with several felonies, including arson. After the trial court denied his request for mental health diversion, he pled no contest to arson and admitted the offense would be designated a strike; the trial court dismissed the remaining charges and placed him on probation. West appealed. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) raising no issues and requesting an independent review of the record. West filed a supplemental brief. We have reviewed the record pursuant to Wende and evaluated the assertions in West’s supplemental brief. We conclude there are no arguable issues and affirm.

1

Factual and Procedural Background In July 2021, the prosecution charged West with felony arson, burglary of a motor vehicle, two counts of felony vandalism, and misdemeanor resisting, delaying, or obstructing a peace officer. In November 2021, West applied for mental health diversion pursuant to Penal Code section 1001.35 et seq.,1 contending—among other things—that he suffered from major depressive disorder. At an unreported hearing, the trial court found him eligible for diversion and scheduled a December 2021 suitability hearing. The suitability hearing was continued three times; it finally took place on February 25, 2022. At the suitability hearing, defense counsel informed the court that West—who had an outstanding arrest warrant in another county—could not obtain a referral to a treatment facility. Counsel asked the court to release West on his own recognizance so that he could resolve the warrant, obtain a referral to a treatment facility, and return to court to accept a grant of diversion. The prosecution opposed the diversion request on several grounds, among them that arson was a serious felony, and that West’s proposed treatment plan was “wholly inadequate” because it failed to identify a treatment provider. The trial court denied West’s application for mental health diversion. As relevant here, the court found that West had failed to submit a concrete treatment plan or information indicating he would respond to treatment, and that given the nature of the offenses, he would be a danger to public safety if treated in the community. Thereafter, West pled no contest to arson and agreed the offense would be designated a strike (§ 1192.7, subd. (c)). The trial