Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

People v. Christiana

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 10, 2010No. E048681Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

KING, J., Concurring and Dissenting.

I concur with the majority as it relates to the order authorizing the administration of antipsychotic drugs.

For the reasons stated in my dissent in People v. Bell (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1071 [105 Cal.Rptr.3d 259], I disagree with the majority’s analysis in the unpublished portion of its opinion.

Appellant’s petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied March 23, 2011, S189781. Kennard, J., was of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. People v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010