As shown on the California Courts appellate docket for case B287387, Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division Seven:
| Description | Reversed & Remanded to trial court w/directions |
|---|---|
| Date | |
| Disposition Type | Final |
| Publication Status | Signed Unpublished |
| Author | Dillon, Timothy P. |
| Participants | Segal, John; Feuer, Gail Ruderman |
Verbatim from the “Disposition” section of the opinion filed October 19, 2020 (pages 70–71):
We reverse Oberdiear’s conviction on count 6 for intent to extort. We conditionally reverse the remaining convictions and the sentence and direct the trial court to conduct a hearing on Oberdiear’s eligibility for mental health diversion under section 1001.36. If the court determines Oberdiear qualifies for diversion, then it may grant diversion. If Oberdiear successfully completes diversion, then the court shall dismiss the charges. If the court determines Oberdiear is ineligible for diversion or declines to exercise its discretion to grant diversion, or if Oberdiear does not successfully complete diversion, the trial court shall reinstate the convictions on the stalking and making a criminal threat counts, and the People shall have 60 days to determine whether to retry Oberdiear on the section 523 count. If the People decide not to retry him on that count, or after the retrial of the section 523 count, the court shall resentence Oberdiear. In the event the trial court resentences Oberdiear, the court shall allow Oberdiear an opportunity to request a hearing and present evidence regarding his inability to pay any fine or assessment the court imposes. If the court determines Oberdiear does not have the ability to pay the restitution fine, the court must stay its execution.
| Case caption | The People, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Steve Clark Oberdiear, Defendant and Appellant |
|---|---|
| Court | Court of Appeal of the State of California, Second Appellate District, Division Seven |
| Case number | B287387 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SA087410) |
| Filed | — Not to be published in the Official Reports |
| Order filed: "Early, Sullivan, Wright, Gizer & McRae LLP's request to modify the opinion dated May 19, 2021 is denied. This court no longer has jurisdiction in this matter." | |
| Order filed: "Early, Sullivan, Wright & McRae LLP's July 9, 2021 letter request is denied. California Rules of Court, rule 8.90 provides guidance for the use of names in appellate court opinions, not a mandatory requirement. The names were not used inadvertently or in error in the opinion. Accordingly, the request, as the previous one, is for modification of the opinion. As explained, this court no longer has jurisdiction in the matter." |
| Date | Docket entry |
|---|---|
| Notice of appeal | |
| Appellant's opening brief | |
| Respondent's brief | |
| Appellant's reply brief | |
| Cause submitted | |
| Opinion filed (Reversed) Full text · PDF | |
| Rehearing petition filed (Appellant) Full text · PDF | |
| Order denying rehearing petition filed | |
| Service copy of petition for review received (Appellant) | |
| Petition for review denied in Supreme Court [S265809] | |
| Remittitur issued / Case complete | |
| Received: Request to modify the opinion submitted by Early, Sullivan, Wright, Gizer & McRae LLP | |
| Order filed: "Early, Sullivan, Wright, Gizer & McRae LLP's request to modify the opinion dated May 19, 2021 is denied. This court no longer has jurisdiction in this matter." | |
| Received: Letter requesting corrections in the opinion submitted by Early, Sullivan, Wright, Gizer & McRae LLP | |
| Order filed: "Early, Sullivan, Wright & McRae LLP's July 9, 2021 letter request is denied. California Rules of Court, rule 8.90 provides guidance for the use of names in appellate court opinions, not a mandatory requirement. The names were not used inadvertently or in error in the opinion. Accordingly, the request, as the previous one, is for modification of the opinion. As explained, this court no longer has jurisdiction in the matter." |
Source: California Courts, Appellate Courts Case Information – Second Appellate District, case B287387, official docket: https://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=2&doc_no=B287387 (the court’s site may need to be opened in a web browser).