All States › Evidence
Neutral Court Opinion Apr 16, 2026

People v. Beard CA4/2

── People v. Beard CA4/2 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 15, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/15/26 P. v. Beard CA4/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, E085023 v. (Super.Ct.No. RIF2401273) CIARA LOUISE BEARD, OPINION Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Matthew C. Perantoni, Judge. Affirmed. Heather E. Shallenberger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, Assistant Attorney General, Christopher P. Beesley and Namita Patel, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. 1 Ciara Louise Beard appeals from the judgment entered after a jury found her guilty of one count of stalking (Pen. Code, § 646.9; unlabeled statutory citations are to this code) and one count of making a criminal threat (§ 422), and she pled no contest to two counts of stalking and two counts of making a criminal threat. We appointed counsel to represent Beard on appeal, and counsel filed a brief that raised no issues and requested an independent review of the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We affirm. BACKGROUND In June 2024, the People filed an information charging Beard with three counts of stalking (§ 646.9, subd. (a); counts 1, 3, & 5), three counts of making a criminal threat (§ 422; counts 2, 4, & 6), and one count of vandalism (§ 594; count 7). As to counts 1 and 3, the People further alleged that Beard stalked the victims in violation of a temporary restraining order. (§ 646.9, subd. (b).) At trial, the People introduced evidence that Beard and John Doe got married in 2016 and had two daughters together. In 2022, John Doe moved out after Beard bit and scratched him. The following year, John Doe moved in with Jane Doe. Beard began sending messages to Jane Doe on Instagram about Beard’s relationship with John Doe. One day, Jane Doe received “approximately 65” calls from an unknown number within about one hour. In September 2023, she answered a call from an unknown number; the caller was Beard, and she asked for John Doe. Beard threatened to “come down to the 2 apartment,” and John Doe “took the phone and there was some arguing.” Jane Doe “stopped answering random phone calls and engaging.” In January 2024, John Doe and Jane Doe learned that they were expecting a child, and they shared the news on social media. Jane Doe began receiving messages and follow requests on Instagram from various accounts, and she felt “harassed.” In January 2024, John Doe sent a message to Beard through the TalkingParents app, asking to visit his daughters. The following morning at approximately 6:30 a.m., John Doe read messages that Beard had sent to him earlier that morning. He saw a missed a call from her at 4:00 a.m. and a text message received seven minutes later. It stated, “[o]n my way.” John Doe sent a message to Beard asking her not to make unauthorized car payments using his account, and Beard responded that she “wouldn’t give a fuck
CourtListener · Apr 15, 2026
Original link
Share on X Share on Facebook
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own address as its source and its own type. #}