People v. Fjeld CA2/5

── People v. Fjeld CA2/5 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: May 19, 2026 Category: General Filed 5/19/26 P. v. Fjeld CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE THE PEOPLE, B347828 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 24AVCF00099) BLYTHE FJELD, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Robert G. Chu and Scott A. Yang, Judges. Affirmed. Margaret Manning, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.  Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Thomas C. Hsieh, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ****** Blythe Fjeld (defendant) appeals from the judgment of conviction by plea, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her pre-plea motion for mental health diversion (Pen. Code, § 1001.36).1 We conclude there was no abuse of discretion and affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. The Underlying Offenses2 On the morning of January 17, 2024, defendant quickly pulled her car alongside her cousin Courtney Adams, who was in the parking lot of the business complex where Adams worked in Lancaster, California. Adams got out of her car to talk to defendant, as defendant “looked distraught”; defendant proceeded to complain that she “couldn’t do this anymore,” and warned that “she was going to run [Adams] over.” Defendant ignored Adams’s entreaties to turn off her car; instead, defendant backed up the car, turned the car to face Adams, and accelerated the car forward toward Adams at approximately five miles an hour. Adams stepped out of the way. 1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 Our factual summary is taken from the preliminary hearing transcript. 2  When one of Adams’s coworkers approached to try to help calm down defendant, defendant drove off. Adams got back into her car to follow. Defendant drove to a market and, after boxing in Adams’s car, accused Adams of abandoning her because Adams had ceased checking in on defendant and bringing her money and food. When Adams responded that she could no longer provide that assistance to defendant, defendant again drove off. Adams once again followed and called 911 because defendant “jerked around” as she drove and was “d[oing] loops around town.” Defendant’s unsafe driving escalated—she did “some donuts . . . in a little dirt parking lot” and then “ran multiple red lights.” At one point, defendant flipped her car around and “directed her vehicle in [Adam’s] direction”; Adams had to “immediately swerve” to avoid the collision.3 Defendant suffers from schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type, and had stopped taking her prescribed medications by the time of the incident. 3 This characterization of defendant’s conduct comes from Adams’s statements to law enforcement immediately after the incident. In her later preliminary hearing testimony, Adams provided a different account; she testified that it did not “look like [defendant] was . . . making an effort to hit [Adams],” that she did not “believe that [defendant] was trying to hurt [her],”