# People v. M.S. (In re M.S.)

> California Court of Appeal, 5th District · March 11, 2019 · 244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 580

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6107259

## Case

- **Full name:** IN RE M.S., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. The People, and v. M.S., and
- **Court:** California Court of Appeal, 5th District
- **Decided:** March 11, 2019
- **Citations:** 244 Cal. Rptr. 3d 580; 32 Cal. App. 5th 1177
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Yegan
- **Judges:** Gilbert, Tangeman, Yegan
- **Cited by:** 28 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6107259

## Opinion text

YEGAN, J., Concurring:
I have signed and I concur with the majority opinion. There is no need to reach the constitutionality of the newly enacted mental health diversion statute. (See Loeffler v. Target Corp. (2014) 58 Cal.4th 1081 , 1102, 171 Cal.Rptr.3d 189 , 324 P.3d 50 .) My concurrence should not be considered an opinion that the subject statute is constitutional.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6107259. Public record. Not legal advice.