California v. Super. Ct. (Mendez)
Annotate this CaseThe superior court granted real party in interest Armando Rodriguez Mendez’s motion under California Penal Code section 995 and dismissed an assault with a deadly weapon charge against him. The State petitioned for a writ of mandate to compel the superior court to reinstate the charge. At the preliminary hearing, defense counsel argued that there was not “enough evidence” for the count of assault with a deadly weapon because it was not clear “exactly what happened with the knife, did [Mendez] hold it above his head, was it down around his waist area.” Counsel emphasized that it was not clear what happened because of the numerous accounts of the incident given by the victim, Jane Doe. Doe lived with Mendez and her three children. Mendez was the father of Doe’s two daughters. At a hearing on the motion, defense counsel argued that the magistrate made a factual finding when he concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to hold Mendez on the assault with a deadly weapon count. The State argued to the contrary. The trial court agreed with defense counsel and granted the motion. The State argued to the Court of Appeal that upon independent review, there was sufficient cause to believe that Mendez had committed the offense. The Court of Appeal agreed with the State on all points.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.