People v. Navone CA3

Filed 1/15/25 P. v. Navone CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ----

THE PEOPLE, C100244

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23CR0115)

v.

ANDREA DIONEE NAVONE,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury convicted defendant Andrea Dionne Navone of robbery after she took a hat from a store display, put it in her jacket, refused to return it when confronted by the store owner, and then shoved her way past the owner and fled the store. On appeal, defendant contends: (1) insufficient evidence supports the robbery conviction because video recordings from security cameras show that defendant did not willfully use force against the owner with an intent to steal and (2) our Supreme Court’s interpretation of the robbery statute is mistaken and should not cover defendant’s use of force in this case. The People respond that: (1) substantial evidence, including the surveillance video,

1

supports the jury’s verdict and (2) we cannot reject binding precedent from our Supreme Court. We agree with the People and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant entered a hardware store and walked to the back, to an area difficult for the store employees to see, took a hat from a display, and put it in her jacket. The store owner and his bookkeeper saw this on the store’s security cameras and went out to confront defendant. As defendant walked down a store aisle toward the owner, the owner told her, “I would like my merchandise back.” They had a brief conversation before defendant handed the owner a sweater she had been carrying draped over her arm. The security camera video shows defendant advancing towards the owner and trying to get around him before stopping and handing over the sweater when the owner blocked her path. The owner then told defendant to give the hat back too. Defendant told the owner, “ ‘I don’t have anything else. . . . Let me get out of here. Take your stuff. I’m leaving.’ ” The owner continued to ask for the hat and moved to block defendant as she tried to get around him. He testified that he never initiated contact with defendant, but just kept stepping in front of her and asking for his hat back. When he blocked her way, defendant gave the owner a “good aggressive shove” and then another shove with her forearm and bolted past him. The video shows the owner backing down the aisle while moving side to side to stay in front of defendant. When they near the end of the aisle, with the owner blocking defendant, the video appears to show defendant extend her right arm towards the owner forcing him backwards. Defendant then moves right towards the opening and appears to push the owner with her left arm before twisting her body to give another stronger shove with her right arm to get separation and propel her down a side aisle. After defendant pushed the owner, he told his bookkeeper to let defendant go. Defendant then ran out of the store while the owner followed, staying about 20 feet