People v. Andrade CA2/4

Filed 1/22/25 P. v. Andrade CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a). IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B332408

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA498869 v.

ANTONIO ANDRADE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark Hanasono, Judge. Affirmed. Lenore De Vita, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Idan Ivri and Melanie Dorian, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Because the issues presented in this appeal are narrow and straightforward, and because we are not publishing this opinion, we resolve this case by memorandum opinion. (See Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1.) We reject defendant and appellant Antonio Andrade’s due process and ineffective assistance of counsel arguments relating to his field show-up, and we affirm the judgment.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The Los Angeles County District Attorney filed an amended information charging Andrade with the second-degree robbery of an employee working at a Metro T-Mobile store. (Pen. Code1, § 211.) The information alleged Andrade used a firearm in the commission of the robbery (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)); and sustained a prior strike conviction. (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(j); 1170.12.) It also alleged the aggravating sentencing factor that the property taken had great monetary value. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421 (a)(9).)2 The jury convicted Andrade of robbery and found true the allegation that the property taken had great monetary value. The court declared a mistrial on the firearm allegation and later dismissed it. In a bifurcated bench trial, the court found the prior strike allegation true. The court denied Andrade’s motion to dismiss his prior strike conviction, and sentenced him to 10 years