People v. Trimble CA2/8

Filed 10/17/22 P. v. Trimble CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.11 15.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B314258

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA100864) v.

LARECE SHANNA TRIMBLE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Hector M. Guzman. Affirmed.

G. Martin Velez, 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, Assistant Attorney General, Idan Ivri and Scott A. Taryle, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

Defendant and appellant Larece Shanna Trimble appeals from her conviction of robbery for which she received probation. She contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying her request to continue the trial after the close of evidence, and that her privately retained counsel was ineffective for failing to present an expert on eyewitness identification. We affirm. BACKGROUND Defendant was charged by information with one count of robbery arising from an incident that occurred at a Target store in Redondo Beach on December 3, 2018. (Pen. Code, § 211.) At the arraignment, defendant pled not guilty and substituted privately retained counsel in place of her appointed counsel. Defendant thereafter waived her right to a jury trial. In April 2021, the court granted defendant’s motion to continue trial to June 2021. At the June 8, 2021, bench trial, two Target employees, Christopher Romero and LaMeshia Williams, testified about the shoplifting incident they witnessed and both identified defendant in court as the woman who had committed the theft. Both Mr. Romero and Ms. Williams worked security and loss prevention for the store. Mr. Romero testified he first noticed defendant while he was monitoring the security cameras. Defendant selected a large amount of different clothing items and then walked to an area of the store without security camera coverage. Mr. Romero told his coworker, Ms. Williams, to stay on the cameras so he could go out onto the floor. Mr. Romero saw defendant pull a bag from her purse, place the clothes in the bag and head toward the front of the store without stopping to pay.