Accessory to shoplifting?

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

19 yr old girl was arrested.
She was outside a store when the other girls shoplifted late at night.
Video shows that this 19 yr old was not in the store and was just waiting outside with a cigarette and a soda in each hand
Video shows that she was the first to be grabbed by undercover cops. After the other girls ran out first.
The group of girls were all caught as there were cops in the parking lot.

At first the court appointed attorney made a deal that only required the girl to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED. So she pled guilty and accepted the requirements.
When the girl went back for a second hearing there was a different judge and they claimed that the prosecutor changed their mind because they claimed that the girl could have been acting as a lookout.
This 19 yr old girl was not friends with the other girls and only had one friend that she was with. This friend is seen on video going to the bathroom of the store and also not mingling with the ones that were shoplifting.
So they added a $250 fine or go to jail until it is paid.
This girl is not bright and grew up as a foster child.
So the question is:
1 if the video shows the girl never entering the store (can she be found guilty of shoplifting?)
2 then if it is true that she was acting as lookout, then wouldn’t she start running ahead of the group and not be the last one to start running from the scene and first one nabbed by the UC?
3 if she was a lookout , wouldnt she not stick around since the cops were in the parking lot?
4 Would the result be better to get a paid attorney instead of the public defender?
5 Can her plea change since they are changing the original agreement by adding the $250 fine on top of the obligation to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED?
She said that she will have a misdemeanor record.

sefnfot said:

1 if the video shows the girl never entering the store (can she be found guilty of shoplifting?)

Click to expand...

Probably not. But she can be found guilty of being an accessory, or conspiracy.

2 then if it is true that she was acting as lookout, then wouldn’t she start running ahead of the group and not be the last one to start running from the scene and first one nabbed by the UC?

Click to expand...

Criminal behavior is difficult to predict. Criminals are often not very bright. If she did nothing wrong, why did she run at all?

3 if she was a lookout , wouldnt she not stick around since the cops were in the parking lot?

Click to expand...

See above. Also, since AA was a condition of the plea, it's likely that she was drunk when this happened, so her behavior would be more unpredictable.

4 Would the result be better to get a paid attorney instead of the public defender?

Click to expand...

Paid attorneys often devote more time to the case, and may produce a better result. If she has the means to pay an attorney, she should not have access to a public defender.

5 Can her plea change since they are changing the original agreement by adding the $250 fine on top of the obligation to attend AA meeting and to obtain a GED?

Click to expand...

Probably. The time may have been at the second hearing, so it may be too late now.

the other girls stole alchoholthe other girls stole alcohol is why AA meetings were made required. But she was clean at drug testing at arrest

I think what happened was that yhe fine was part of the original deal but she was not told this. It is not uncommon for the public defender to not fully inform you of every aspect of the plea deal. After the deal is made and a verdict is entered, changing ones mind is almost impossible. That being said, I do not believe any judge will allow you to withdraw the plea and begin the process again. To vacate the sentence at this point would take a significant amount of new evidence. The time to retain a lawyer has passed. I believe the defendant is now stuck with whatever the courts decide.gdlck.

CA does not have an "accessory" statute for misdemeanors. She was either a principal in the theft or the conspiracy to commit the theft (by doing the stealing or aiding in it), or she was an innocent dupe.

This sounds like a beer run. I suspect the video shows that they all met up and tried to run together when the girls with the booty got outside. As such, it is likely clear that she knew what was going on inside. The argument (had it gone to trial) would be whether or not she played an active roll or simply chose not to prevent what she knew to be happening.

As it is, it appears that she pled guilty. If she has not yet been sentenced, she may still be able to withdraw her plea and go to trial (though a guilty verdict can result in jail time and fines). She should talk to her attorney about her options.