Even without that, unless the officer is willing to outright lie, I don't see anything resembling probable cause sufficient for an arrest, much less an indictment. If a police officer identifies himself, showing ID, and acts in a fashion that should get the attention of anyone who's actually watching the child, and ten minutes of a such attention fail to elicit any response, then that would constitute a prima facie case that the child was left unattended for more than ten minutes. If a cop arrives on scene to notice a baby apparently unattended, but the mother shows up less than ten minutes later, the cop has no way of knowing how long the baby was unattended and thus no cause for arrest. If the cop thinks there might be security footage, take down the plate number, ask the store for the footage, and seek a warrant later if justified. But to make an arrest without even a prima facie case is just plain wrong.
I’ll disagree slightly here. If a police officer sees a car with an unattended baby, and then sees a woman walking from the store, they could presume the person was there more than 10 minutes, for purposes of making an arrest. I suppose if you went to trial and the woman was arguing the 10-minute rule you would have to collect more evidence, but there should be “probable cause” for a citation.