P. v. Cooper
Filed 12/15/09 P. v. Cooper CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FREDRICK ALBERT COOPER, Defendant and Appellant. | B215582 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA103331) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, John J. Cheroske, Judge. Affirmed.
Karyn H. Bucur, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
________________________________________
Defendant and appellant Fredrick Albert Cooper was charged in count one with carjacking (Pen. Code, 215, subd. (a)),[1]in count 2 with kidnapping to commit another crime ( 209, subd. (b)(1)), and in count 3 with robbery ( 211). It was further alleged defendant had suffered a prior conviction under the three strikes law ( 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667, subd. (b)-(i)) and a serious felony prior conviction ( 667, subd. (a)(1)), and that he had served five prior prison terms ( 667, subd. (b)).
It appears from the preliminary hearing transcript that the prosecution theory in this action was that defendants DNA was found in blood recovered from a car that was the subject of the charged offenses. Trial counsel filed an in limine motion to preclude testimony that defendant was the source of DNA found at the crime scene because of flaws in the statistical frequency analysis of a cold hit DNA. The motion was supported by several hundred pages of attachments.
Before a ruling on the DNA exclusion motion, defendant entered a plea of guilty to the carjacking charge and admitted serving two prior prison terms in return for a sentence of seven years in state prison. All remaining charges and allegations were dismissed by the prosecution. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. On October 26, 2009, counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 raising no issues and asking this court to
