P. v. Cooper

1
Filed 1/4/17 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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.
JAMES WILLY COOPER,
Defendant and Appellant.
B269198
(Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. MA011494)
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles County, Lisa Mangay Chung, Judge. Affirmed.
Suzan E. Hier, under appointment by the Court of Appeal,
for Defendant and Appellant.
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler,
Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior
Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey and Mary
Sanchez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.

-- 1 of 4 --

2
Defendant, James Willy Cooper, was convicted in 1996 of
firearm possession by a felon in violation of Penal Code former
section 12021, subdivision (a)(1).1 The jury further found true
five prior prison term allegations under section 667.5, subdivision
(b). The jury also found true two prior conviction allegations
within the meaning of sections 667, subdivision (d) and 1170.12,
subdivision (b). Defendant was sentenced to 25 years to life plus
5 years for the prior prison term enhancements. One of the prior
prison term allegations rested on a 1990 controlled substance
possession conviction in violation of Health and Safety Code
section 11350. (Los Angeles Sup. Ct. Case No. MA001637.) In
2015, defendant successfully secured an order reducing the
controlled substance possession conviction to a misdemeanor
pursuant to section 1170.18. The trial court declined, however, to
reduce defendant’s prior prison term enhancements in the
present case by one year. Defendant appeals from that order.
For the reasons articulated by our Division Two colleagues in
People v. Williams (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 458, 463-475, review
granted May 11, 2016, S233539, we affirm. Related issues are
pending before our Supreme Court. (People v. Valenzuela (2016)
244 Cal.App.4th 692, review granted Mar. 30, 2016, S232900;
1 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code except
where otherwise noted.

-- 2 of 4 --

3
People v. Carrea (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 966, review granted
April 27, 2016, S233011.)
The order under review is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL
REPORTS
TURNER, P.J.
We concur:
KRIEGLER, J.

-- 3 of 4 --

1
The People v. James Willy Cooper
B269198
BAKER, J., Dissenting
As the majority opinion correctly notes, the issue presented
in this appeal is now before our Supreme Court. Because the
Supreme Court will have the controlling word, I see little need for
any extended analysis in this dissent. Rather, I simply observe
that if defendant James Cooper were to commit any future
crimes, his 1990 controlled substance possession conviction could
not be used to enhance his sentence under Penal Code section
667.5; I do not believe California voters intended to provide
sentencing relief only for future crimes, and not for a crime for
which defendant is currently serving a sentence.
BAKER, J.

-- 4 of 4 --