California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
LARRY WIMBERLY,
Defendant and Appellant.
C045556
(Super. Ct. No. 02F09968)
Defendant was convicted by a jury of two counts of rape (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2)) and one count of kidnapping to commit rape (Pen. Code, § 209, subd. (b)(1)) primarily on the strength of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence. He was sentenced under the three strikes law to an aggregate, indeterminate term in state prison of 150 years to life.
Defendant was first identified as a suspect through a search of a convicted offender DNA database that contained a profile of defendant's DNA taken in connection with an unrelated matter. Defendant contends on appeal the earlier seizure of his DNA violated his Fourth Amendment rights. He further contends statistical data regarding the probability of a random DNA match was improperly admitted. Finally, defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior uncharged offense. We find no error and affirm the judgment.
Facts and Proceedings
Sometime between 9:00 and 9:30 p.m. on April 14, 1997, 32-year-old Traci N. was standing near the corner of 47th Street and Martin Luther King Boulevard in Sacramento waiting for a bus to take her to the residence of a friend. Traci was homeless at the time and was staying with the friend temporarily. Earlier that evening, Traci had eaten at Loaves and Fishes and had been drinking beer. She considered herself to be â€
Description
Defendant was convicted by a jury of two counts of rape (Pen. Code, S 261, subd. (a)(2)) and one count of kidnapping to commit rape (Pen. Code, S 209, subd. (b)(1)) primarily on the strength of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) evidence. He was sentenced under the three strikes law to an aggregate, indeterminate term in state prison of 150 years to life.
Defendant was first identified as a suspect through a search of a convicted offender DNA database that contained a profile of defendant's DNA taken in connection with an unrelated matter. Defendant contends on appeal the earlier seizure of his DNA violated his Fourth Amendment rights. Defendant further contends statistical data regarding the probability of a random DNA match was improperly admitted. Finally, defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior uncharged offense. Court find no error and affirm the judgment.
