State v. Cooper
| Docket Number | ID 1801007017 |
| Decision Date | 31 July 2023 |
| Parties | STATE OF DELAWARE v. MAURICE COOPER |
| Court | Delaware Superior Court |
Submitted: April 17, 2023
Upon Defendant Maurice Cooper's Motion for Postconviction Relief DENIED.
Mark A. Denney, Jr. Esquire, Erika Flaschner, Esquire, Deputy Attorneys General, Department of Justice
Richard Sparaco, Esquire, Law Office of Richard Sparaco, LLC Jan A. T. van Amerongen, Jr., Esquire, Office of Conflicts Counsel, Attorneys for Defendant Maurice Cooper.
Defendant Maurice Cooper (“Cooper”) was convicted by a jury of Drug Dealing (Heroin), Aggravated Possession of Heroin, four counts of Possession of a Firearm During the Commission of a Felony (“PFDCF”), four counts of Possession of a Firearm by a Person Prohibited (“PFBPP”), and two counts of Possession of Ammunition by a Person Prohibited (“PABPP”).[1] For sentencing purposes, the two drug charges merged.[2] The Court sentenced Cooper to unsuspended Level V imprisonment of 15 years on the merged drug charge, five years on each PFDCF charge, and 10 years on each PFBPP charge.[3] The sentences on the PFDCF and PFBPP charges were all minimum mandatory sentences.[4] He was sentenced to probation on the PABPP charges.[5] Cooper's direct appeal was unsuccessful.[6]
On April 7, 2021, Cooper filed a pro se Motion for Postconviction Relief (“pro se Motion”)[7] and request for appointment of counsel. The Court appointed Peter A. Levin, Esquire (“Levin”) to represent Cooper, and Levin then submitted an Amended Motion for Post Conviction Relief (“Amended Motion”).[8] After Levin discovered that he had a conflict of interest due his representation of a previous client in a related case, Richard Sparaco, Esquire (“Sparaco”) was appointed to represent Cooper. Sparaco filed a Supplemental Brief in Support of Motion for Post-Conviction Relief (“Supplemental Brief”)[9] and Appendix (“Supplemental Brief Appendix”).[10] The State filed its Response in Opposition to Cooper's Amended Motion for Postconviction Relief (“State's Response”).[11] On April 17, 2023, the Court held an evidentiary hearing. The Court has carefully considered the parties' submissions as well as the evidence presented at the hearing. For the reasons set forth below, Cooper's Motion is DENIED.
In 2014, police began receiving tips about large scale distribution of heroin, cocaine, and marijuana taking place in Wilmington.[12] Primarily through informants the police began taking a specific interest in Cooper.[13] For example, based on information obtained from confidential informants, and confirmed through their own investigation, the police sought and obtained search warrants for a business (3607 Downing Drive, Unit 8, Wilmington, Delaware; “Unit 8”) and a residential address (2338 West 18th Street, Apartment 1, Wilmington, Delaware; “Apartment 1”).[14] On January 15, 2018, the police executed these warrants, finding several firearms, ammunition, cash, “a large quantity of packaged heroin[,]” and “a large quantity of raw heroin,” in addition to finding evidence in Apartment 1 confirming that Cooper occupied it.[15]
The police then obtained two search warrants for Cooper's Instagram account. The first covered November 25, 2017 through January 15, 2018.[16] That search yielded evidence linking Cooper to firearms.[17] The second, for May 18, 2017 through January 15, 2018, “yielded additional incriminating information.”[18]Cooper's motions to suppress seized from these warrants were denied.[19]
Cooper was arrested during the January 15, 2018 searches[20] and indicted the following day.[21] He was originally indicted on an array of drug and weapon possession related offenses,[22] but grand juries later returned several superseding indictments adding conspiracy, racketeering, and money laundering charges.[23]
Cooper was initially represented by John Edinger, Esquire (“Edinger”). During that time, the Court received several letters from Cooper asking to proceed pro se.[24] Since he was represented, the Court referred all letters to counsel.[25]According to Court records, Edinger did not pursue any of these requests.
On August 6, 2018, Stephanie Volturo, Esquire (“Volturo”) of the Office of Conflicts Counsel moved for the admission pro hac vice of James Brose, Esquire (“Brose”).[26] That motion was granted on August 10, 2018.[27] Brose went to work immediately, within the first month and a half filing a combined Motion to Sever and Motion for Bill of Particulars.[28] Volturo and Brose also filed multiple Motions to Suppress[29] and a Motion to Reveal Identity of Confidential Informant.[30] The motions were ultimately either denied, withdrawn, or rendered moot.[31]
Before the February 25, 2019 commencement of trial, the State entered nolle prosequis on several counts in an effort to avoid calling a confidential informant as a witness.[32] On February 19, 2019, Brose informed the Court that Cooper would be pursuing an entrapment defense,[33] claiming that the confidential informant sold him one of the guns for which he was charged.[34] On February 21, 2019, the parties discussed concerns over Cooper's wearing prison clothes for jury selection,[35] how to handle the person prohibited charges,[36] the overlap between the confidential informant, Instagram communications, and the entrapment defense,[37] and voir dire questions.[38] After Brose discussed the matter with Cooper, the parties stipulated that during the timeframe at issue (January 1, 2015-January 15, 2018), Cooper was a person prohibited from possessing firearms and ammunition.[39] On February 22, 2019, Brose requested a continuance in order to attempt to recover Cooper's deleted Instagram messages.[40] The State opposed.[41]
On the morning of trial, Brose made two oral motions; one for a continuance, again hoping for additional time to forensically retrieve Cooper's deleted Instagram messages, and the second for the identity of an informant to subpoena him/her for trial.[42] The State opposed the continuance request, claiming that the State did all it could to get the deleted messages, that a prospective witness to the entrapment allegation, Kiarye Braxton (“Braxton”), was available to testify, that its witnesses would be inconvenienced with a rescheduling; and that “it [would be] an affront to judicial economy.”[43] The Court denied the request for a continuance and reserved decision on the informant identification issue.[44]
A jury trial took place from February 25 to 28, 2019.[45] During trial, the State called numerous witnesses, including multiple law enforcement officers and expert witnesses Rachel Philibert, a forensic chemist with the Delaware Division of Forensic Science,[46] Kira Glass, a latent print examiner with the FBI Laboratory,[47] and Erica Ames, a forensic examiner in the DNA Case Work Unit at the FBI Laboratory.[48] The jury heard, for example, that Cooper admitted that everything found in Apartment 1 was his,[49] that there is “very strong support that Cooper is a contributor to the Ruger handgun,”[50] and that his middle finger's print was found on magazine paper and tape[51] located “inside of the locked Husky toolbox that contained heroin and the gun at [Unit 8].”[52] The Court denied Cooper's Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, his pro se Motion for Dismissal, and his objection to the conspiracy question and charge going back to the jury.[53]
On February 27, 2019, after much discussion between the parties as well as between Cooper and his counsel, Cooper informed the Court that neither Braxton[54]nor he would be testifying.[55] Also, for the first time, the Court was, made aware of Cooper's desire to proceed pro se.[56]
On February 28, 2019, Cooper was found guilty of Drug Dealing (Heroin), Aggravated Possession of Heroin, PFDCF (four counts), PFBPP (four counts) and PABPP (two counts).[57] He was found not guilty of Conspiracy to Commit Racketeering and two counts of Receiving a Stolen Firearm.[58] He was sentenced to a total of 75 years of unsuspended imprisonment at Level V.[59] Cooper raised four issues on direct appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court.[60]Cooper claimed that this Court erred in denying his motions to suppress evidence from the Apartment 1, Unit 8, and Instagram searches.[61] He also claimed that his sentence violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.[62] The Supreme Court “[found] no merit to Cooper's claims and affirm[ed],”[63] finding that “the facts and circumstances set forth in the applications were sufficient to permit the judge issuing the warrants to reasonably find that the items sought would be found in Apartment 1 and Unit 8.”[64] The Supreme Court also rejected Cooper's challenge to the Instagram warrants.[65] Finally, it found that the facts of this case, combined with Cooper's criminal history, justified his sentence and “do not create an inference of gross disproportionality to his crimes, they do not violate the Eighth Amendment.”[66]
On April 7, 2021, Cooper filed his pro se Motion[67] and on April 8, 2021, he filed a Motion for Appointment of Counsel.[68] His request for counsel was granted on April 19, 2021.[69] Levin was assigned to represent him and was admitted pro hac vice on January 21, 2022.[70] After submitting Cooper's Amended Motion, Levin discovered that he had a conflict of interest that disqualified him from continuing to act as counsel for Cooper.[71] Sparaco then was assigned to replace Levin and was admitted pro hac vice on August 18, 2021.[72] Sparaco filed the Supplemental Brief and Appendix on December 28, 2022.[73]
Prior to submitting his brief and appendix, Sparaco filed a motion to withdraw as ...
To continue reading
Request your trial