Preliminary Hearing for First-Degree Murder Case Cut Short, Judge Continues Hearing for the Following Week

By Rachel Benck [former] - January 19, 2023
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Charged with first-degree felony murder while armed, Ethan Cunningham appeared in court on Jan. 19 before D.C. Superior Court Judge Rainey R. Brandt to begin his preliminary hearing.

Cunningham, 20, was arrested for allegedly shooting James Curtis, 38, which occurred on May 10, 2022, in an apartment building located on the 2600 block of Stanton Road, SE.

The case’s lead detective testified that Cunningham, along with one other unidentified suspect, followed Curtis into his apartment complex. Cunningham met Curtis at his front door, armed and demanding to be let in.

Curtis told him he didn’t have the keys, so Cunningham brought him down the stairs, next to the apartment door, and into the basement, the detective said. According to court documents, a friend accompanying Curtis also entered the building, supposedly being let in and greeted at the front door by the unidentified suspect.

As the witness was approaching the apartment, he heard Curtis yelling for help from the basement and went down the stairs to find the victim and Cunningham scuffling. The witness then attempted to wrestle the gun from Cunningham, during which two shots were fired; One striking the witness’s backpack, consequently setting it on fire due to a flammable liquid inside the backpack.  The other struck Curtis.

The suspects fled the scene, and officers of the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) were dispatched to the apartment building where they found Curtis with a gunshot wound. Curtis was then transported to MedStar hospital where he later succumbed to his injuries and was pronounced dead.

The apartment door in question had a Ring doorbell camera. Police were able to obtain the footage from the night of the incident, and used still frames from the video to later identify the suspect as Cunningham. The second unidentified suspect was masked, unlike Cunningham. 

In addition, the footage also shows Cunningham armed with a firearm that was later identified as a black, .9 mm handgun with an extended clip. The ballistics report of the two shell casings found on the scene matched the weapon seen in the video.

During cross-examination, Cunningham’s defense attorney, Ronald Resetartis, attempted to undermine the witness’s credibility by pointing out discrepancies in the details between their interview transcript and evidence submitted to the court, including the witness and Curtis’ whereabouts before the incident occurred.

Resetarits also pointed out that the identification of Cunningham as the suspect in the video was determined by a single witness, and no photo array was conducted. Only still images from the camera footage were shown to the witness who identified Cunningham as the unmasked suspect in the video.

Additionally, no phone belonging to Cunningham was obtained by the MPD. There is no location evidence to corroborate the witness’s testimony, placing Cunningham at the apartment building at the time of the incident, Resetarits said. 

Judge Brandt was unable to finish the hearing due to scheduling conflicts, so all parties are scheduled to reconvene for the continuation of Cunningham’s preliminary hearing on Jan. 24 at 10 a.m.