Defense Motions for Dismissal In Homicide Case Due to Delays in DNA Testing

By Marta Fernandez [former] - January 20, 2023
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

On Jan. 20, five co-defendants who are on track for a 2024 trial were scheduled for a hearing to discuss DNA testing in the case.

Koran Jackson, 22, Reginald Steele, 23, Tyiion Kyree Freeman, 23, Stephen Nelson, 21 and Aaron Dequan Brown, 26, are charged with multiple counts of conspiracy, assault with the intent to kill while armed, first-degree murder while armed, carrying a pistol without a license, and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence in connection to the shooting of 13-year-old Malachi Lukes on March 1, 2020 on the 600 block of S Street, NW. 

Jackson and Brown are also charged with tampering with evidence and possession of an unregistered firearm or destructive device. Nelson is also charged with being an accessory after the fact while armed.

During the hearing, counsel discussed the timeline for DNA testing results. The prosecution has not completed DNA testing because it needs Combined DNA Index System approval (CODIS), a software that compares a target DNA record against DNA records contained in the database.

An outside agency is responsible to give this approval, so the testing faculty is hesitant to provide a date for when testing will be done, said the prosecution. 

“The lab won’t even give you a hint?” asked DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt. 

The prosecution offered a 30-day period for DNA testing to get back and be reviewed by expert witnesses for the upcoming trial set for January 2024. “Once they get the approval, it should not take them long to perform testing,” she said. 

The defense is concerned that there is no concrete time of when the testing will be completed. 

Defense counsel proposed a 60-75 day period for review of DNA testing. “Thirty days would not make sense,” said Andrew Ain.

Judge Brandt agreed, saying 30 days was too soon to review all the evidence. 

The defense counsel’s concerns regarding how long the DNA testing has taken made them file to dismiss the case. 

“No one’s case is getting dismissed orally,” said Judge Brandt, requesting that all attorneys put their motions in writing.

Further, defense counsel requested any videos that the prosecution may have. Still, the prosecution would like the defense to view the videos and if they need a copy, they will provide a redacted copy for them. 

Judge Brandt requested that counsel work the hard drive matter out or file a motion. The next hearing is set for April 7 at 11 a.m. 

Freeman’s defense attorney, Andrew Ain, filed a bond review motion. “Mr. Freeman has grown a lot in the past three years. This case has ruined his life,” he said. 

Ain said Freeman wants to have an educational opportunity since he has lost the years that most people would be going through college

According to Ain, none of the DNA swabs tested had Freeman’s DNA. He added, he was waiting for two years for the DNA evidence, which made it difficult for him to finalize a release statement. 

Freeman was seen in a surveillance video firing a gun, the prosecution argued. Although no faces were seen in the video, it is believed that the clothing matched Freeman’s clothes. 

In regards to the bond review motion, the defense then quoted the defendant, “Why would I run if I want to have this trial because I believe it will exonerate me?” 

“When he can’t even behave on the inside, why would you ask me to put public safety at risk? Motion denied,” Judge Brandt said.

She explained that the court reached out to the Department of Corrections (DOC) regarding Freeman’s education interest. Residents are not allowed educational services after thirty days after a disciplinary report. 

Mr. Freeman was denied General Education Development (GED) services 14 times due to disciplinary reports or being placed in restrictive housing, according to Judge Brandt. 

He is currently on restrictive housing until Feb. 10 because of disciplinary reports.