Teen-Age Tryst Leads to Shooting, Says Prosecution

By Laura Berol - August 5, 2024
Court | Daily Stories | Non-Fatal Shooting | Suspects |

Defense attorney Matthew Rist told  DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt at a hearing on Aug. 2 that his client Antoine Johnson‘s constitutional right to due process has been violated in the wake of a shooting.

Johnson, 28, is charged with two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, unlawful discharge of a firearm, possession of an unregistered firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition. These charges stem from his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on May 21, 2023, on I-695 southbound near exit 2B. No injuries were reported from the incident.

According to court documents about the shooting, the victim was the father of a 17-year-old boy who was found in bed with his 14-year-old girlfriend earlier the same day by the girl’s parents. They called the police to arrest the boy, but the police arrested the girl’s father for assaulting the boy and allowed the victim to drive his son home. 

A police officer present at that arrest testified that he recognized Johnson there from a previous arrest and heard him say to the girl’s mother, “Auntie, I got this.” Court documents state that police body-worn camera footage showed an individual identified as Johnson telling the girl’s mother, “We ain’t doing no talking. I’ve seen his face.”

The victim and his son told police they saw a white sedan following them as they drove away. When both vehicles were slowed by heavy traffic, the driver of the white sedan shot at the victim, shattering the front side windows on the victim’s car and leaving five bullet holes in the driver’s side doors.

According to arrest documents, the victim’s son described the shooter’s distinctive facial tattoos to police and testified to having seen him earlier at his girlfriend’s residence.

Judge Brandt called the Aug. 2 hearing because the deadline to file motions for Johnson’s Sept. 16 trial had passed without any filings from either party.

Rist said he plans to file a motion arguing that the late disclosure of the cell site data information is a constitutional violation, stating it is too close to the trial date for the defense to make any effective use of the information. If Judge Brandt denies the motion, he will need to find an expert witness to testify regarding cell site data.

Rist said he expected to receive DNA testing results by the end of the day on Aug. 2. The prosecution said they may need to call an expert DNA witness, depending on what the results indicate.

The parties agreed to reconvene in a week to determine whether the Sept. 16 trial date is still feasible.

The next hearing in this case is scheduled for Aug. 9.