Judge Allows Prosecutors to Use Instagram Evidence in Murder Trial 

By Joseph Wolf , Lauren Andreala - October 28, 2024
Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

DC Superior Court Judge Maribeth Raffinan granted two motions, including one that allows the prosecution to present Instagram evidence during a homicide trial, on Oct. 24. 

Tony Morgan, 31, is charged with first-degree murder while armed with aggravating circumstances, assault with intent to kill while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, and conspiracy, for his alleged involvement in a shooting incident on the 3500 Block of Wheeler Road, SE, on Oct. 20, 2018, which resulted in the death of 19-year-old Malik McCloud.

During the hearing, the judge heard arguments regarding a motion from the defense to suppress evidence seized from Morgan’s Instagram account, a prosecution’s motion to admit evidence of prior bad acts, and a motion in line to preclude third-party perpetrator defense.

The only motion Morgan’s defense attorneys, Megan Allburn and Steven Kiersh, made was a motion to suppress evidence seized from Morgan’s Instagram account.

They posited the search warrant was too broad and it did not satisfy the Supreme Court’s rulings surrounding the Fourth Amendment. As to the latter reason, they argued the warrant conflicts with Burns v. United States, which held the warrant must “specify the particular items of evidence to be searched and seized from the phone and be strictly limited to the time period or other date . . .”

The prosecution requested Judge Raffinan deny the motion, asserting that they had probable cause and that the Supreme Court was referring to cellular devices as a whole, versus a single phone application.

Judge Raffinan agreed and denied the motion to suppress evidence, ergo the evidence is admitted into trial.

The second motion filed by the prosecution was to admit into court statements of conspiracy allegedly made by the original codefendant, and by Morgan. These social media statements were euphemisms such as “dog for gun” that were allegedly used by both defendants that alluded to the idea of illegal gun sales. It was up to the judge to determine whether or not these statements would corroborate circumstances, and that a conspiracy to commit this crime existed. 

The “theory of admissibility” was a big aspect of this conspiracy crime where it was believed that Morgan used euphemisms to assess firearms used in this case. 

According to the defense, these statements came from the original codefendant, and the whole case was not built around Morgan. Thus, they found no reason for this motion as these statements aren’t linked to the actual crime, and the prosecution is trying to build a world of evidence against his client. 

Judge Raffinan agreed that these statements were important, and could be used as evidence against Morgan if they aren’t outside the scope of what is being presented. 

The last motion that was filed was the government’s to admit prior bad acts into trial. 

In their motion, the prosecution had seven acts they wanted to admit: 1) “Defendant Raynor’s involvement in the drug trade; (2) Defendant Raynor’s and Defendant Morgan’s affiliation with “solid Gang” or “SG,”; (3) Defendant Raynor and Defendant Morgan’s access to the specific Glock 19 and Springfield XD 40 used in the homicide; (4) Defendant Raynor and Defendant Morgan’s access to firearms generally; (5) Defendant Raynor and Defendant Morgan’s use of euphemisms and street lingo to refer to firearms and firearms accessories; (6) the murder of Defendant Morgan’s brother, Robert Merritt on October 9, 2018; and (7) the February 4, 2020 jail stabbing of [stabbing victim] by Defendant Raynor and Defendant Morgan” (Government 2024).

According to the prosecution, the reasoning behind admitting these acts into evidence is that the vast majority of the seven tenets are direct evidence of the crimes that Morgan is charged with. 

Furthermore, tenet five is included because, according to the prosecution, they allegedly texted back and forth every day, and, leading up to the murder, they used codenames for firearms and their accessories. Their reasoning is to make it clear to the jury that they are, in fact, discussing guns.

Pertaining to tenants six and seven of the motion, the prosecution reserves those in the event Morgan testifies in his trial.

Allburn and Kiersh requested that the Court deny the motion in its entirety, citing the evidence yielded from the motion as prejudicial and speculative.

Judge Raffinan has not ruled on this motion.

Parties are set to reconvene on Oct. 30.