DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt heard and ruled on pivotal motions of a murder defendant during a hearing on July 29.
George Sutton, 45, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of John Coleman, 34, on May 1, 2023, on the 2000 block of M Street, NE.
The defense previously filed a motion to suppress oral statements made by the defendant. The prosecution opposed this and called the lead detective from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) who identified the suspect as Sutton in court and stated that the first time he met Sutton was when he searched his house on June 1, 2023 authorized by a warrant.
Sutton was put in handcuffs during the search, and agreed to go to the police station so the detective could interview him. The lead detective affirmed that he read Sutton his Miranda rights and assured Sutton understood he was talking to the police voluntarily. On November 8, 2023, the defendant was arrested and refused to speak to the police at that time.
The prosecution offered four exhibits into evidence which included interviews with Sutton at the police station on June 1, and signed documents that proved Sutton had the option to decline talking with police and knew his rights.
Steven Kiersh, Sutton’s attorney, had the witness clarify that about six to ten officers in uniform showed up to Sutton’s house unannounced. The witness stated that they detained Sutton and his longtime girlfriend, because of MPD’s policy. When Sutton arrived at the police station for an interview, his leg was cuffed so he couldn’t leave. While the detective did read his Miranda rights, there was no ascentainment of Sutton’s education and English language literacy or and comprehension, Kiersch said.
The court ruled the testimony from the lead detective was credible. The Judge also stated that most of the police actions seemed reasonable for officer safety and protection. Therefore, the defense’s motion to suppress statements from the first interview with Sutton on June 1, 2023 was denied.
The interview showed Sutton understood his Miranda rights when they were being read to him and was consistently told by the detectives that he was not under arrest. In the interview, Sutton stating that he did not have anything against the victim and that he did not know the victim’s name or who he was but just had seen him around the neighborhood. Sutton also claimed he was not at the scene of the crime during the incident but when shown a picture of his car he stated that he might have gone back there to sell drugs.
The prosecutor said that inconsistency shows consciousness of guilt.
Sutton also stated that he did not hear any gunshots from the car and explained he would’ve helped the victim if he had seen what happened. The video of the police interview also shows Sutton handing over his phone to the detectives and willingly sharing his passcode to them.
Ultimately, the judge ruled that the prosecution would be allowed to state the defendant and victim knew each other before the incident but denied the prosecution desirfe to mention Sutton’s drug use because it was overwhelmingly prejudicial.
Parties are slated to meet on August 11 at 9 a.m. for jury selection.
