D.C. Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld denied multiple defense motions on Oct. 24, leading to accusations that she violated a suspect’s constitutional rights..
Marcus Tucker, 30, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, armed carjacking, robbery while armed, and three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a carjacking on April 17 on the 2700 block of Hartford Street, SE.
Defense counsel Jason Tulley made a request for US Marshals court security personnel to un-cuff one of Tucker’s hands in order to take notes–Judge Hertzfeld refused based on the Marshal Service policy.
Tulley claimed that this was a violation of Tucker’s constitutional rights to participate in his trial and confer with counsel. Ultimately, the Marshals un-cuffed one of Tucker’s hands.
Tulley moved to recuse Judge Hertzfeld, claiming that she is partial and favoring prosecution.
The prosecution opposed the motion arguing Judge Hertzfeld had been impartial and made rulings in accordance with the law.
Judge Hertzfeld rejected the motion arguing the defense wanted her off the case because they disagreed with her rulings.
Tulley also moved to ask a prosecution’s witness about allegedly violating release conditions for an open strangulation case and suggesting the witness is testifying to “curry favor” with the prosecution.
The prosecution agreed to allow the defense to ask about the maximum sentence but argued Tulley cannot ask about the nature of the crime. Judge Hertzfeld ruled that the defense can ask about the case and sentencing, however, will limit cross examination.
Tulley also complained the prosecution failed to send out correct arrests records of the victim.
Judge Hertzfeld ruled there was nothing improper about relying on the prosecution’s methods to find out arrest records and the prosecution corrected the issue once they were notified.
Tulley moved to exclude screenshots that tracked Tucker’s cellphone location because it was a late discovery. The prosecution claimed it was not late because they sent more information as they received it.
Tulley asked Judge Hertzfeld to sign a subpoena to get access to the metadata on a private phone. Judge Hertzfeld agreed with the prosecution’s argument that this action required a search warrant and refused to sign a subpoena.
Tulley also moved to suppress a suggestive identification by the victim after the witness made an identification based on a police officer’s mistake of not muting their phone.
Both parties disagree about the facts of the incident, therefore, Judge Hertzfeld ordered the officers and complaining witness to an evidentiary hearing to decide on this matter.
The parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 27.
