DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean denied a defense motion to dismiss a shooting case due to prosecutors’ lack of readiness in a trial on March 31.
Marquis Allen, 32, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than a year, and threatening to kidnap or injure a person for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting that occurred on the 3500 block of East Capitol Street, SE on Aug. 19, 2025.
Allen allegedly fired one shot at his sister but no injuries were reported.
During the hearing, the parties discussed a non-responsive witness, whom the prosecution assured Judge McLean would show up for the trial.
The prosecution said they issued the witness a subpoena. However, their attempts to contact the person were unsuccessful. Still, they are prepared to move forward with the case at the trial readiness hearing on March 19.
The prosecutors shared photos at the hearing of texts between an investigator and the witness with Allen’s attorney, Shawn Sukumar. The prosecutors claimed that the witness texted them, “tell me when and I’ll be there,” regarding their appearance in court.
However, Sukumar stated that he could not find that language, and instead found a text from them stating they didn’t want anything to do with the trial from early December 2025.
Judge McLean asked prosecutors if they were expecting the witness to show up for the trial despite lack of communication, and if they were relying on the subpoena when they said they were ready to move forward with the trial. The prosecutors did not immediately respond.
The prosecutors told Judge McLean they attempted to contact the witness through two different phone numbers. They stated they called, texted and left messages with no response.
One of the prosecutors told the judge it’s “not uncommon” for witnesses to shun prosecutors but still show up to court.
“This was not raised to me until this morning,” said Judge McLean, admonishing the prosecutors for their unpreparedness. Judge McLean stated that this was an “issue with [prosecutors’] diligence.”
Sukumar requested that the case be dismissed because the prosecutors weren’t ready to proceed. Judge McLean denied the motion, but Sukumar said he would reserve his arguments and do more research regarding the dismissal motion.
Judge McLean delayed the start of trial to the next day, stating she expected both parties to be fully prepared to move forward, and said the prosecutors could argue issuing a warrant for the witness to appear in court. The judge said if prosecutors speak to the witness, they could still appear on their own accord, but if not she would decide if a warrant should be issued.
Parties are scheduled to reconvene on April 1.
