A defense attorney argued before DC Superior Court Judge Erik Christian on April 17 a shooting defendant’s previous representation was deficient, effectively denying him a fair trial.
Richard “Black” Nduba, 42, was sentenced on June 2, 2023 to 10 years imprisonment for assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his involvement in a shooting that occurred in front of a Walmart at the unit block of H Street, NW on Aug. 10, 2022.
According to court documents, officers responded to a report of gunshots. The victim reported to the officers that he, wheelchair bound, was on the sidewalk when Nduba drove past and shot at him twice.
A jury returned a guilty verdict to both counts on March 22, 2023.
In a hearing before Judge Christian, Nduba’s attorney, Michelle Lockard, argued her motion of ineffective counsel, filed on Aug. 8, 2025, regarding the handling of Nduba’s trial. She argued that Nduba’s former attorney, Bruce Cooper, had no interest in representing him, unfairly disadvantaging Nduba. In her motion, Lockard requested Judge Christian reconsider Nduba’s sentence, reducing it and releasing him.
“I was really thinking he didn’t care about the case,” Nduba testified. Nduba sent DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur a letter prior to his trial on March 9, 2023, regarding Cooper and requesting a new attorney.. “After my first letter he caught an attitude with me,” Nduba said.
In one of the letters written to Judge Arthur, Nduba said he was not confident moving forward with Cooper as counsel. Nduba said that in the few times they met he tried to discuss the defense theory and plan for the trial with Cooper to no avail.
After the case was transferred to Judge Christian, Nduba recalled Cooper telling him he “can’t speak up” anymore. Further, according to Nduba, Cooper told him he may be discredited for testifying in his trial due to a past conviction.
Nduba said Cooper did not believe there was a defense in his case. Additionally, Nduba claimed he provided Cooper with a possible alibi’s information which Cooper did not follow-up or sufficiently investigate.
“If I knew it was going to end up like this, I would have taken the plea,” Nduba said.
Nduba recalled the trial, saying the prosecution depicted him “like some type of animal,” resulting in his 10 year sentence.
The defense also called Cooper who testified that “Nduba was difficult to deal with, he felt this whole case was beneath him.”
According to Cooper, he instructed his investigator to search for Nduba’s alibi which was inconclusive. The investigator, Cooper said, visited Nduba frequently. He said he often had the investigator meet with clients because he is African American and “sometimes [defendants] will not tell me things.”
“Nduba did not like talking to you because you aren’t an African American male,” Lockard questioned?
On the day of the trial, Cooper said Nduba requested new counsel. According to transcripts from March 20, 2023, Cooper supported the request saying they did “not have the best of relationships” and could “understand his desire for new counsel.”
Judge Christian asked if Cooper had discussed trial strategies with Nduba, to which Nduba reiterated in open court, “He actually told me he don’t see no defense in my case.”
Cooper disagreed and said he discussed strategy and was ready to proceed with the trial. Judge Christian denied Nduba’s request for new counsel.
Lockard claimed Cooper disregarded Nduba’s information about a possible alibi witness and did not diligently search for him. Additionally, Lockard said Cooper brought on a provisional attorney without Nduba’s consent. Nduba met the new attorney at the council table the day of trial, said Lockard.
Lockard called Justin Boggs, Nduba’s second attorney, as witness. According to Boggs, Cooper posted an opening online to serve as second chair in Nduba’s trial just a week before the start date.
Boggs said he cross-examined the victim and presented closing arguments in the trial. Lockard argued Boggs’ role in the trial quickly became the lead as Cooper took the back seat. She noted this dynamic was problematic as Nduba’s trial was the first in Boggs’ career.
Lockard characterized Boggs as the “game day QB ready to save the case.”
“With the little he knew about my case, he did a better job than Cooper would have,” Nduba testified about Boggs’ in his trial.
At the hearing, Boggs waved at Nduba upon leaving the witness stand. Nduba mouthed, “Thank you.”
Lockard additionally argued in her motion that Cooper did not adequately represent Nduba at his sentencing because he failed to mention any redeeming qualities of Nduba’s circumstances.
Lockard argued if Cooper investigated further and appointed Boggs with Nduba’s consent and knowledge, the case would have ended differently. She said his lack of action in the case violated Strickland v. Washington (1984) which holds “a defense attorney must have been objectively deficient and that there was a reasonable probability that a competent attorney would have led to a different outcome.”
“You can tell when somebody has an interest and is trying to help. [Cooper] didn’t have an interest in my case,” Nduba said.
The prosecution disagreed, arguing Lockard had no basis to call Cooper and Boggs ineffective because they operated with the information they had with an uncooperative defendant. Cooper testified he and his investigator attempted to track down the alibi. However, Cooper said Nduba’s previous attorney, Sara Kopecki, believed the alibi was a “ploy.”
The prosecution noted Nduba’s testimony was contradictory regarding communication with Cooper.
According to Nduba, Cooper never discussed the plea offer with him. Despite this, Cooper testified he discussed the plea and that he initially supported Nduba’s request for new counsel at the trial to give him more time to reconsider the plea offer. The prosecution argued Cooper’s communication did not affect the outcome of Nduba’s sentence.
Additionally, by speedily appointing Boggs as second chair, the prosecution argued Cooper put forth effort to win the case by getting help.
Boggs, according to Cooper, was known by colleagues as “aggressive” and was hired by Cooper to agitate the “belligerent” victim in cross-examination into quitting trial. The prosecution argued that Boggs’ lack of experience should not bar him from representing clients at trial. The prosecution emphasized Boggs’ success at trial as proof of Cooper’s effort.
“I wish I had you as my lawyer the whole time,” Boggs recalled Nduba saying to him after the trial.
Judge Christian did not make a ruling on the motion but said he will rule from chambers.
No further dates were set.
