Case Acquitted: Officer Describes Domestic Homicide Defendant as ‘Clammy,’ Nervous at the Scene

Editor’s note: Rayvon Slye was acquitted of all charges by a jury on August 5, 2026.

A Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer testified about a homicide defendant’s demeanor when she arrived at the scene in a trial before DC Superior Court Danya Dayson on July 22.

Rayvon Slye, 34, is charged with second-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of Andrea Bond, 30. The incident occurred on March 7, 2023, on the 1000 block of D Street, NE. Bond sustained one stab wound to her left upper chest.

The MPD officer testified that she responded for a suspected overdose based on information from Emergency Medical Services (EMS), but later classified the investigation as a homicide.

Prosecutors played footage from the officer’s body-worn camera, and she confirmed that Bond was depicted on the floor. According to the officer, Bond had already succumbed to her injuries when police arrived.

The officer asserted that there were several people at the scene, including Bond’s family members and Slye. The officer identified Slye in court and said that he seemed nervous when the police initially responded. She described his face as “clammy,” and said that he was sweating.

According to the officer, Slye told Bond’s family member that Bond was reportedly stabbed the day prior after an altercation with a woman in the Trinidad neighborhood. Slye claimed that he instructed Bond to call the police, but she refused. He told the officers that he helped her wipe the blood off and bandage her wound before they went to sleep.

The officer said MPD conducted a search of the house through several rooms and looked for signs of blood. According to the officer, blood was not visible on any floors or walls. However, when searching an outdoor trash can, the officer stated she found a shirt stained with suspected blood.

The officer later explained that investigators were not searching for a weapon in the house because, at the time, they did not believe that the stabbing occurred there.

In another officer’s body-worn camera footage, Slye confirmed that the last time he saw Bond alive was the morning of her death. He claimed that, the day before, she reportedly told him that she had suicidal thoughts. He told officers that she took 15 pills, but did not know what kind.

The officer testified that she ordered Slye to stop eating while facing Bond’s body, as it was a homicide investigation.

In cross-examination, Slye’s attorney, Kayla Wyatt, confirmed that Slye was compliant with officers and answered their questions.

Slye was neither placed under arrest nor classified as a suspect while he interacted with the responding officers, according to the officer.

Wyatt highlighted that, although this was a homicide investigation, one family member was permitted to leave the scene to pick up their child. The officer clarified that it was up to MPD to determine who could stay or leave and that not all parts of the house were considered an active crime scene.

Wyatt also pointed out that not everyone in the house could be monitored by police, as there were fewer officers than family members.

Addressing the suspected bloody clothes and washcloth in the trash, Wyatt confirmed with the officer that the trash might have been disposed of shortly before MPD’s arrival.

Upon additional questioning, the officer established it took Slye a long time to provide the location in Trinidad where he reportedly dropped off Bond the day prior. According to the officer, she used a map to help Slye describe the area and he still did not provide a specific location.

Two of Bond’s cousins were also called to the stand as witnesses. Bond had been adopted by their grandmother and raised alongside the brothers despite not having a biological relation.

The older of the two brothers testified that he returned home between 2:30-and-3 a.m. the night before the incident and saw Bond and Slye asleep under blankets on a couch in the living room. The following morning, he reportedly saw Slye leave the house and return with a tray of food. He testified that he did not realize anything was wrong until he later returned to ambulances outside.

The witness also testified that he did not hear any arguing or screaming during the night.

Bond’s other cousin testified that the morning of the incident, he found Bond lying on the couch and described her as “lifeless.” Prosecutors also played a video the witness recorded of paramedics performing CPR on Bond.

Slye’s other attorney, Kevin Mosley, questioned the witness’ omission of certain details during an earlier police interview. The witness responded that he had “offered what [he] remembered,” in light of a traumatic incident.

An analyst with the Department of Forensic Sciences (DFS) also testified about documenting and collecting evidence from the scene. Prosecutors introduced photographs of the residence, clothing with suspected bloodstains, and a green shirt recovered from an outdoor trash can.

Mosley argued that the green shirt was recovered from the trash where it was buried under numerous other items, allegedly including a half-eaten box of chicken. He questioned the decision to not collect other items from the trash, including the washcloth with suspected bloodstains, arguing that substances from those items could have contributed to the suspected bloodstains on the shirt.

The forensic scientist also testified that no visible blood was observed on the walls or floors inside the home.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene to continue the trial on July 23.

Shooting Victim Says He Has ‘No Ill Will’ for Defendant at Sentencing

DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel sentenced a shooting defendant to nine years in prison on July 10 after one of the victims described the debilitating effects of his injury.

Kyre Robinson, 23, pleaded guilty on Aug. 22, 2025 to aggravated assault knowingly while armed, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, and destruction of property worth more than $1,000. Robinson shot a man in the back of the head on Dec. 16, 2024 on the 1500 block of Benning Street, NE.

In a separate case, Robinson pleaded guilty on April 10 to aggravated assault knowingly and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction for more than one year. Robinson shot two men in the back on June 9, 2025 on the 1500 block of Benning Street, NE.

A victim of the June 9 shooting testified remotely about the lasting effects of his injuries.

“This year has been the roughest in my life,” the victim said. “As soon as I wake up, I’m in pain.”

The victim already required a wheelchair for mobilityu when the incident occurred, but as a result of his gunshot wound he is now paralyzed from the waist down. Despite that, the victim offered a message of forgiveness.

“I hold no ill will toward Mr. Robinson,” the victim said.

The prosecution asked for six years for the June 9 shooting and three years for the Dec. 16 shooting for a total of nine years. They argued that because of the senseless nature of the crimes and Robinson’s history with firearm-related offenses, serious consequences were appropriate.

Julie Wilson, Robinson’s attorney, asked Judge Israel for eight total years of prison time, arguing that this incident was the result of “profound trauma and grief.” According to Wilson, Robinson had been a “bright, talented, smart” individual whose life changed when his friend died in his arms from a gunshot wound.

“If you look at his life as a whole, these are anomalies,” Wilson said.

Wilson asked Judge Israel to sentence Robinson under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA), which allows sentencing flexibility for defendants who commit offenses under the age of 25. The judge can sentence a defendant under the mandatory minimum and a defendant can have their convictions sealed upon successful completion of requirements.

However, Judge Israel denied the request because Robinson had already been sentenced twice under the YRA for two other firearm-related convictions.

When given the opportunity to speak, Robinson apologized to the three victims of the shooting.

“There are no words that can justify my actions,” Robinson said.

For the Dec. 16 shooting, Judge Israel sentenced Robinson to six years in prison for aggravated assault, 14 months for carrying a pistol, and 180 days for destruction of property, all to run concurrently.

For the June 9 shooting, Judge Israel sentenced Robinson to three years for aggravated assault, and 14 months for unlawful possession. The sentences will run concurrently with each other but consecutively with the charges from the Dec. 16 shooting.

Judge Israel also sentenced Robinson to three years of supervised release.

Judge Israel reminded Robinson that because of the seriousness of the two offenses, his sentence could have been significantly higher.

“These are at the bottom rungs,” Judge Israel said. “I could have gone way higher.”

No further hearings were set for either of Robinson’s cases.

Homicide Defendant Skips Hearing Again, Defense Attorney Cites Ankle Injury

A fatal shooting defendant’s missing a July 24 court date might have resulted from an ankle injury sustained in jail, his attorney told DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson.

Jordan Therman, 27, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed, first-degree felony murder while armed, armed robbery, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and possession of a firearm with a prior conviction more than one year. Those charges stem from an Aug. 4, 2023 incident on the 1900 block of 13th Street, NW, where prosecutors allege Therman shot and killed Denzel Greenwood, 33, in a robbery.

In a separate case, Therman is charged with two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, armed carjacking, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm as a felon, and endangerment with a firearm. The charges stem from a Feb. 7, 2024 incident on the 3900 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, SW, where prosecutors allege Therman shot two men while attempting to rob them outside a 7-Eleven. One victim sustained a gunshot wound to the shoulder and the other sustained a gunshot wound to the chest.

Therman was not present for his hearing. According to US Marshals, Therman had refused transport to the courthouse that morning.

According to his attorney, Julie Swaney, Therman injured his ankle in DC Jail the day before and that was likely the reason for his absence. Judge Dayson said it was acceptable for a defendant to miss a hearing held to discuss only procedural matters, but she would prefer that Therman attend every subsequent hearing.

Although she was aware of the injury, Swaney said she could not confirm whether that was the reason Therman refused transport from the DC Jail.

The hearing marked the second consecutive hearing Therman missed. Therman refused transport from DC Jail for his hearing on April 24, although the reason for his absence on that date was unclear.

Prosecutors informed Swaney that they began testing some DNA evidence, specifically strands of hair found on a coat. Judge Dayson had approved the testing despite the fact that the prosecution’s testing could possibly destroy the available evidence.

Swaney stated that the defense opposed the prosecution’s action, but she was not willing to file an objection since Judge Dayson had already ruled on the matter.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Jan. 8, 2027 for a status hearing.

Victim Says That Suspect Drove ‘Erratically’ Before Shooting at Him

The victim in a shooting case testified about his experience being attacked while driving before the jury in DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur’s courtroom on July 21.

Marcus Reavenell, 48, 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 one year, unlawful discharge of a firearm, reckless driving, and destruction of property less than $1,000. These charges stem from Reavenell’s alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting following a traffic-related incident at the intersection of 58th and Foote Streets, NE on May 14, 2025. No injuries were reported.

In court, the prosecution called the victim described that on the morning of the incident, he was driving to a DC school to install a security system. He saw a white van next to him, and the driver yelling at him.

After this, the victim claimed that the white van tailgated his vehicle and drove “erratically.” The victim testified that he felt “uneasy” and ran a red light to escape. The victim explained that he slowed down for a speed bump before hearing a “loud pop.”

“I freaked out because I knew I just got shot at,” the victim said.

After hearing the shot, the victim told the jury that he pulled over and called 911. When officers from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) arrived, he extracted videos from his vehicle’s dashboard camera.

The prosecution played the video for the jury showing the white van attempted to merge in front of the victim’s car from a right turn lane. The victim claimed that he did not realize the white van tried to merge at the time of the incident. The victim said he felt scared and just “wanted to get home safely.”

In cross-examination, Margaret Dawson, Reavenell’s attorney, noted that the victim never mentioned the race of the driver during his grand jury testimony. However, in the trial, he said that he remembered that the driver was a Black male.

The prosecution also called a former employee of the American Community Services. In late 2023, she helped hire and train Reavenell so he could provide direct aid to people with disabilities.

According to the witness, in May 2025, two detectives came to the office and asked her for help identifying a suspect. They showed the witness a slow-motion video of a man driving a white van, who she identified as Reavenell. The witness also identified Revanall in the courtroom.

In cross-examination, Dawson confirmed with the witness that people can change their appearances.

In the jury’s absence, the prosecution presented videos from an Instagram account they allege is Reavenell’s. The videos show a van with the same license plate and characteristics as the suspect vehicle.

Michael Bruckheim, Reavenell’s other attorney, objected to the relevance of the videos, arguing that there is no connection between Reavenell and the van in the video.

In response Judge Arthur compared the prosecution’s Instagram evidence as if if he were to go outside of the courthouse and film a video with a car in the background. The judge contended that video would not connect him to the car with certainty.

The prosecution then presented Instagram direct messages which show an account they allege is Reavenell’s messaging another individual that his “rental van was stolen from [his] job last night.” The prosecution argued that since these messages were sent from the same account as the video, they prove the van belonged to Reavenell.

Bruckheim argued that the context and timing was irrelevant, because the video was taken two weeks before the incident. He added that simply filming a vehicle does not prove that Reavenell owns that vehicle.

Judge Arthur asked the prosecution how they would connect Reavenell to the voice in the video and the Instagram account. In response, the prosecution displayed information extracted from Meta that showed the email linked to the account was under Reavenell’s name.

Bruckheim maintained his objection, stating that the prosecution presented an “incomplete narrative” that did not prove Reavenell’s ownership of the van or whereabouts at the time of the shooting.

Judge Arthur expressed concern that Reavenell’s social media statements could interfere with his right to not testify, and told the prosecution they had to call a witness to testify about all of the social media evidence.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on July 22 to continue the trial.

‘Why Wouldn’t We Take a Chance on Someone Who Has Potential?’ Defense Asks for Youth Act in Sentencing 7 Teen Carjackers

Defense attorneys in a carjacking case argued for DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz to sentence their clients under the more lenient Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA) on July 17.

A jury delivered mixed verdicts on Jan. 6 for Jaelen Jordan, 20, Jahkai Goff, 21, Taj Giles, 20, Warren Montgomery, 21, Bryon Gillum, 21, Irshaad Ellis-Bey, 20, and Isaiah Flowers, 21. All were charged in connection to what prosecutors described as an armed carjacking ring.

All defendants were convicted of at least one count of armed carjacking. Apart from Ellis-Bey and Goff, all were convicted of conspiracy.

These charges stem from separate incidents on Feb. 27, 2023 at the intersection of 20th Street and Sunderland Place, NW, on April 27, 2023 at the intersection of K and 8th Streets, NE, and on May 16, 2023 on the 600 block of Butternut Street, NW.

The YRA allows sentencing flexibility for defendants who commit crimes under the age of 25. The statute allows judges’ to sentence defendants’ for less than the mandatory minimum and for their convictions sealed upon successful completion of requirements.

In consideration of the YRA, parties present evidence of mitigating and aggravating factors to support their argument as to whether a candidate is qualified for the program.

If the seven co-defendants are deemed ineligible for YRA sentencing, each faces the mandatory minimum for armed carjacking, which is 15 years in prison.

Brian McDaniels, Jordan’s attorney, argued for YRA based on Jordan’s youth and his intelligence. McDaniels noted that Judge Kravitz should pay attention to the “Y” of the “YRA.” Jordan was 17 when he committed the offense, McDaniels explained, and he should not have to spend “over three times the amount of time he was alive at the time of the incident in jail.”

McDaniels then directed the court to Jordan’s role in the incident, one the prosecution described as the “mastermind” who developed the plan. McDaniels argued that this should not be weighed against Jordan because the YRA can “save” Jordan, as he’s “so smart” and could use his intelligence to “serve the community.”

McDaniel closed by asking Judge Kravitz, “Why wouldn’t we take a chance on someone who’s smart? Why wouldn’t we take a chance on someone who has potential?”

Goff’s attorney, Donna Beasley, argued that the “crux of the [prosecution’s]” objection “centers around the nature of the offense” and that the crime itself shouldn’t outweigh Goff’s chance for rehabilitation.

Beasley then informed the court of the rehabilitation programs at the jail Goff was currently enrolled in, such as cosmology, to show his willingness to reform. As one of the two not found guilty of conspiracy, Beasley asserted Goff wasn’t trying to cover-up the crime. Beasly argued that this showed that Goff didn’t understand the consequences of his actions, and Judge Kravitz should consider maturity in determining his YRA eligibility.

Christopher Young, Giles’ attorney, described his client’s behavior at the jail as “exemplary.” He then said that Giles has taken every opportunity presented to show his capacity for change and rehabilitation. Young concluded that in his own conversations with Giles regarding the incident, he learned Giles is haunted by how the incidents could have ended worse, and expresses deep remorse.

Warren Montgomery’s defense also advocated for YRA based on Montgomery’s rehabilitative efforts in jail. Montgomery wrote a letter to Judge Kravitz, which his attorney, Steven LoGerfo argued showed his capacity for reflection and change.

Daniel Dorsey, Gillum’s attorney, listed his client’s athletic and educational accomplishments in jail. Daniel said that Gillum’s pursuit of higher education through the Georgetown University district program showed that he is “trying to correct the downfall he caused.” Dorsey concluded his argument by claiming that the “only thing that could be his downfall” for YRA eligibility “is that he put on weight.”

Nathaniel Mensah, Flower’s new attorney, asked for more time to craft his argument because he was recently appointed to the case.

Ellis-Bey was not present for the hearing. Due to his absence, all defendants’ sentencing was postponed to allow for another YRA eligibility hearing. Ellis-Bey and Flowers will present YRA eligibility arguments on Oct. 2. Judge Kravitz will rule upon their eligibility prior to sentencing.

Judge Kravitz informed parties he would have his rulings on the YRA for Jordan, Goff, Giles, Montgomery, and Gillum in the following three weeks.

Parties are slated to reconvene for sentencing on Nov. 19.

Defense Requests Release for Triple-Fatal Arson Defendant for Trial Delayed Until 2028

Defense attorneys before DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson asked on July 21 for the release of a triple-homicide defendant after his trial was delayed until 2028.

Robert Simpson, 58, is charged with three counts of felony murder that was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel with aggravating circumstances, assault with a dangerous weapon, simple assault, threatening to kidnap or injure a person, arson, threats to do bodily harm, and two counts of destruction of property worth less than $1,000.

The charges stem from his alleged involvement in events that led up to and a house fire that killed Ronald McKinnon, 64, Jessica Cunningham, 34, and Margaret McKinnon, 84, on the 3400 block of 23rd Street, SE on Oct. 6, 2024. In addition, Simpson is accused of threatening a fourth victim with a knife.

The prosecution motioned to delay the original trial date of Aug. 24 due to the medical issues facing a key witness. Namely, the prosecution planned to call the medical examiner that performed autopsies on the three victims to testify, but she is on leave until October.

In this motion for continuance filed on July 16, the prosecution argued the medical examiner’s testimony is particularly relevant because Margaret died a day after the fire. They asserted that the witness’ testimony is necessary for the jury to understand that the fire caused Margaret’s death.

Simpson’s attorneys, Terrence Austin and Georgia Rochon, opposed the delay. Austin alleged the prosecution knew about the examiner’s absence in early summer, and claimed they had not taken the necessary steps to find a substitute.

Judge Dayson granted the continuance, and explained that if the prosecution sought a replacement witness as Austin suggested, they would have depended on the examiner’s autopsy report. She claimed this could be grounds for a violation of the Confrontation Clause in the Sixth Amendment, which ensures defendants the right to face witnesses and cross-examine them.

Simpson’s trial was rescheduled to April 24, 2028.

As a result of the lengthy delay, Austin requested Simpson’s release, citing his dated criminal record and previous employment. The prosecution orally opposed Simpson’s release and said they would submit written opposition.

Parties are set to reconvene on Sept. 18 to discuss the defense’s motion for Simpson’s release.

Stabbing Defendant, ‘Made Up His Mind’ About Probation Non-Compliance, Says Officer

DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean delayed probation revocation for a stabbing defendant until his attorney is present on July 20.

Alexis Rivera, 22, was sentenced on April 17 to one year of confinement with all but five months suspended and one year of probation for attempted assault with a dangerous weapon. The sentence was related to Rivera’s involvement in a stabbing during an attempted robbery on the 1500 block of Kenilworth Avenue, NE, on Dec. 6, 2025. The victim was attacked with a large black kitchen knife.

After Rivera failed to appear for his hearing on July 14, Judge McLean issued a bench warrant and he was detained on July 18.

At the hearing, a representative from the Court Services and Offenders Supervision Agency (CSOSA) informed the court that Rivera has not made an effort to appear as required since his release in April.

The representative believed Rivera “had made up his mind” that he wasn’t going to participate in supervision.

Judge McLean delayed revocation of Rivera’s probation for a week to allow Rivera time to talk to Matthew Rist, his attorney, who was not present at the hearing. However, the judge ordered he remain held until the next hearing.

Parties are slated to reconvene on July 27.

Domestic Stabbing Defendant Denied Release by Second Judge

DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur denied a domestic stabbing defendant’s release on July 22 due to the nature of the crime and risk to the community posed by the suspect’s prior convictions.

Paula Washington, 44, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for her alleged involvement in a stabbing that occurred during a domestic dispute on the 2300 block of 4th Street, NE on June 10. The incident left one victim with injuries to his chest and left arm.

At Washington’s felony status conference, the prosecution recounted the events of the incident. They claimed that Washington yelled, “I’m going to send you to meet the Lord” to her former romantic partner before allegedly pulling his pocket knife off of his belt and slashing him across the chest. The prosecution also pointed out that the victim arrived at the hospital with a blood soaked shirt and told the court, “actually the [prosecution’s] evidence is strong.”

Additionally, the prosecution brought up Washington’s prior criminal history, which includes a 2001 attempted second-degree murder conviction.

Washington’s defense counsel, James Brockway, described the victim’s version of events as “drunk ramblings” that made up “the sum total” of the prosecution’s evidence. He claimed that the victim’s recollection of the incident was inconsistent, due to having a “blood alcohol [content] several times the legal limit hours after.”

Brockway also claimed that the victim described events differently several times, leading to officers at the scene saying, “We don’t know how she got the knife. We don’t know why she got the knife.”

In addition, Brockway argued that Washington’s medical needs were not met at the DC Jail. He said she had not received CT or MRI scans or medication for pain and high cholesterol. The defense shared that Washington’s family has been present in her hearings and emphasized her support system if she were released.

Brockway previously argued for Washington’s release before DC Superior Court Judge Dorsey Jones on June 22, but Brockway argued his ruling relied too heavily on the severity of the charges.

Judge Arthur denied Washington’s release, declining to “disturb the findings of Judge Jones.”

Although Washington’s attempted second-degree murder conviction was “dated,” Judge Arthur said he was concerned with granting pre-trial release to a defendant who had completed a 15-year sentence less than ten years ago.

Parties are slated to reconvene for a trial readiness hearing on Sept. 18.

Judge Denies Two Late-Filed Defense Motions Before Jury Selection in Fatal Stabbing Trial

Before jury selection began on July 23 for the trial of homicide defendant Vanessa Bonaparte, 34, DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz denied two defense motions.

Bonaparte is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed and destruction of property valued at $1,000 or more, in connection to her alleged involvement in the murder of 31-year-old Dwayne Boyd on the 3500 block of East Capitol Street, SE. Boyd sustained two stab wounds to his chest on June 22, 2024, and was pronounced dead when police arrived at the scene.

Defense attorneys Kevann Gardner and Roderick Thompson wanted to ask jurors their feelings and experience with domestic violence during jury selection. Judge Kravitz denied the request, stating that domestic violence is unrelated to Bonaparte’s case.

Judge Kravitz also said the motion, which was filed that morning, was “too late.”

Gardner also argued to prohibit the use of the word “defendant” when referring to Bonaparte throughout trial because he said it lacked respect and could prejudice the jury as to Bonaparte’s guilt.

Judge Kravitz denied this motion, but said his jury instructions would direct jurors to treat Bonaparte with respect and humanity.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on July 27 to continue jury selection.

Judge Releases Fatal Arson Defendant Amid Mental Competency Questions

DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz released a fatal arson defendant on July 22.

Dayshawn Nolan, 23, is charged with second-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in a fatal arson incident that occurred on July 3, 2022 at the 400 Block of Condon Terrace, SE. Antoinette Davis succumbed to her injuries on July 17, 2022.

Judge Kravitz discussed the rulings made by DC Superior Court Judge Okun, who initially presided over Nolan’s case.

Judge Okun originally set a $100 cash bond for Nolan’s release on March 7, 2024 that would take effect after he finished serving his sentence in an unrelated case. Then, on Nov. 21, 2025, Nolan was transferred from Saint Elizabeths Hospital to the DC Jail and mistakenly put on a 1325 A hold.

A 1325 a hold keeps a person accused of first-or-second-degree murder held before their trial. Unless, the presumption of their dangerousness to the community is rebutted.

Judge Kravitz said the $100 cash bond should be restored but asked the prosecution their position on the risk of Nolan’s release with no conditions. The prosecution responded, “all options are on the table.”

Judge Kravitz read a transcript from Judge Okun where he determined Nolan’s release could protect the safety of the community based on a lack of evidence. The prosecution argued that a 1325 a hold is appropriate for Nolan since they claim there has been more evidence since Judge Okun’s ruling. The prosecution asserted that Nolan was and still is a danger to the community.

Judge Kravitz considered deferring this matter before making a decision. Nolan’s attorney, Christen Philips, asked Judge Kravitz to rule, adding “what may seem to be a short period of time to us is not a short period of time for someone at the DC Jail.” Philips added that Nolan’s was held for two months after his sentence in his other case expired.

Nolan was released on 24-hour home confinement with GPS monitoring and will live with his aunt.

At this time, Nolan is deemed mentally competent to stand trial, however, the defense is contesting his competency. To stand trial, Nolan must understand the charges against him and be able to assist in his defense.

Philips explained that Nolan has been undergoing cognitive tests since kindergarten and has an intellectual disability. According to Philips, various tests have shown Nolan has an IQ around 66, falling into the mild cognitive impairment category.

Judge Kravitz said he expected DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan to rule on whether Nolan is competent to stand trial by the following week.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on July 31 before Judge Kravitz.

Metrobus Carjacking Defendant Succeeds in Mental Health Court

On July 23, a carjacking defendant appeared before DC Superior Judge Laura Cordero in mental health court after receiving a positive report for compliance with her release conditions.

Kaprice Steward, 27, is charged with carjacking and unauthorized use of a vehicle after she tried to take over a Metrobus and caused a collision with another bus at the 1100 block of the Howard Road, SE at the Anacostia Metro Station on Sept. 15, 2025.

In her March 12 hearing, Steward was transferred to Mental Health Community Court, special division dedicated for defendants with serious mental health conditions who are charged with certain misdemeanor or low-level felony offenses.

Steward accepted a deferred sentencing agreement on May 21, where a defendant pleads guilty in exchange for a chance to fulfill certain requirements and delay their sentencing. If Steward successfully completes the requirements, the prosecution can dismiss her case.

At this hearing, Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) was able to confirm that Steward is still overall compliant with her release conditions after testing positive on July 15 for EtG, a byproduct of ethanol, meaning the defendant was exposed to or consumed alcohol.

Judge Cordero recommended Steward seek grief counseling after the recent loss of her great grandfather.

“Focus on strength and do what would make him proud,” Judge Cordero said.

Steward also has consistent meetings with her community service worker and regularly attends intensive outpatient program groups as well as being complainant with efforts to improve her life.

Judge Cordero recommended Steward discuss with her doctors if she can get medication injections once a month and it’s one less thing for her to worry about.

Parties are set to reconvene on Aug. 20.

Case Acquitted: Defense Emphasizes, ‘Not One Drop,’ of Blood Was Found at Fatal Stabbing Scene

Editor’s note: Rayvon Slye was acquitted of all charges by a jury on August 5, 2026.

Parties presented opening arguments before DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson on July 21 in a domestic homicide case.

Rayvon Slye, 34, is charged with second-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of his girlfriend, 30-year-old Andrea Bond. The incident occurred on the 1100 block of D Street, NE, on March 7, 2023. Bond sustained one stab wound to her chest.

Court documents report that Slye and Bond were in a tumultuous relationship during the year they were together. Both were reportedly arrested multiple times for domestic disputes against each other. Bond gave birth to their child two months before her death.

In their opening argument, the prosecution alleged that Slye invented his story. “The defendant admitted what he thought he couldn’t hide, and hid what he thought he could,” the prosecution said.

According to prosecutors, when Slye was first questioned by police, he claimed that he and Bond spent the night of March 6, 2023 out with their respective friend groups. When he later picked Bond up, Slye said she had already been stabbed. Slye alleged to police when they returned home he bandaged the wound and encouraged her to go to the doctor, to which she denied.

According to Slye’s recollection of events to the police, the couple spent time together that night before going to sleep. The prosecution said Bond was found dead the next morning by her family that lived in the house, as Slye was out getting food.

However, the prosecution explained expert witness testimony will discredit the story Slye told the police. They alleged that Slye stabbed Bond at the home and spent the night falsifying a story.

The prosecution also detailed the nature of their relationship, calling it “toxic and violent.” They claimed that Bond “tried to leave and never could,” and explained that a domestic violence expert will testify later in the trial.

“This was an intimate, private, domestic murder,” the prosecution said.

Kayla Wyatt, one of Slye’s attorneys, gave the opening statement for the defense. She urged the jury to not get “distracted” by the story the prosecution is attempting to “sell” them.

Wyatt focused on the forensic evidence in the case. Contrary to the prosecution’s explanation that Bond was stabbed in the house she and Slye were staying in, Wyatt said investigators found no blood at the scene. Bond had blood on her shoelaces, indicating she was stabbed while standing, Wyatt said.

“Not one drop [of blood]… in the house that the [prosecution] claims Ms. Bond was stabbed and killed in,” Wyatt said.

Wyatt said there are three main reasons why Slye should be found not guilty: there was no known argument between the couple that day, Slye tried to save Bond’s life by administering CPR and calling 911, and the prosecution’s story doesn’t make sense.

Moreover, Wyatt explained that Slye voluntarily spoke to officers numerous times, and never tried to run away or conceal his identity.

The forensic evidence isn’t simple in the case, Wyatt added. She disputed the prosecution’s claim that Bond died within 30 minutes of being stabbed. According to Wyatt, Bond was stabbed in her pulmonary artery, which caused mostly internal bleeding. In addition, Bond had alcohol and fentanyl in her system, making it difficult to discern her pain level.

According to Wyatt, this supports Slye’s claim that Bond was alive before the couple went to bed that night.

Wyatt also alleged that Bond overdosed in the Trinidad neighborhood the day before her murder, which is the same area she was in the night of her death.

Finally, Wyatt explained that the jury will hear from family members who will consistently describe Bond as loud and outspoken. Yet, Wyatt said, there were five other people in the house that night, and no one heard a dispute between Bond and Slye.

The prosecution then presented Bond’s cousin to testify, who lived in the house that Bond and Slye were staying in at the time of her death.

“She always liked to be the star of the show, she’s loud, vibrant. She was a good person,” Bond’s cousin said.

The prosecution presented photos of the house, which belongs to Bond and her cousin’s grandmother. When Bond died, the witness established he lived in the basement, while Bond and Slye were staying on the floor above, in the living room.

On Feb. 27, 2023, approximately a week before Bond’s death, the witness testified that there was an altercation between Bond and Slye on the porch of the house.

“They were just arguing in each other’s face,” Bond’s cousin said.

The witness established that he could hear the argument from his room in the basement, but he did not know what it was about. When he got to the porch, the cops were there. Bond’s cousin identified that night as the last time he saw Bond alive.

The prosecution also asked the witness about what he experienced on the morning of the incident. Bond’s cousin testified that at approximately 7:30 a.m. he woke up to footsteps above him that he did not think were not Bond’s.

“We lived in that house for so long, I could tell who was coming up and down the steps,” the witness said.

The witness explained he went upstairs two separate times that morning before he left for work. The first time, he saw Slye walking away from him to the couch. The second time, Slye was allegedly laying on the couch with his arm around Bond, however the witness said did not get a clear look at her and did not notice any movement from Bond.

Two-to-three hours later, the witness said he received a video from a family member depicting Slye performing CPR on Bond. He then rushed home from work, he said.

During cross-examination, Wyatt pointed out discrepancies between Bond’s cousin’s current testimony and the one he delivered to a grand jury on Dec. 5, 2023.

Wyatt read excerpts from that testimony’s transcript. To the grand jury, the witness said he woke up at 9 a.m. and went upstairs three times, leaving once to walk his dog and passing Bond and Slye on the couch in the living room around 10:30 a.m. Wyatt highlighted that the witness saw Bond and Slye more times than he testified about.

In addition, Wyatt asked the witness about his experience with Bond in the weeks leading up to the incident. He confirmed she was acting strange and she was possibly on drugs. The defense then presented a police interview the witness gave the afternoon of the incident.

“We thought she may have ODed [overdosed] or something,” the witness said in the interview.

Wyatt also asked about Bond’s relationship with her family, if she was “secretive” about her life, to which her cousin said yes.

During re-direct, Bond’s cousin clarified she was secretive about “her whereabouts…what was going on with her relationship,” but he did not know why.

Parties are set to reconvene on July 22 to hear from more witnesses.

Doctors Say Scissors Stabbing Defendant is Feigning Mental Competence

DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel told a stabbing defendant on July 21 that doctors had determined he was malingering, namely faking, the appearance of mental incompetence.

Chauncey Liverpool, 33, is charged with assault with significant bodily injury while armed and assault with a dangerous weapon. The charges stem from a Sept. 9, 2025 incident on the 4000 block of 3rd Street, SE, in which prosecutors allege Liverpool stabbed a friend twice with a pair of scissors after a conversation became heated.

Liverpool is also charged with two counts of felony contempt for allegedly violating a court order to stay-away from the victim on June 3, 2026.

Judge Israel said she had received five reports from the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH), all of which deemed Liverpool competent to stand trial. A defendant is deemed competent when they have a rational understanding of the charges and the ability to assist in their defense.

In their reports, two doctors from the DBH claimed that Liverpool behaved differently in front of them than he did in front of Judge Israel, and they concluded that his behavior was a result of malingering in an effort to be deemed incompetent to stand trial. Malingering is when a person intentionally exaggerates or fabricates an illness, either mental or physical, to gain a benefit.

Liverpool’s attorney, Howard McEachern, indicated his client’s strong interest in invoking a not guilty by reason of insanity (NGRI) plea when the defendant argues they should not be held criminally responsible due to their inability to comprehend the true nature of their actions at the time of the offense.

Judge Israel reminded Liverpool that an NGRI plea could result in a longer sentence than a conviction from a jury or plea deal. If the NGRI plea is successful, Liverpool would spend the duration of his sentence at Saint Elizabeths Hospital. Judge Israel also added that an NGRI plea would render the defense responsible for proving Liverpool’s insanity at the time–that he didn’t know right from wrong.

The prosecution established that pleading NGRI would prove a “big issue,” given their position that this plea was not supported by the evidence of the case.

Liverpool expressed concern about the qualifications of one of the doctors who had deemed him competent to stand trial.

“She told me she loved me. I don’t even know her,” Liverpool said.

As parties discussed the NGRI plea, Liverpool continued on to convey his frustration with the trial process and the “back and forth” he experienced.

“I’m just trying to get it over with,” Liverpool said.

Prosecutors said they were willing to re-extend a plea offer that had expired earlier in the case. On Feb. 10 they had offered Liverpool a deal in which they would not seek indictment on any other charges if Liverpool pleaded guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon. Liverpool declined that deal at the time.

Judge Israel ordered a criminal responsibility exam for Liverpool to determine if he could use an NGRI defense. The evaluation will take 45 days to complete.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Sept. 15.

Judge Corrects Sentencing Error for Defendant Who Fatally Shot Son in Face

In a hearing on July 17, DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz corrected an impermissible sentence he accidentally imposed for a fatal shooting defendant, but declined to reduce his overall prison time.

JD Wheeler, 27, was sentenced on Dec. 19, 2025 to five years in prison for voluntary manslaughter. The charge stems from a Nov. 24, 2021 incident on the 2300 block of Chester Street, SE, when Wheeler accidentally shot his two-year-old son Legend Wheeler in the face, killing him.

In a separate case, Wheeler was sentenced on the same date to two years in prison for a carrying a pistol without a license offense that occurred on Nov. 27, 2024 on the 3300 block of Fort Dupont Drive, SE. Wheeler was on release in the murder case when the offense occurred.

As part of Wheeler’s plea deal, parties agreed to a sentence between four-and-10 years in prison for the murder and one year for the possession case. Both sides agreed that the counts would run consecutive to each other. The agreement was under rule 11c1C, which requires the judge to sentence within the agreement, or reject the deal.

Without an 11c1C, prosecutors can agree to recommend a certain sentence, but they cannot guarantee what sentence the judge will impose.

At Wheeler’s sentencing on Dec. 19, 2025, Judge Kravitz determined that seven total years was an appropriate sentence for the two charges. However, instead of sentencing Wheeler to seven years in prison for manslaughter and one concurrent year for carrying a pistol, Judge Kravitz sentenced Wheeler to the aforementioned sentence.

Because the plea deal guaranteed Wheeler serve one year in prison for carrying a pistol, Judge Kravitz’s sentence on that charge was impermissible under the plea deal. Sylvia Smith and Erin Griffard, Wheeler’s attorneys, caught the mistake about four months later, and filed a motion to reduce the two-year carrying a pistol sentence to one year. This would reduce Wheeler’s total sentence to six years.

Smith and Griffard opposed Judge Kravitz increasing Wheeler’s sentence for manslaughter and maintaining the original seven year sentence, saying that doing so would violate the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment.

It protects defendants from receiving more than one sentence for the same offense, in effect being penalized for the same time twice. Because rectifying the sentencing error would require Judge Kravitz to sentence Wheeler a second time, Smith and Griffard argued that Wheeler’s sentence could not be increased.

Judge Kravitz granted Smith and Griffard’s motion to reduce Wheeler’s firearm sentence to one year in prison, but he denied their motion to leave his manslaughter sentence unchanged.

Judge Kravitz used the sentencing packaging doctrine for legal justification in increasing Wheeler’s manslaughter sentence. The doctrine allows a judge to modify related sentences in order to maintain the original total sentence.

He cited Ward v. United States as precedent, where a court raised a defendant’s sentence to comply with an 11c1C plea, while still maintaining a 108-month total sentence. The DC Court of Appeals determined that the actions of the original judge were appropriate because the amended sentence was still consistent with the court’s overall sentencing plan.

Smith argued that in Ward v. United States, the 11c1C plea mandated that the defendant serve 108 total months in prison, so the court would have still violated the 11c1C terms had they not maintained the original total sentence. However, in Wheeler’s case, a five-year sentence instead of a seven-year sentence still fell within the sentence range required by the 11c1C agreement.

Judge Kravitz acknowledged Smith’s argument, but maintained his ruling and invited the defense to either file a motion to reconsider or appeal his decision.

No further hearings were scheduled in this matter.

Judge Says He is ‘Inclined to Allow’ Claims of Stabbing Victim’s Violent Character

Parties argued final motions, including a prosecution request to exclude evidence of the victim’s violent character, before DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz on July 21.

Vanessa Bonaparte, 34, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed and destruction of property 1,000 dollars or more for her alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of Dwayne Boyd, 31, on the 3500 block of East Capitol Street, SE on June 22, 2024. Boyd sustained at least two stab wounds to his chest.

Bonaparte was not present in court. Following her mother’s recent death, Bonaparte refused to come to court, delaying the trial’s start until July 28. In her absence, her attorneys Kevann Gardner and Roderick Thompson, argued motions on her behalf.

The prosecution moved to exclude evidence of Boyd’s violent character. Gardner was seeking to admit a 2015 domestic violence complaint against Boyd. Prosecutors argued that the defense’s evidence was not admissible.

According to the prosecution, Gardner would not be able to prove that the character evidence was close enough in time to Boyd’s murder.

Gardner argued that the 2015 incident formed a pattern of incidents he planned to admit into evidence, accompanying complaints from 2018, 2023, and 2024. He said that because of the pattern, the concern about closeness in time should be disregarded.

Judge Kravitz noted that the 2018 complaint has not been confirmed yet, saying that it “may be a bit premature to have this discussion.” He asked Gardner to contact the victim of the 2018 complaint. Gardner agreed to reach out, but could not give a deadline because of his investigator’s schedule.

Prosecutors also argued that the character evidence would confuse the jury. They said it would make the jury look at Boyd as a “good guy” or a “bad guy,” instead of evaluating the evidence properly. Judge Kravitz disagreed, offering to provide a limiting instruction he believed the jury would abide by.

While he did not plan to make a ruling until after Gardner contacts the 2018 victim, Judge Kravitz said that he is “inclined to allow” the evidence of Boyd’s character.

Prosecutors requested a jury selection “voir dire” question, meant to eliminate potential jurors with bias. They said that a witness will testify to getting an abortion, which reportedly angered Boyd. The prosecutors requested a line of questioning that would determine whether any potential jurors had a bias against abortions.

Gardner argued that the witness did not have an abortion, but instead used Plan B, a retroactive contraceptive. He asked for the removal of the question and for the witness to testify to using Plan B instead of having an abortion.

Parties claimed the witness previously testified to the grand jury that it was an abortion, but told investigators that it was Plan B. Judge Kravitz said, “we just need to clarify.” He asked prosecutors to reach out to the witness and clarify her testimony before adding or removing the questions at issue.

The courtroom clerk alerted Judge Kravitz that Thompson had not been officially assigned as Bonaparte’s attorney. Thompson apologized, offering to file a motion to be formally appointed as counsel by the end of the night. Judge Kravitz denied the formal motion, saying that the clerk could add Thompson without a formal motion.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene for jury selection on July 23.

Search