Whether a murder defendant’s location could be identified by cell phone data resurfaced in a brief hearing before DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan on Jan. 5. The question is are different drafts of the cell phone analysis contradictory?
Terrance Stoney, 32, is charged with second-degree 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 Donte Tiller, 43. The shooting occurred at the intersection of Naylor Road and Southern Avenue, SE, on March 17, 2023
In trial last February an FBI agent who specializes in cell phone evidence testified he was able to locate Stoney’s cell phone near the incident at the time of the shooting.
Meanwhile, Nikki Lotze, Stoney’s attorney, questioned the data’s exactness and the agent acknowledged he couldn’t pinpoint Stoney’s exact location.
The jury deliberated for a week, finally alerting Judge Ryan they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict who then granted a mistrial on Feb. 19. Stoney, meanwhile, remains in custody since Judge Ryan concluded releasing him would be a danger to the community.
If the judge limits the contested cell phone testimony in the upcoming retrial, it could impact the prosecution’s case, which is now entering its third year.
“It’s the government’s ox that’s being gored,” said Judge Ryan of the controversy.
In October, Lotze filed a motion challenging the FBI’s analysis as inconsistent.
“The maps depicting arcs [ coverage areas] as currently configured should be excluded from evidence because testimony…at Mr. Stoney’s first trial differed with regard to whether phones could be found only inside the arc, or both outside or inside the arc,” argues the motion.
Increasingly used as technical evidence, cell phone data is essentially a form of triangulation in which a phone’s location can be most accurately plotted by analyzing its signal in relation to at least three transmission towers. Depending on the technology used, a cell phone in use can be detected to within a few hundred feet.
However, Lotze complained that there were ten drafts of the expert’s report. “That can’t be ignored,’ she said. “You can’t pretend that didn’t happen.”
The prosecutor said it was only necessary to show the jury the previous report used in trial and that there wasn’t an attempt to hide anything from the jury.
“That’s not something I was trying to do,” he said
Judge Ryan suggested he was inclined to rule based on precedent in the Willis case which allows expert testimony as reliable but open to challenge based on the weight of the evidence.
The next hearing on the cell site motion is set for March 20. Stoney’s trial date was moved up to Sept. 14, one week earlier than its original date.
