Defendant’s Attorney Criticizes Police Actions In Homicide Investigation

By Laura Berol - May 5, 2025
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Defense attorney Sylvia Smith criticized police for entering the apartment where her client lived without a warrant, turning off a bodyworn camera inappropriately, and allowing evidence to be destroyed during a hearing before DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman on May 5.

Anthony Green, 39, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 24-year-old Terence Akindo on the 2300 block of 13th Place, NE, on July 30, 2023.

Smith filed motions to suppress evidence that was obtained when Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers entered the apartment where Green lived with his girlfriend without a warrant. 

Judge Edelman denied the motions, ruling that Green didn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the apartment because he was living in an abandoned building without permission from the owner. Thus, Green didn’t have standing to object to the police entering without a warrant.

According to Judge Edelman, the police were justified in entering without a warrant because they had received information that squatters were illegally present in the building and that a pregnant woman was in danger from a person who had committed a murder the day before. 

Although the pregnant woman, who was Green’s girlfriend, quickly told police she was not in danger, police still had a reasonable suspicion that Green had committed unlawful entry, which gave them a basis to arrest Green. The officers also learned Green had an extraditable warrant for his arrest in Maryland. 

In her motions, Smith objected to the police taking a photo of Green when they arrested him and used it to confirm his identity with the two witnesses of the shooting.

Judge Edelman said it’s accepted protocol for police to use a single confirmatory photo instead of a photo array to identify a person the witness knows well. In this case, both witnesses lived near Green and saw him regularly. 

Smith also filed a motion for sanctions against the prosecution for failing to preserve evidence. Judge Edelman heard both parties’ arguments and the testimony of two MPD officers.

One officer testified that he responded to a non-emergency call by a resident three days after Akindo’s death that asked police to investigate a vehicle suspected of being stolen. When the officer discovered the vehicle belonged to Akindo, he contacted the lead detective in Akindo’s case, who said the car didn’t have evidentiary value and should be turned over to a private towing company. 

The lead detective investigating Akindo’s murder testified that the prosecutor in the case asked him to locate the vehicle as evidence, but he was unable to find it. He later learned the towing company had sent it to a scrap yard. 

Smith pointed out that the officer investigating the car didn’t complete the appropriate paperwork regarding it and deactivated his bodyworn camera contrary to MPD guidelines. She produced reports showing this officer has been disciplined in the past for not using his bodyworn camera as required and for mishandling evidence. 

Smith questioned the lead detective’s decision that the car didn’t have evidentiary value. He said he would have preserved the car if it had contained ballistics evidence, but Smith pointed out that he didn’t direct the officer to search the car, so he didn’t know what evidence it contained.

Judge Edelman said he would rule on the motion for sanctions the next day.

The prosecution filed motions in limine, asking Judge Edelman to rule on the admissibility of certain evidence and testimony prior to the trial. Judge Edelman said he would make his rulings during the trial as the issues arose.

Parties are set to reconvene on May 6.