Thank you for reading D.C. Witness.
Help us continue our mission into 2025 by donating to our end of year campaign.
By
Elizabeth Bernstein
- September 19, 2024
Daily Stories
|
Homicides
|
Shooting
|
Suspects
|
Victims
|
A homicide and conspiracy defendant’s lawyers alerted DC Superior Court Judge Marisa Demeo that their client was rejecting a plea deal during a hearing on Sept. 18.
Eugene Burns, 32, was convicted of first-degree murder while armed, carrying a pistol without a license, and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence in 2017 for his alleged involvement in the shooting death of 24-year-old Onyekachi Emmanuel Osuchukwu III, on Nov. 15, 2015, on the 2900 block of Second Street, SE.
The conviction was overturned in 2020, when the DC Court of Appeals ruled that the search warrants for cell phones seized as evidence in the case were unconstitutional because they were overly broad.
In 2022, prosecutors updated the charges of first-degree murder, carrying a pistol without a license, and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence against Burns and added charges of conspiracy and two counts of obstructing justice.
Burns’ 24-year-old co-defendant, Tyre Allen, 24, was also charged with obstructing justice. The two allegedly attempted in 2020 to persuade and intimidate a witness into recanting testimony he gave against Burns in the original murder trial.
Burns previously requested an unwired plea deal because it would allow him to accept or reject a deal regardless of Allen’s decision to accept one.
According to Jocelyn Wisner, Burns’ attorney, the rejected deal required Burns to plead guilty to first-degree murder while armed, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy. Wisner told Judge Demeo Burns is ready to go to trial, which is slated to begin Sept. 23.
Wisner also raised an objection to newly submitted evidence by the prosecution. She disagreed with a firearm expert’s testimony, which was derived solely using images from Burns’ phone. According to Wisner, the images should be considered part of the unlawful search and should not be admissible.
However, the prosecution disagreed, arguing that the evidence is admissible because it stems from another search warrant that is legitimate. The prosecution also shared that they plan to reference further evidence that falls under the same rubric during trial.
Judge Demeo ordered the parties to write briefs outlining their stances on the evidence.
Parties are slated to reconvene for trial on Sept. 23.