A homicide defendant testified about his version of a shooting before a jury in DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park’s courtroom on Sept 18.
Alphonso Oliver, 36, is charged with second-degree murder while armed, carrying a pistol without a license, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, and possession of a firearm during crime of violence.
The charges stem from his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 16-year-old Levoire Simmons on July 5, 2022, at the 700 block of Kenilworth Terrace, SE.
According to court documents, Simmons suffered a singular gunshot wound to the head and was pronounced dead on scene.
Oliver has a previous conviction for aggravated assault knowingly while armed from 2012. He was sentenced to 12 years incarceration, of which he served ten. He was released on March 4, 2022.
“I didn’t want to die. I just got home,” said Oliver.
Oliver walked the jury through the events of that night from his perspective. He had been released from jail for almost four months when the incident occurred. He testified he had plans to become a truck driver and travel.
Oliver testified that in the early hours of July 5, 2022 he and a woman were walking to a convenience store when he came into contact with Simmons, who was a part of a group hanging out on Kenilworth Avenue.
As the two walked towards the convenience store and were passing the group, an individual allegedly ran straight at Oliver brandishing his weapon. Oliver testified he had put his own weapon in his waistband before leaving for the store because he lived “in a bad neighborhood.”
Oliver said he put his hand on his own weapon in his waistband as the individual ran at him. The person ran past him as he crossed the street and a woman from the group yelled, “He got a gun; he got a gun”. Oliver allegedly addressed the group saying, “It’s not for y’all, I don’t want no problems.”
He stated then Simmons approached him saying, “I should take your mother f****** dog.” The “dog” he was referring to was the defendant’s gun.
Oliver told the jury he said, “I don’t want no problems, I don’t want to go back.” According to Oliver, Simmons told him he was good, and Oliver thought there were no longer problems between them.
The prosecution questioned why he was looking over his shoulder on the way to the store and pacing once inside if he was sure there were no problems with Simmons.
According to Oliver, the pacing was subconscious behavior he developed from his time in incarceration. He added he was able to tell there were no problems when no one from the group chased him into the store.
Wole Falodun, Oliver’s attorney, asked Oliver specifically how he ended up pulling the trigger, shooting Simmons.
The defendant said as he was walking back from the store he decided to introduce himself to the group because he thought they looked like they were from the neighborhood and he was “liable to see them again.”
He walked across the street towards the group with his hands in the air in a surrender position and asked the group, “Can I come at y’all like this?”.
At that point, Oliver testified, Simmons had his back to him and the person who had ran at Oliver before was standing perpendicular to Oliver facing Simmons.
As Oliver approached, Simmons allegedly turned, brandished his weapon, and advanced on the defendant so quickly that Simmons’ gun hit Oliver in the left temple. Oliver said he grabbed Simmons wrist of the hand that held the gun and reached for his own.
According to Oliver, Simmons in response grabbed Oliver’s arm just as he had done before. The two then tussled for control of the weapons. Oliver stated he saw the other man move from the corner of his eye and that is when he pointed Simmons’ gun downward and pulled the trigger, shooting Simmons in the head.
In cross examination the prosecution asked why Oliver was approaching a group of strangers, who he knew had weapons, at one in the morning.
The defendant said it was because he wanted to warn them about the dangers of having guns because of what could happen to them and due to the fact that “police were around the corner.”
The prosecutor asked if it was true that, “The person with the gun in his waist band was going to give advice to people with guns on gun safety.” Oliver said yes.
The defendant was asked if during the time when Simmons and Oliver were struggling over the gun the other man brandished his weapon at Oliver. He said no. She asked if the other man made a move to grab or point his gun at Oliver. He testified no.
He stated that when he saw the man move he thought he was going to be shot.
She went on to ask why he did not call 911 or for an ambulance before or after he fled the scene.
“I don’t want to go back, I didn’t want to be locked up,” Oliver said, adding “It’s not something I wanted – he put a gun to my head”.
The prosecution said he had asserted during his entire testimony that he had willingly gone up to this group of individuals to provide advice in which, “You didn’t know them from Adam” Oliver responded, “or Eve”.
The prosecutor played a snippet of a recorded phone call between Oliver and his cousin where Oliver was quoted saying, “Why would you go up to a group you ain’t know?”
Prosecutors also called on a forensic toxicologist to testify to the results of the report on Simmons ordered by the DC Chief Medical Examiner’s Office.
Simmons blood alcohol content at the time of death was .08, the legal limit. The witness stated that this indicated that the victim had been consuming alcohol shortly before the time of death. In addition, marijuana was found in the victim’s blood work.
The toxicologist made an important distinction between finding concentrations of alcohol compared to cannabinoids in an individual’s blood.
According to the witness, when marijuana is found in blood work it only indicates that an individual has come in contact with it, but not when they came in contact. This is because cannabinoids remain in the system for a longer period of time than alcohol.
The toxicology report results showed that at the time of his death Simmons was influenced by both alcohol and THC.
In cross examination, Falodun asked the witness if he knew if substances affected kids differently than adults, and if yes how so? The witness said while he knew the effects were different because children are still developing, he could not testify to the direct differences because more studies would need to be done.
Falodun made two motions for acquittal of the case. Judge Park denied both.
Parties are set to reconvene Sept. 22
