DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park denied defense motions to suppress identification evidence in a homicide case on April 22.
Robert Carpenter, 36, 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 shooting of 42-year-old Tremaine Nicholson. The incident occurred on the 3400 block of 25th Street, SE, on May 7, 2024.
Carpenter’s lawyers, Christen Philips and David Knight, filed a motion arguing that evidence police found in his truck shouldn’t be admitted because the police searched it without a warrant.
On April 11, a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective testified that they searched the truck only after a police dog signaled that there was a gun inside. He also stated that Carpenter was free to leave but chose not to.
The prosecution argued that the canine sweep was legal as the truck was parked in a public location. They added that the police had well founded suspicion that the truck was connected to the incident as it was allegedly observed leaving the scene.
Knight stated that Carpenter was handcuffed immediately after being stopped and wasn’t able to drive away. He added that there was no basis for the search as police originally thought the gun was elsewhere and the decision to search the truck was an afterthought.
Knight further argued that police attempted to interrogate Carpenter before the search of his truck hoping he would say something incriminating. He said probable cause should have been established before arresting Carpenter. Additionally, Knight stated that Carpenter was held was too long and the police should have been able to complete the search faster.
The prosecution responded that police had an obligation to determine the ownership of the truck and determine the suspect’s identify in surveillance footage–a process that was ongoing.
Judge Park ultimately agreed with the prosecution and denied the motion to suppress the evidence found in the truck.
Philips also argued that a witness’ identification of Carpenter should be excluded because the identification procedures used were unduly suggestive. She said that the witness initially identified a different person in the surveillance footage of the incident.
However, during grand jury testimony, the witness was questioned about his relationship with Carpenter, shown photos of Carpenter’s vehicle, and in surveillance footage where he was seen entering and leaving the vehicle. Philips argued these actions implicitly and explicitly communicated to the witness that the prosecution wanted them to identify the individual as Carpenter.
Philips further stated that the prosecution’s case for the witness’s reliable identification rests on knowing Carpenter. However, it does not mitigate concerns about the suggestive nature of the identification procedure.
The prosecution argued that the witness’ identification was a result of a careful and measured review of the evidence. They stated that the witness knew Carpenter and that the initial identification was made based on a low-quality cellphone photo.
Judge Park found that, while the defense proved the presence of suggestivity, the prosecution succeeded in proving the reliability of the identification. He reasoned that several factors, including the witness’ opportunity to observe the defendant, the controlled grand jury setting, the degree of attention paid by the witness, and more contribute to the reliability.
Parties are expected to reconvene on April 24.
