Judge Denies Dismissal Motion for Defendant Awaiting New Trial

By D.C. Witness Staff - October 22, 2020
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Suspects |

A DC Superior Court judge denied a motion to dismiss a case involving multiple felonies that dates back to 2013. However, he did grant a motion to submit clothing for DNA testing.

In 2015, a jury found 57-year-old Victor Coley guilty of assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior firearms conviction, possession of an unregistered firearm/unlawful possession of a firearm or destructive device and unlawful possession of ammunition. 

Coley was sentenced to 40 years. 

In 2018, he filed a motion to reopen the case due to ineffective counsel. In December 2018, the case was reopened, and a new trial began on Nov. 12, 2019. The trial was paused in January due to motion issues and vacated after Coley submitted a motion for a new attorney. 

Attorney Dorsey Jones was appointed to defend Coley on Feb. 21. 

During the Oct. 22, Judge Michael Ryan addressed motions filed by the defense. 

Coley’s attorney, Dorsey Jones, filed a motion to dismiss the case due to alleged violations from the Department of Forensic Services (DFS). Jones also filed a motion for DNA testing of the defendant’s shoes, shoelaces, jacket, and jeans. 

Jones’ motion to dismiss based on DFS violations centered around a DFS employee who carried out the ballistics testing on the firearm found in Coley’s apartment. The DFS employee who testified at Coleys 2015 trial was investigated by the Department Of Justice (DOJ) in 2017 for allegedly forging a signature on documentation in an unrelated case. The employee was accused of trying to “shape the narrative” of the investigation. 

Jones said that these subsequent actions on the DFS employee’s part challenged his credibility and called into question the chain of custody for the firearm and shell casings. 

The prosecutor said these claims are no basis for dismissal. He said these allegations against the DFS employee happened two years after the investigation in this case. Another testing agency also re-examined the evidence.

Jones argued that the second examination didn’t prove that the evidence hadn’t been tampered with by the first DFS employee. He argued that officers did not mark the shell casings found on the scene. This makes it possible for the DFS employee to fire new rounds out of the gun recovered from Coley’s apartment and falsely claim that the new casings were those found on the scene. 

“I can’t see how the DFS employee’s subsequent wrongdoing affects his testimony in such a way that it justifies dismissing the case.” Judge Ryan said. “I don’t believe that I can dismiss the case or exclude evidence.”

Jones requested DNA testing on the clothing Coley was wearing on the night of the offense. The surveillance footage of the assault showed a suspect running behind the victim while shooting. Jones said that the victim’s blood could have gotten on Coley’s clothing if he was the shooter. 

The prosecution argued that the evidence could not be admitted at trial because officers, investigations, jurors, and prosecutors had all touched the clothing. He also said the testing would probably not lead anywhere. 

“It seems like a sensible argument by Mr. Jones,” Judge Ryan said granting the request for DNA testing.

Coley is scheduled to return to court on Jan. 13.