Murder and Conspiracy Defendant Requests Plea Deal, Fights Disputed Evidence in Retrial

By Laura Berol - September 10, 2024
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Accused of killing his best friend and conspiring to intimidate a witness, Eugene Burns asked the prosecution to extend a plea offer and argued through his defense attorneys, Rosemary Szanyi and Jocelyn Wisner, to deny the admission of certain evidence before DC Superior Court Judge Marisa Demeo on Sept. 6.

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 convictions were 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 overbroad.

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. His 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.

The prosecution extended a deal that required Burns to plead guilty to second-degree murder while armed, attempting to obstruct justice, and obstructing justice, and Allen to plead guilty to obstructing justice, in return for the dismissal of all other charges. The offer was wired, meaning it would be valid only if both co-defendants accepted it. 

Allen rejected the offer. The prosecution is considering offering an un-wired plea deal after Burns requested his attorneys petition for an un-wired plea agreement.

The prosecution asked Judge Demeo to admit as evidence the testimony of a witness who said Burns told him about the murder before and after it happened. 

According to the rules of evidence, repeating another person’s out-of-court statements is hearsay and therefore inadmissible. An exception to the rule against hearsay allows a witness to repeat a defendant’s statement confessing a crime, as long as the defendant is available in court for cross-examination about the statement. 

Judge Demeo provisionally granted the motion, on condition that the prosecution demonstrates Burns’ statements to the witness can rightly be viewed as a confession. She invited the defense to object to the testimony later if they believe the prosecution has not met that requirement.

The prosecution asked Judge Demeo to admit evidence of bad actions for which Burns wasn’t charged. These included ownership of a handgun compatible with the bullets found in and around Osuchukwu’s body, a joint drug-selling operation with Osuchukwu, threats to kill Osuchukwu for not sharing the drug profits fairly, and threatening a witness who testified against him for Osuchukwu’s murder.

The Federal Rules of Evidence state that the evidence of other crimes is not admissible simply to show a defendant’s propensity to commit a charged crime, but it is admissible if it helps prove the defendant’s guilt for the charged crime or provides necessary context for understanding the crime. 

Judge Demeo granted most of the motion but refused to admit evidence that Burns threatened a witness in 2015. She rejected the evidence on grounds of the double jeopardy clause that prevents a person from being tried twice for the same crime. In Burns’ first trial, he was charged with obstructing justice and threatening to kidnap or injure a person, partly based on that evidence, but was acquitted.

In response to a motion filed by the prosecution to admit evidence of Burns and Allen’s conspiracy to obstruct justice, Judge Demeo objected that the motion was very broad in what it asked to include.

“It seems way out of proportion to the effect you’re trying to achieve,” Judge Demeo said. 

She gave the prosecution until Sept. 13 to file the specific excerpts of prior statements they want to admit as evidence and the reasons for each one.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Sept. 18.