A homicide defendant declared his strategy was his innocence when he asked DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman to dismiss his stand-by attorney and allow him to proceed to trial alone in a hearing on May 19.
Kyle Piunti, 37, is charged with second-degree murder while armed and three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a vehicle crash that resulted in the death of 54-year-old Michael Hamlin. The incident occurred on Jan. 3, 2024 on Highway I-295 southbound around Mile Marker 1.
According to court documents, Piunti was reportedly driving over 100 miles per hour shortly before the crash. The speed limit in the area was 50 miles per hour.
Judge Edelman said he scheduled the hearing to address Piunti’s motion filed on May 5 to dismiss his attorney advisor, Howard McEachern, and proceed without stand-by counsel.
Piunti said McEachern had not spoken with him since his appointment to the case on Feb. 5, despite Piunti’s attempts to reach out to him multiple times. McEachern acted as a “communication barrier” between himself and the prosecutors, argued Piunti.
McEachern agreed that his communication was not at a level that would make Piunti feel comfortable. “My candor to the court,” said McEachern, was that he was on leave for about four weeks and busy with other trials. McEachern said prosecutors sent him evidence that he could deliver to Piunti at the jail in the next week and improve communication.
Judge Edelman understood Piunti’s frustration with stand-by counsel that had not contacted him, but asked whether McEachern’s promise to visit in the next week satisfied Piunti for now, and then parties could revisit the issue if necessary.
Piunti said on prior occasions McEachern did not keep his promise to visit the jail and he preferred if the judge would remove him from the case.
Judge Edelman expressed concern with dismissing McEachern since Piunti’s trial is scheduled to begin on June 29. In addition, the judge said Piunti lost access to computers at the jail because he sent emails to the United States Attorney’s Office (USAO) that violated the Department of Corrections’ (DOC) policies. Without a computer, the judge questioned how Piunti would prepare for trial on his own.
Piunti argued he was “never given rules” with the computers at the jail but the judge said he could not change the situation.
Judge Edelman did not grant Piunti’s motion, asked McEachern to visit the jail and show Piunti the evidence, and said if Piunti’s concerns remain they will schedule a prompt hearing.
“I don’t want him as my attorney,” said Piunti and continued, “I don’t want him anywhere near my case.”
Judge Edelman confirmed with Piunti that he wanted to proceed to trial in about one month without counsel. “The odds are vanishingly small” said Judge Edelman that he could find new stand-by counsel that is available and could prepare for the trial. Judge Edelman emphasized that he had never heard of a defendant in a felony case at trial without an attorney or an advisor next to them. Piunti affirmed his request to proceed alone.
The judge asked the prosecution to voice their position on the issue. The prosecutor requested Judge Edelman order a mental competency screening. To stand trial, Piunti must understand the charges against him and be able to assist in his own defense.
“The guard rails are off” without a defense attorney, asserted the prosecutor and noted Piunti’s attempt to fire his fifth competent attorney, “somewhat erratic behavior,” and “unusual logic” in filings.
Judge Edelman agreed with the prosecutor and said he had his own concerns about Piunti’s mental competency.
“I don’t have to comply in that situation, right,” questioned Piunti. The judge emphasized that if he wants the case to move forward, it’s important for Piunti to comply with the screening. “I’m telling you right now, I’m not going to,” said Piunti.
“My strategy is simple, I’m innocent,” declared Piunti about his trial strategy.
Judge Edelman said Piunti’s repeated interruptions in the hearing and refusal to comply with the competency screening demonstrated why it would be a “disaster” for him to not have an attorney present at trial.
The parties are scheduled to reconvene on May 29 for a mental observation hearing.
