Prosecutors Will Retry Triple-Homicide Defendant After Mistrial

Prosecutors told DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz on July 17 that they would be retrying a triple-homicide defendant after his first trial resulted in a hung jury.

Jalonte Thompkins, 34, is charged with three counts of first-degree premeditated murder while armed, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm for a person with a prior conviction more than a year. The charges stem from his alleged involvement in a shooting on Aug. 4, 2023 at the intersection of Ontario Road and Euclid Street, NW, which left three brothers, James Morgan, 34, Jamal Morgan, 30, and Vincent Martin, 42, dead.

In his first trial which began on May 21, Thompkins’ attorney Brandi Harden argued the incident occurred in self-defense after the victims’ reportedly fired the first shots.

In a separate bench trial on June 30, Judge Kravitz found Thompkins guilty of unlawful possession of a firearm for a person with a prior offense. However, a jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on the remaining six charges, and Judge Kravitz declared a mistrial on July 1.

Prosecutors confirmed to Judge Kravitz at the hearing that they intend to retry Thompkins on the six remaining charges.

Harden said she was prepared to retry the case as soon as November, but due to a busy court schedule Judge Kravitz set the retrial date for June 1, 2027.

In addition, Harden filed a motion for judgement of acquittal on July 15 on all charges except one count of murder and one count of firearm possession. Prosecutors said they wanted the opportunity to file a written response to Harden’s motion.

Harden noted her motion that prosecutors claim Renza Bryant, 30, another suspect with Thompkins, allegedly fired the shots that killed James and Martin. Because DC Superior Court Judge Robert Okun found no probable cause for the charges Bryant and dismissed his case on Jan. 16, 2024, Harden argued that the prosecution could not charge Thompkins for their deaths under the co-conspirator liability theory.

Harden did not request acquittal on the charges stemming from Jamal’s death, since prosecutors claim he was allegedly struck with bullets from Thompkins’ gun.

Parties are set to reconvene on Aug. 11 for oral arguments on Harden’s motion for judgement of acquittal.

Defense Criticizes Prosecutors’ ‘Pattern’ of Late Disclosure in Fatal Shooting Case

A fatal shooting defendant’s attorney expressed frustration with the prosecution’s “pattern” of late disclosures in DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park’s courtroom on July 20.

Diantre Smith, 50, is charged with first-degree murder while armed, seven counts of assault on a police officer while armed, eight counts of possession of firearm during a crime of violence, four counts of unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than one year, two counts of carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or place of business, and four counts of leaving after colliding in a vehicle crash.

These charges stem from Smith’s alleged involvement in the murder of 28-year-old Nyesha Galloway on Dec. 20, 2019. Galloway was killed in a shooting in a wooded area on the 400 block of 42nd Street, NE.

In court, Smith’s attorneys, Hannah Claudio and Madalyn Harvey, noted that they would not be able to cross-examine a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer who recovered the murder weapon.

According to Harvey, the officer was arrested in January 2025 for driving under the influence , and he was scheduled to undergo cross-examination in a motions hearing on July 20. However, the prosecution only turned over grand jury transcripts which would allow the defense to cross-examine him that morning.

“This is a problem,” Harvey stated, “I don’t understand why I’m getting them this morning.”

Harvey claimed that the prosecutors have had a “pattern” of sending materials late to her team. As such, she requested a continuance for the evidentiary hearing.

Judge Park granted the request, asking parties to investigate the matter further and determine whether he needs to help resolve any issues.

Judge Park denied the defense’s motion to suppress digital evidence from cell phones found in a Jeep Cherokee allegedly registered to Smith and from his apartment.

In the prosecution’s opposition to the motion, they claimed that Smith’s alleged abandonment of the Jeep Cherokee and its contents made it permissible for police officers to search the phones.

Claudio rebutted that abandonment of the phones did not mean that Smith abandoned their contents.

Judge Park noted that different courts have ruled in opposite manners on similar issues, but that he generally agreed with Claudio’s point. However, he denied the motion to suppress this evidence because he said that the relevant search warrants were sufficient and in good faith.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Aug. 20.

Fatal Arson Defendant Has ‘Unsophisticated, Childlike, and Wishful’ Legal Understanding, Says Defense Expert

A defense expert witness testified before DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan on July 20 that a murder suspect’s intellectual and developmental disabilities hinder his competency to stand trial.

Dayshawn Nolan, 23, is charged with second-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the death of Antoinette Davis. According to court documents, Nolan reportedly fired a Roman candle firework into Davis’ apartment on the 400 block of 42nd Street, SE, on July 3, 2022, causing a fire that resulted in injuries from which Davis later died. Davis succumbed to her injuries on July 17, 2022.

The hearing centered on whether Nolan is mentally competent to stand trial, meaning whether he can rationally understand court proceedings and assist his attorneys in his defense.

After two evaluations, the defense’s expert witness concluded that Nolan is incompetent to stand trial. The individual is a board-certified clinical neuropsychologist well-versed in criminal investigation psychology, competency examinations, and assessing defendant competencies.

In cross-examination by the prosecution, the expert testified that Nolan demonstrates an “unsophisticated, childlike, and wishful” understanding of the criminal justice system. According to the expert, Nolan can answer simple factual questions but does not show the rational understanding required to stand trial.

The defense’s expert diagnosed Nolan with an intellectual and developmental disability (IDD), attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), all of which have reportedly resulted in significant impairment of his reading comprehension, reasoning, and ability to process information.

The specialist also said Nolan frequently confused his previous carjacking case with the current murder case and said he has been “very much impaired for all his life.”

The defense witness said courtroom accommodations such as reading documents slowly, explaining legal terminology, or giving him pen and paper to organize his thoughts might “make him feel better,” but would not redeem his competency to stand trial.

During redirect examination, the defense’s expert testified that Nolan’s test results consistently placed him in the first percentile for intellectual functioning. The expert said neuropsychologists generally consider people who score in the fifth percentile and below on the mental competency test to have an IDD.

He also said psychological evaluations from Nolan’s high school, Saint Elizabeths Hospital, and the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) corroborated an IDD diagnosis. According to the witness, Nolan was not exaggerating his symptoms or malingering, meaning intentionally fabricating or exaggerating symptoms for personal benefit.

When questioned by Judge Ryan, the witness said Nolan’s lifelong intellectual and developmental disability is extremely unlikely to improve through treatment.

The witness further testified that Nolan had attempted to “mask” his impairments in a variety of ways, including by using colloquial phrases such as “roll the dice” or saying you understand something even when you don’t. The expert said this would hinder an individual’s ability to assist their attorney.

The prosecution presented their own expert witness, a clinical psychologist who performed five evaluations on Nolan beginning in May 2025. The expert witness found Nolan incompetent in her May and July evaluations, but found him competent on two dates in October. In April 2026, the expert found Nolan competent again.

In the prosecution’s expert’s October report, she had noted Nolan knew of his charges, but needed education on the difference between first-and-second-degree murder. She had also reviewed the evidence and witnesses of the case with Nolan, which he described as “confusing.”

Nolan’s attorney, Christen Philips, pressed the witness on a notable discrepancy between her April evaluation notes and her official report. The analyst’s report mentioned a discussion with Nolan regarding witnesses, but there was no documentation of it in her notes.

The prosecution’s expert stated that she thought there were multiple instances where Nolan knew the answers to her questions but did not communicate due to exhaustion and irritation with the process. She did not believe Nolan was “feigning” or “malingering” in his responses.

As a result of time constraints, the contested competency hearing is scheduled to continue on July 21.

Judge Won’t Sanction Prosecution for Evidence Issues in a Stabbing

DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld ruled on July 10 that, despite the defense’s disagreement, prosecutors had not committed any evidentiary violations in a domestic violence stabbing case.

Otis Ransom, 51, is charged with aggravated assault knowingly while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury while armed, and possession of a prohibited weapon, for his alleged involvement in a domestic violence stabbing on Dec. 13, 2025 on the 1200 block of 3rd Street, NE.

According to court documents, the victim sustained multiple lacerations, allegedly at the hand of Ransom who, according to the victim was reportedly pressuring her to have sex with him.

The hearing began with the court arraigning Ransom on the charges against him. John Harvey, Ransom’s attorney, pleaded not guilty to all charges on his client’s behalf, asserted his rights to a speedy trial, and requested all evidence in the case.

Judge Hertzfeld then asked both parties to confirm that they were prepared for trial on July 16. The prosecution confirmed that they were but noted the defense was still having some issues accessing evidence.

Harvey stated that they were not ready for trial and said he was “extremely disappointed” at the prosecution’s purported failure to share evidence. “I have not seen any of the body-worn camera” footage, Harvey added.

Prosecutors said that they had put the relevant evidence on the digital portal that they use. However, Harvey said that he repeatedly attempted to log in to the portal but could not, even after requisitioning help from the prosecution’s IT department.

Despite this, Judge Hertzfeld ruled that the prosecution had not committed a violation at which point Harvey, visibly upset, objected, and argued the prosecution violated their evidentiary obligations.

Harvey stated that he alerted Judge Hertzfeld about his difficulty getting evidence at a previous hearing. A month-and-a-half later, the prosecution had still not complied, emphasized Harvey.

Judge Hertzfeld responded if he wanted her to step in he should have submitted a motion to compel the prosecution to share evidence earlier than the day before the hearing.

Parties agreed to reschedule the trial to Sept. 21.

Harvey also argued for release of his client with a stay-away order from the victim, referencing his previous arguments about evidentiary delays as well as noting that the client has been incarcerated since December 2025. However, Judge Hertzfeld denied this request, after the prosecution opposed Ransom’s release, citing the seriousness of the incident.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Sept. 11.

Defense Wants New Trial in Carjacking Case Claiming Ineffective Counsel, Lack of Witnesses

A carjacking defendant’s attorney argued that his client should have a new trial before DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel on July 10.

Devonte Carter, 31, was initially charged with armed carjacking and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. Prosecutors alleged that he stole a Taizhou moped at gunpoint on July 10, 2024 on the 2100 block of 14th Street, SE.

Prior to jury deliberations, Judge Israel granted the defense motion for judgement of acquittal on April 10, 2025 for the possession charge. After deliberations, on April 14, 2025, a jury found Carter not guilty of armed carjacking, but guilty as to the lesser-included offense of unarmed carjacking.

However, Carter filed a motion on his own behalf on Aug. 25, 2025, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel from his trial attorney Gregg Baron and asking for a new trial. Carter argued in his motion that Baron failed to challenge significant differences between witness statements and their court testimony. Judge Israel removed Baron and appointed Adrian Madsen on Sept. 25, 2025.

At the hearing, Madsen argued that Carter should have a new trial because no witness identified him in or out of court as the perpetrator. This was a problem, Madsen said, because the prosecution claimed that a man riding a moped in a surveillance video was Carter, but never supported that claim with evidence.

Prosecutors argued that their case against Carter was strong enough as it was without witness identification either inside or outside the courtroom. They pointed to Carter’s DNA found on the handlebar brakes of the moped as additional strong evidence, as well as Carter’s evasive behavior when police confronted him on the night in question.

Madsen responded by arguing that the evidence the prosecution had might suggest guilt of a lesser crime, specifically unauthorized use of a vehicle, but not carjacking.

Judge Israel declined to make a ruling at the bench, but told parties she would email them when she had made a decision and inform them of the next hearing date.

Judge Will Raise Stabbing Defendant’s Safety Concerns With Jail

A defendant accused of stabbing a correctional officer told DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan on July 17 that other officers reportedly are assaulting him in retaliation.

Ovid Gabriel, 21, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, assault on a police officer while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury while armed, and unlawful introduction of contraband into penal institution for his alleged involvement in the stabbing of a DC Jail correctional officer on the 1900 block of D Street, SE, on Aug. 3, 2025. The officer sustained nine stab wounds, a collapsed lung, and a lacerated intestine.

Gabriel’s attorney, Kevin Irving, told Judge Ryan that Gabriel believes he has faced retaliation from other correctional officers following the alleged assault. Irving said he was concerned for Gabriel’s safety and asked whether Judge Ryan could order his transfer to a different facility.

According to a July 4 filing from Gabriel on his own behalf, a correctional officer reportedly assaulted him on June 22 while he was restrained in handcuffs at the infirmary. According to Gabriel’s filing, an investigation determined he was the victim and the officer was the aggressor.

Judge Ryan said that he does not have the authority to determine where Gabriel is held, as that falls outside the scope of his authority under the bond statute. However, he said he was willing to reach out to the Department of Corrections (DOC) general counsel’s office with Irving’s concerns.

Irving also said Gabriel claims he was intentionally placed in a cell with limited Wi-Fi access, preventing him from preparing for two other cases in which he is representing himself. According to Irving, repeated requests to move Gabriel to another cell have not been granted.

Judge Ryan reiterated he would contact the DOC’s general counsel to address Gabriel’s concerns and inquire about the measures being taken to ensure his safety.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Jan. 4, 2027.

Jury Convicts Defendant of First-Degree Murder in Domestic Violence Case

A jury found a domestic homicide defendant guilty on all charges before DC Superior Court Judge Park on July 16.

Wonell Jones Jr., 38, is charged with premeditated first-degree murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior a crime of violence, for his involvement in the fatal shooting of the mother of two of his children, 33-year-old Audora Williams. The incident occurred at Williams’ home on July 19, 2022, on the 2900 block of Knox Place, SE. Williams sustained 52 wounds and defects.

Less than 24 hours after closing arguments, the jury unanimously found Jones guilty on all charges.

In the trial that began on July 9, the prosecution argued that Jones deliberately shot Williams an extraordinary number of times. Jones’ attorneys, Steven Kiersh and Megan Allburn, argued that Jones was not culpable for Williams’ death. However, in closing arguments they advised that if the jury found Jones guilty, the charge should be manslaughter, not murder.

“Today’s verdict, guilty on all charges, is a step toward justice for Williams and a clear affirmation that such brutality will be met with unwavering accountability,” said US Attorney Jeanine Pirro in a press release on July 16.

At the time of her murder, Williams had a Temporary Protective Order (TPO) against Jones.

After the jury delivered their verdict, Kiersh notified the court that they intend to submit a motion for a new trial and requested to push back Jones’ sentencing date.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 30 for sentencing.

Judge Allows Expert’s Deposition Before ‘Presently Incompetent’ Homicide Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman allowed a deposition of a forensic DNA technologist despite the defense’s written objections in a first-degree murder case on July 14.

Alberto Valle Carranza, 57, is charged with premeditated first-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of 31-year-old Reyna Garcia Lopez. The incident occurred on Dec. 19, 2023, on the 1200 block of 11th Street, NW. According to court documents, Garcia Lopez sustained over 30 lacerations.

Judge Edelman allowed the deposition even though he said Valle Carranza is “presently incompetent” to stand trial. To be competent to stand trial, a defendant must understand the legal process and be able to help their lawyer with the case.

According to court records, the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) has previously found Valle Carranza both competent and incompetent over five mental competency examinations.

The forensic technologist who analyzed secondary DNA evidence in Valle Carranza’s case is moving abroad and said it would be “difficult if not impossible” to return to the US to testify. Judge Edelman acknowledged the potential effect her testimony could have on Valle Carranza’s case, granting the deposition out of an “abundance of caution.”

According to court documents, defense attorneys Andrew Ain and Julie Swaney objected to the deposition by arguing it violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause and the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause.

The Sixth Amendment grants a defendant the right to confront witnesses against them. The Fifth Amendment guarantees a defendant receives proper legal proceedings before being deprived of life, liberty or property.

In their objection, defense attorneys wrote the witness’ testimony may “exclude[s] Mr. Valle as a contributor to DNA found on the [victim].” Defense weighed the benefits of this including this testimony, against the harm caused by the Fifth and Sixth Amendment violations.

The defense concluded the deposition should be held, but plans to questions its legality “in the unlikely event Mr. Valle is ever deemed competent to stand trial.”

Parties are scheduled to meet for a mental observation hearing on Aug. 7.

Shooting Defendant’s Case Won’t Be Sealed After Failing Youth Act

DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe terminated a shooting defendant’s Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA) probation as unsuccessful on July 15.

Dayquan Henderson, 24, was sentenced to nine months in prison, all suspended, in favor of one year of supervised probation for unlawful discharge of a firearm and possession of an unregistered firearm for his involvement in a shooting that occurred on the 300 block of Anacostia road, SE on May 11, 2024. No injuries were reported.

The YRA under which Henderson was sentenced, would allow for his case to be sealed if he met additional requirements of his probation.

After almost a year of probation, Henderson was scheduled for a probation show cause hearing in order to give an update on whether or not he had completed his community service hours required as part of his probation.

At the hearing, a probation officer from the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) told the court that Henderson had not completed his community service hours. Henderson’s attorney, Daniel Kolver, confirmed this information to Judge Pipe.

The prosecution requested a revocation of Henderson’s probation, which Judge Pipe denied. She explained that while he had compliance issues in the past, he had already been on probation for a significant amount of time. Henderson’s probation was instead terminated as unsuccessful.

Judge Pipe additionally noted that Henderson could have had his case sealed after his probation period, had he been fully compliant with the requirements of his YRA sentencing.

No further dates were set.

‘Many People in DC Have Been Hit by Stray Bullets,’ Says Prosecutor in Shooting Case

DC Superior Court Judge Hildum found probable cause for unlawful discharge of a firearm and released the defendant on personal recognizance on July 16.

Barry Fox, 72, is charged with unlawful discharge of a firearm for his alleged involvement in a shooting that occurred on July 12, on the 2500 block of Brentwood Road, NE. No injuries were reported.

According to court documents, the incident allegedly occurred at Fox’s home. Three rounds of ammunition were reportedly fired inside the home from a Colt Lawman 357. The shots were reported to 911 by two separate neighbors.

The prosecution called a responding Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer to testify regarding his involvement in the case.

The officer established that he responded to two phone calls alleging three gun shots were fired from the general area of the incident address. The officer responded to the scene with other members from MPD.

“He didn’t want us to come in and he also didn’t want to come out,” the officer said.

The officer explained that upon arrival, Fox denied law enforcement entry into the unit. MPD went to Fox’s wife, who was across the street, and the officer said she granted them permission to enter the home out of concern for Fox. According to the officer, Fox’s wife told officers that Fox had been drinking while on medication for a recent hip surgery. The officer confirmed he was not present for this conversation.

While searching the home, the officer said he found a firearm on the couch, next to where Fox was sitting. The officer explained that there were three spent shell casings and three live rounds still in the firearm.

During cross-examination, Fox’s attorney, James Brockway, emphasized that no witness has identified Fox as the shooter, or specified his home to be the location the shots were fired from.

Brockway confirmed with the officer that he was not present for the 911 calls that reported the shots, or any other conversations had with witnesses.

In addition, Brockway asked the officer about the state of the firearm when he recovered it. The officer said it was not warm to the touch.

When asked whether MPD received any other reports of gunshots that night, or if there were frequent gunshot reports in the neighborhood, the officer said he did not know.

“There is not probable cause for three principal reasons,” said Brockway.

Brockway alleged that there is no evidence that these shots were fired without a permit from the Chief of Police, which is a legal requirement of unlawful discharge. In addition, he said there is no evidence shots were fired from a specific location or identification of Fox as the shooter.

“A reasonable person who obtained a permit to fire a firearm, when contacted by the police, would say so,” said the prosecution.

The prosecutor argued for probable cause, explaining that Fox was found with a firearm next to him right after 911 calls were made. They also said there is no evidence of a lawful permit from the Chief of Police and Fox never indicated that he acted in self-defense.

“I think what we have here is circumstantial evidence… we know from the laws that circumstantial evidence is good evidence,” said Judge Hildum and found probable cause.

Brockway urged Judge Holdim to release Fox, citing multiple letters of support from the community, Fox’s current gun licenses in Virginia, Maryland, and DC, and a history of employment as a driver for Metro Transit and cellphone technician. Brockway highlighted Fox’s limited criminal history, a 1983 minor drug charge.

“It is a tragic reality that many people in DC have been hit by stray bullets,” said the prosecution.

The prosecution asked for a continued hold, highlighting the seriousness of the offense. They asked Judge Hildum to restrict Fox’s access to firearms if he grants release.

Judge Hildum released Fox on personal recognizance, emphasizing Fox’s good standing with the community and that the gun was registered at the time of the incident.

The judge prohibited Fox from possessing any form of firearm or ammunition. Other conditions of his release include the completion of substance abuse and mental health assessments with the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) and biweekly PSA meetings.

Parties are slated to reconvene Sept. 8.

Shooting Case Dismissed After it Was Transferred to District Court

The prosecution asked DC Superior Court Judge Heide Herrmann to dismiss a shooting case on July 14 because the defendant’s case was moved to US District Court.

John Bradham, 54, was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, possession of an unregistered firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition for his alleged involvement in a July 10 shooting at 300 block of 8th Street, SE. No injuries were reported.

According to court documents, Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) received a call from a witness who heard a “large boom” outside of her residence and saw a “muzzle flash” on security camera footage. Documents say that the video showed someone, who was later allegedly identified as Bradham, retrieving a gun from his backpack, firing shots in an alley, then walking out.

The prosecution asked for Braham’s DC Superior Court case to be dismissed. Bradham’s case was moved to the US District Court and he was not present for the hearing.

Bradham’s attorney, Joseph Fay, had no objection to the request to dismiss the case. Judge Herrmann dismissed the case after the agreement from both parties.

Bradham was also scheduled to have a status review hearing related to a 2002 first-degree murder case he was sentenced for in 2004 and had his sentence reduced in 2005. According to Judge Herrmann and the prosecution, that hearing was scheduled in case the prosecution was asking for a hold in the shooting case. Court records reflect no changes in Bradham’s murder case since 2010.

No further hearings were scheduled.

Judge Allows Unrecorded ID of Traffic Shooting Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur ruled on July 16 that an unrecorded identification of a road rage defendant was admissible in trial but would be a “ripe area of cross-examination” for the defense.

Marcus Reavenell, 48, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than one year, unlawful discharge of a firearm, reckless driving, and destruction of property less than $1,000 . These charges stem from Reavenell’s alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting following a road rage incident at the intersection of 58th and Foote Streets, NE on May 14, 2025. No injuries were reported.

In court, Reavenell’s attorneys, Michael Bruckheim and Margaret Dawson, argued in favor of suppressing photo identification of their client. On May 8, they filed a motion to suppress identification based on the prosecution’s reported failure to preserve evidence. They also asked for the case to be dismissed on these grounds.

Bruckheim and Dawson claim the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detectives who acquired Reavenell’s identification from his coworkers failed to videotape this process.

The MPD detectives reportedly showed a still photograph and a short video clip from the shooting to Reavenell’s coworkers. Bruckheim noted that two of the three coworkers interviewed could not identify the person displayed, whereas one identified Reavenell only based on the video clip.

“All we have is what the detectives say happened,” Bruckheim said. “We don’t have any way to check them on that.”

Bruckheim argued that because detectives approached Reavenell’s three coworkers with a preconceived notion of who was in the photo, there might have been an “element of suggestivity” during their questioning.

In addition, detectives failed to use a photo array, which Bruckheim called an “unusual” manner of suspect identification.

The prosecution rebutted Bruckheim’s arguments, stating that they could not produce what does not exist. In addition, they claimed that it is typical for MPD detectives not to wear body-worn cameras.

“This is an issue that happens regularly,” prosecutors said.

Judge Arthur ruled against the defense motion, stating that the lack of video evidence was not grounds to suppress the identification. However, he noted that it hurts the MPD detectives’ credibility as witnesses and is a “ripe area of cross-examination.” He also declined to dismiss the case.

The parties then selected a jury for Reavenell’s trial.

Parties are scheduled to present opening statements on July 20.

Judge Orders Bench Warrant for Stabbing Defendant on Probation

DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro ordered a bench warrant for a stabbing defendant on July 16 after she missed her hearing and was non-compliant on probation.

Jasmine Armwood, 34, was sentenced on June 8 to one year in prison, all suspended, in favor of one year of probation for assault with significant bodily injury and possession of a prohibited weapon for her involvement in a stabbing that occurred on the 3800 block of Minnesota Avenue, NE on Nov. 29, 2025. The victim sustained a stab wound to her midsection.

If Armwood is not compliant with her probation requirements, Judge Di Toro can require her to serve her prison sentence.

In her probation show cause hearing, Armwood was not present, and a probation officer from the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) noted that she had not reported to or been in contact with probation services.

According to court records, the first notice of Armwood’s non-compliance was filed on July 6.

Prosecutors asked for a bench warrant to be issued for Armwood, andJudge Di Toro agreed.

Parties are expected to reconvene when US Marshals execute the warrant.

Judge Won’t Release Stabbing Defendant Who Reportedly Told Police She Should Have Murdered Victim

DC Superior Court Judge Heide Hermann denied release for a defendant accused of stabbing her partner of 30 years in the head after she waived her preliminary hearing on July 16.

Patricia Barron, 64, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for her alleged involvement in a stabbing on July 13, at the 3100 block of Buena Vista Terrace, SE.

According to court documents, the couple was reportedly arguing about Barron not liking her partner’s friends. The victim allegedly approached Barron holding a chair when Barron struck the victim with a knife in the head.

Barron waived her right to a preliminary hearing that would determine if probable cause exists for the charge against her.

Judge Hermann then heard from both the defense and prosecution whether Barron should be released. Barron’s attorney, Sara Kopecki, noted that the case is an assault with a dangerous weapon, between two romantically involved individuals.

Kopecki asked for Barron’s release, noting she would check in with the Pretrial Service Agency (PSA) by phone because of her walking condition.

The prosecution argued Barron should remain held, citing their concern about the level of violence in the case. They also asked to keep the stay-away order in place from both the location and the victim.

Judge Hermann explained that the offense wasn’t a fright assault, but a physical assault with a knife that was recovered. Judge Hermann added that Barron allegedly admitted to the stabbing and said she wished she had killed her partner.

According to court documents, Barron told a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective that she accidentally struck her partner with a knife, but also stated that she should have murdered him.

As a result, Judge Hermann denied Barron’s release.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Aug. 21.

Gun Possession Defendant Sentenced After Murder Acquittal

DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park sentenced a gun possession defendant to 30 months in prison on July 17 after discussion between parties over the severity of his offense.

Christopher Tyler, 48, was convicted on March 9 of unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than a year. The charge stemmed from an incident on July 7, 2023 on the 4100 block of Ames Street, SE.

Tyler was acquitted of first-degree premeditated murder, first-degree burglary, attempt to commit a robbery while armed, and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 34-year-old Nolan Edwards.

At Tyler’s sentencing, the prosecutor attempted to increase Tyler’s offense severity score, which would increase the sentencing guidelines for the crime from 18-to-36 months to 30-to-54 months in prison. To support the request, he argued that Tyler had a criminal history, specifically a prior conviction of unlawful possession of a firearm.

Kevann Gardner, Tyler’s attorney, criticized the prosecution’s short notice. Gardner argued Tyler proceeded to trial with the homicide-related charges in the indictment, and might have decided differently if he knew he was facing greater charges after the murder acquittal.

Judge Park decided to continue with Tyler’s sentencing under the guideline of 18-to-36 months, noting that the prosecution must give at least two-weeks notice for any proposed amendments for sentencing.

The prosecutor promptly asked for “the highest of the guidelines,” 36 months in prison, briefly noting apparent inconsistencies in the context of the offense, such as a text message allegedly implicating Tyler.

Gardner emphasized the jury’s acquittal of Tyler’s murder charge and its relation to his possession conviction. He argued that “jurors expressly told [parties] the gun conviction was based on the text message, not what they should have been considering,” and for that Tyler should not have been convicted.

“A sentence of 18 months is sufficient,” Gardner concluded, briefly mentioning Tyler’s childhood history of “abuse, instability, fear,” and how he grew to become “a caregiver for many people.”

The prosecutor called Gardner’s argument “inappropriate” given the jury’s verdict According to the prosecutor, the jury’s admission that the text message was their primary evidence was neither on the record, nor reported to the prosecution or Judge Park.

The prosecutor told Judge Park he had “more than enough” in front of him to support a sentence at the top of the guidelines.

Judge Park, taking into account the seriousness of the offense and Tyler’s prior conviction, said he didn’t believe 36 months was warranted, nor did he think 18 months was sufficient.

As a result, Tyler was sentenced to 30 months in prison with a 12 month mandatory minimum, followed by three years of supervised release. In addition, Tyler must register as a gun offender in DC and pay $100 to the Victims of Violent Crimes Fund.

Judge Park also recommended that Tyler seek mental health treatment while on supervised release.

No further dates were set.

Search