Judge Declares Mistrial After Jury Deadlocks on Suspected Accomplice in Deadly Nightclub Mass Shooting

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt declared a mistrial on May 27 after the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict for a defendant accused of aiding and abetting a mass shooting.

Cotey Wynn, 45, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed, three counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, and four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a mass shooting at CRU Lounge, on the 1300 block of H Street, NE on Sept. 23, 2023. The shooting resulted in the death of 31-year-old Blake Bozeman and injuries to three surviving victims.

In the trial that started on May 12, prosecutors attempted to prove Wynn facilitated the shooter’s entry into the club with the firearm. The prosecutors claimed Wynn’s special privileges as the reported “king of H Street,” allowed him and individuals he associated with to bypass security protocols.

Wynn’s attorneys, Brian McDaniel and Randy McDonald, argued their client was innocent and did not have anything to do with the shooting. The defense asserted the case was speculative with no powerful proof of Wynn’s involvement.

After less than four days of deliberations, the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict and Judge Brandt granted the defense request for a mistrial.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on June 5 to discuss how prosecutors will proceed.

Jury Partially Convicts Homicide Defendant After 1-Month Trial

A jury in DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan’s courtroom returned a mixed verdict for a homicide defendant on May 26.

D’Andre Montgomery, 20, was initially charged with conspiracy, premeditated first-degree murder while armed, felony murder while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, attempt to commit robbery while armed, unauthorized use of a vehicle during a crime of violence, and carrying a pistol without a license for his involvement in the fatal shooting of 28-year-old Kenneth Barksdale on Dec. 16, 2023 on the 1200 block of 44th Place, SE. Barksdale sustained two gunshot wounds to his torso and arm.

Eric Sheffield, 21, and Kevin Hider, 20, are also charged for their alleged involvement in Barksdale’s death but will face separate trials.

After less than three days of deliberations, the jury found Montgomery not guilty of felony murder, first-degree murder while armed, attempt to commit robbery while armed, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business.

The jury found Montgomery guilty of conspiracy, the lesser-included offense of second-degree murder while armed, and unauthorized use of a vehicle during a crime of violence.

Judge Ryan previously granted the defense’s motion for judgement of acquittal, meaning that the prosecution did not present sufficient evidence for a jury to convict Montgomery, for assault with intent to kill and the associated possession of a firearm during a crime of violence charge.

Throughout the trial that started on April 27, the prosecution attempted to prove that Montgomery, Hider, and Sheffield conspired to steal multiple cars in the days leading up to the murder. The defendants were “greedy for more” as they attempted to steal Barksdale’s vehicle, when he confronted them, and they started shooting, argued prosecutors.

Montgomery’s attorneys, Sylvia Smith and Charlotte Gilliland, argued Montgomery did not have a gun and never intended to harm anyone. The defense contended that Barksdale charged at Montgomery and the group reacted to protect him.

Montgomery’s sentencing is scheduled for Aug. 21.

Defense Questions Why Defendant Would Bring Gun Into Nightclub

A defense attorney challenged prosecutors’ theory that a defendant facilitated a deadly mass shooting at a club where he reportedly received special privileges in a trial before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on May 20.

According to prosecutors, Wynn allegedly aided and abetted the shooter by facilitating his entry into the club with the firearm.

In closing arguments, prosecutors argued Wynn’s “small act” had “big impact” by ending Bozeman’s life and changing the lives of the three surviving victims. They argued Wynn associated with the shooter, participated in the crime, and intended to make the shooting succeed. The prosecutors characterized Wynn as “the king of H Street” and claimed that because the CRU staff trusted Wynn he used his “special privileges” to help the shooter bring the gun into the club.

Through video footage, the prosecutors detailed the timeline around the shooting. They played a video from before the shooting in H & Vape, which was next door to CRU, of the shooter reportedly asking where Wynn was. The employee responded that Wynn was in a nearby establishment.

Another video outside CRU showed the shooter walk in at approximately 10:56 p. m. and prosecutors noted that security patted him down before he entered. Then at 11:15 p. m., the prosecutors said video showed Wynn arrive with no pat down because “he was a familiar face.”

In a video from inside CRU at 11:41 p. m., the prosecutors said the shooter approached Wynn, put his arm around him, they talked for 10-to-15 seconds, Wynn put down the hookah he was smoking, and followed the shooter outside the club. The shooter headed towards his car and Wynn followed behind him.

In Wynn’s testimony, noted prosecutors, he said the shooter approached him to pay for a table that was on Wynn’s tab. Prosecutors argued that retrieving money isn’t a two man job, but the shooter “can’t bring a gun in without Cotey…that’s why it’s a two man job.”

At 11:45 p. m., the two headed back into the club and prosecutors said they went through security quickly with no pat down. Right before the shooting, noted prosecutors, Bozeman and his friends started to leave.

Prosecutors said Wynn stared at them, stopped what he was doing, and stood there. Wynn had “eyes on Bozeman” and “eyes on the shooter,” alleged prosecutors because “he knew this was coming.”

At 11:50 p. m., video footage showed the shots hit Bozeman, the shooter ran to the back of the club, and then shot the other victims. The prosecutors emphasized that everyone in the video, including security, dropped to the ground upon hearing the shots, except for Wynn.

Within nine minutes the shooter approached Wynn and shots were fired, emphasized prosecutors. They said Wynn “put everybody in that zone of danger” and asked the jury to find him guilty.

Wynn’s attorney, Brian McDaniel, said his heart raced and told jurors they might assume it was because of a full courtroom watching him speak. McDaniel said, in reality, “the thing that keeps me up at night is defending an actually innocent person.” He argued the case was speculation with no powerful proof of Wynn’s involvement.

McDaniel reminded the jury that their “analysis is only what [the prosecution] can prove,” not what prosecutors believe happened.

Jurors should ask themselves, what if the prosecution is wrong, said McDaniel. The prosecution proved they are “capable of being wrong,” asserted McDaniel because the lead detective testified that he initially believed Wynn arrived in the car with the shooter.

“There is no plot, there is no plan,” argued McDaniel because Bozeman made a last minute decision to go to CRU on his way to another club and didn’t plan to be there. He added that Wynn did not know Bozeman and never stood next to the shooter after the shots were fired.

According to McDaniel, Wynn went with the shooter to get the money because of prior instances where people told him they were retrieving money and then left.

McDaniel questioned if Wynn was “the king of H Street,” as prosecutors characterized him. Why would he decide to randomly shut down his kingdom one day by bringing a gun “where he holds court,” the defense attorney said.

No witnesses testified that Wynn asked for the shooter to not receive a pat down at CRU, emphasized McDaniel. If Wynn had murderous intent, then why would he risk entering through the security line where the shooter could have received a pat down. With his reported privileges, Wynn could have just walked through the door, reasoned McDaniel.

McDaniel also emphasized testimony from a security guard the night of the shooting. According to McDaniel, the security guard performed a pat down in court that was around three seconds, about the length of time Wynn and the shooter were under the security tent in the video when they reentered the club.

The head of security could not testify about how the gun entered the club, who brought it in, or when it was brought in, said McDaniel and noted that there was evidence of other people entering and exiting the club. McDaniel also pointed out that the shooter arrived at the vehicle with enough time to put the gun into his pants before Wynn arrived.

“I have to leave Wynn to you,” said McDaniel, and asked the jury to find him not guilty.

The parties are slated to reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.

Judge Lessens Release Conditions for Homicide Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan granted a homicide defendant’s request for relaxation of release conditions during a hearing on May 27.

Anna Hyman, 23, is charged with voluntary manslaughter while armed for her alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of 63-year-old Robert Dent who sustained 55 sharp force injuries. The incident occurred on July 26, 2025 in an apartment complex on the unit block of Galveston Street, SW while Hyman’s two children were in the apartment.

According to court documents, Hyman claimed Dent was trying to rape her at the time of the incident, and she suffered lacerations to her hands and arms.

During the hearing, parties discussed a report from the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA), which stated Hyman has been compliant with all release conditions during her stay at a halfway house.

Elizabeth Weller, Hyman’s attorney, requested Judge Ryan relax some of the conditions at the halfway house, including allowing Hyman to have visitors. According to Weller, she has been unable to see her children or family while she’s been there.

Weller also requested Hyman be allowed to leave the halfway house in mid-June to attend her child’s kindergarten graduation.

The prosecution did not object to the request for the graduation, but stated they opposed the request for visitation because she is still under evaluations for mental health issues.

Judge Ryan granted both requests, stating her family is allowed to visit her, including her children as long as their custodial guardian supervises them.

“You are doing well with what I ordered. Please continue to do well,” Judge Ryan told Hyman.

Parties are slated to reconvene July 17.

‘We Just Going To Go Do What We Did,’ by ‘Killing’ Testifies Co-Conspirator in Fatal Shooting Trial

A co-conspirator testified as a cooperating witness that a 2019 fatal shooting was a planned act of retaliation before DC Superior Court Danya Dayson on May 27.

Alonzo Brown, 29, and Naquel Henderson, 28, are charged with conspiracy to commit a crime of violence while armed, first-degree premeditated murder while armed, four counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, and five counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence. Brown and Henderson are charged for their alleged involvement in the shooting death of 21-year-old Michael Taylor on the 1700 block of Benning Road, NE. Two other victims also sustained injuries during the incident.

A co-conspirator testified as part of a plea agreement he accepted on May 12, 2019, related to his involvement in Taylor’s death. Although he testified that he completed his cooperation agreement and the his obligation to the prosecution, he stated he testified in the trial because he did not want to perjure himself.

According to the co-conspirator, he still faces a sentence for his involvement in the incident and a separate matter from January, but he testified the prosecution has made no additional promises in exchange for his current testimony.

The co-conspirator, who was also a shooter in the incident, testified that the motive for the attack was to avenge the death of a mutual friend, 19-year-old Shamar Marbury, who died on Jan. 1 2019, on the 4200 block of Barnaby Road, SE. The co-conspirator said their group, armed with Glocks, targeted the apartment building because they believed rivals responsible for Marbury’s death were located there.

The co-conspirator told the prosecution that he and his associates were deeply “hurt” and angry after Marbury’s death. He testified that Brown informed him of social media posts suggesting a rival group, “BC the Army” or “Benning Courts,” was responsible for “wiped one down,” meaning their friend.

On the day of the homicide, the co-conspirator testified that he met with Brown, Henderson, and others at a parking lot on Benning Road. He noted that Henderson, Brown, and the others were all armed with firearms.

“We all had glocks,” the co-conspirator testified. He told the prosecution that all four shooters wore masks to hide their identities during the attack.

In the days leading up to the incident, the co-conspirator alleged the group gathered at an apartment complex to smoke and discuss their plans to “run up” on their rivals. The co-conspirator testified that when the group discussed going to Benning Courts, the plan was “basically, like we just going to go do what we did,” which he understood to mean “killing.”

On the morning of Jan. 12, the co-conspirator said Brown reportedly signaled the start of the attack by asking another suspect, “You know what time it is?”

The co-conspirator testified that the group traveled to the incident address, in a car driven by another associate. He noted that Henderson was seated next to him in the back while Brown sat in the passenger seat, and all members of the group were armed with Glocks.

The group allegedly drove to the incident address where they spotted a group of people inside a building. The co-conspirator testified that they parked near a school and approached the building on foot, walking in a single-file formation.

Once inside the building, the co-conspirator said a “lot of shots” were fired as the four men began shooting simultaneously. He testified that Brown went up the stairs to fire from the first landing while Henderson remained on the same level as him near the entrance.

The co-conspirator admitted to the prosecution that he emptied his entire ammunition clip during the ambush. He stated that his intent while firing was to “get someone” and that hitting them included the intent to kill.

He identified both Brown and Henderson as active shooters who were positioned inside the building during the fatal incident.

Following the shooting, the group fled the scene and eventually learned that Taylor was killed via a phone call minutes after. The co-conspirator testified that he sold his firearm to an associate for $700 before traveling to Virginia with Brown by bus.

The defense did not have the opportunity to cross-examine the co-conspirator before the court adjourned for the day. That is expected to continue when the trial resumes.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on June 1.

Defense Claims 17-Year-Old Homicide Case Based on ‘The Word of One Man, a Convicted Murderer, Who Ran Out of Options’

A defense attorney argued that a key witness for a 2009 homicide lied about a defendant’s involvement to help himself in a trial before DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman on May 27.

Randolph Thomas, 43, is charged with felony murder while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, first-degree burglary while armed, robbery while armed, and five counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 19-year-old Emmanuel Durant on Dec. 31, 2009 on the 200 block of Webster Street, NE. Durant died from a single gunshot wound to his body that struck a blood vessel.

According to Thomas’ arrest warrant, police charged him with Durant’s murder after he pleaded guilty to the fatal shooting of Chardale Bowe on Dec. 31, 2009 on the 4800 block of North Capitol Street, NE. A ballistic comparison reportedly concluded the same firearm was used in both murders.

In opening statements, the prosecutor said sometimes “a random and innocent decision…can lead to irreversible consequences.” For Durant, the prosecutor said, his brother left to get snacks, and 20 minutes later he bled out in an alley.

The prosecutor elaborated that Durant’s brother left their home for a snack run, returned, and was barely inside before he realized he left the snacks in the car. When he returned to his car, two masked gunmen approached Durant’s brother and took all his belongings. The gunmen were “not satisfied,” said the prosecutor, and forced Durant’s brother into his home.

The gunmen forced Durant’s brother into the basement, his girlfriend heard the voices, went downstairs, and was “met with a gun pointed to her face,” said the prosecutor. Durant then entered the basement and started a struggle with one of the gunmen, who prosecutors allege was Thomas, before the gun fired and struck Durant.

The prosecutor told jurors it didn’t matter whether the gun fired accidentally or intentionally for a homicide conviction. As the gunmen exited, the prosecutor alleged Thomas fired a shot towards Durant’s brother’s head, but missed. The gunmen ran outside and fled the area.

According to the prosecutor, Durant ran up the stairs and told his sister “get the kids, get out of the house.” Durant then left a trail of blood, said the prosecutor, until he collapsed behind the 200 block of Hawaii Avenue, NE. First-responding officers found Durant “unresponsive, unconscious, bleeding out in the alley,” the prosecutor elaborated.

Jurors will hear testimony from the individuals at the residence, but the prosecutor acknowledged they are not perfect. “These people have imperfections,” but they have “to bare their souls in a public courtroom,” said the prosecutor.

The prosecutor said parties agreed that Thomas possessed the murder weapon less than a day later, around 11:30 p. m. on Dec. 31, 2009, on the 4800 block of North Capitol Street, NE.

In addition, the prosecutor said two witnesses will testify that they observed Thomas with the murder weapon before and after Durant’s murder. According to the prosecutor, one of those witnesses will testify that 10-to-11 hours after Durant’s homicide, Thomas reportedly admitted to shooting Durant and his brother, because Thomas believed the second shot killed Durant’s brother.

The prosecutor said “We don’t expect you to like [the key witness]” but asked the jury to trust his testimony and find Thomas guilty.

Thomas’ attorney, Kevin Steward, said Durant’s murder was a tragedy but his client was “charged with a crime he did not commit.” Steward agreed that Thomas possessed the gun the next day, but not when Durant was killed. Instead, Steward said Thomas took the gun from someone else “leaving him carrying the consequences of someone else’s actions,” because people frequently passed around guns in Thomas’s neighborhood.

Steward said prosecutors’ case is based on “the word of one man, a convicted murderer, who ran out of options.” The key witness had “nothing to lose, everything to gain,” and would say and do anything, claimed Steward and alleged the prosecutors also would do anything in pursuit of a conviction.

According to Steward, a jury convicted the key witness of first-degree murder, he faced up to 60 years in prison, and needed a way out. Steward said the witness told prosecutors he had useful information and at sentencing, the prosecution requested the witness serve 20 years in prison for second-degree murder, which the judge granted.

After his sentencing the key witness was not satisfied, argued Steward, and then he told prosecutors a fabricated story about Durant’s murder, a highly publicized case. The key witness received a “get out of jail free card, courtesy of the United States Attorney’s Office,” concluded Steward.

The key witness can’t be trusted and he will “lie directly to your face,” Steward told jurors and asked them to “pay close attention” to the information the witness claims to know because in his “web of lies,” there’s a truth he doesn’t want prosecutors to know.

Steward also argued the case has no hard evidence, nothing independent, reliable or objective. The shooters ransacked the residence and police collected DNA fingerprints, noted Steward, but Thomas’ DNA is not connected to the scene and a set of fingerprints remain unidentified.

“Thomas is not the man [the witnesses] saw that night,” asserted Steward and asked the jurors to find him not guilty.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on May 28.

‘The Option to Leave was 3 ft. Away,’ Prosecutors Say in Homicide Closings

Parties delivered closing arguments before a jury in DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan’s courtroom on May 21.

D’Andre Montgomery, 20, also known as Drizzy, is charged with conspiracy, premeditated first-degree murder while armed, felony murder while armed with aggravating circumstances, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, attempt to commit robbery while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed, unauthorized use of a vehicle during a crime of violence, and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 28-year-old Kenneth Barksdale Jr. on Dec. 16, 2023 at the 1200 block of 44th Place, SE. Barksdale sustained multiple gunshot wounds to the abdomen and arms.

Kevin Hider, 20, and Eric Sheffield, 21, are also charged for their alleged involvement in Barksdale’s death but will face separate trials.

“What’s the price of a phone? What’s the price of a thunderbird? On Dec. 16, 2023, it was Kenneth Barksdale’s life,” a prosecutor asserted to the jury during closing arguments. The prosecution affirmed Barksdale didn’t know that would be his last day alive, stating he had taken his one-year-old child home to put him to bed when he realized he left his cellphone in his car.

“That one realization sent him on a collision path with that man [pointing to Montgomery] and his co-conspirators,” the prosecutor stated.

According to the prosecution, Montgomery was not only the driver “who drove the harm to Kenneth,” but also the first shooter when Barksdale confronted the group at his car. “The option to leave was three feet away,” the prosecutor said, highlighting surveillance footage that showed the suspect, believed to be Montgomery, left the driver door open in the suspected vehicle. “He chose to continue this,” the prosecution insisted.

“They heard him, they saw him, and decided what to do,” according to the prosecution. “If you know you’re up to no good on that day, you know you need to be ready [with guns],” the prosecutor said.

“D’Andre Montgomery didn’t play a minor role,” the prosecutor asserted, providing evidence of Montgomery, Hider and Sheffield allegedly stealing multiple cars in the days leading up to the murder, including the suspect vehicle, a Chevy Malibu.

The prosecutor emphasized Sheffield’s girlfriend’s testimony, in which she stated Sheffield would consistently text her whenever he was doing something with Hider and Montgomery. Sheffield sent a text minutes before the murder stating “they seen us checking cars.”

“Why the guns?” the prosecutor questioned, “how does this [the gun] help you get into a car?”

“He [Montgomery] knows he has a GPS on. He knows he’s in trouble. That’s why they shot,” the prosecution asserted. It is unclear what Montgomery was on release for.

“D’Andre Montgomery, Drizzy, is guilty,” the prosecution insisted.

Sylvia Smith, Montgomery’s attorney, claimed Montgomery didn’t have a gun and didn’t shoot anyone, adding he could not have foreseen what would happen while the group was checking cars.

Smith argued Montgomery did not intend to rob anyone, stating he didn’t know Barksdale was around the vehicle during the incident. Smith insinuated Montgomery acted in self-defense, stating Barksdale attacked Montgomery.

“He’s charged with crimes he didn’t do,” Smith claimed, adding Barksdale charged at Montgomery and everyone in the group reacted to protect him.

“They are misleading you,” Smith said about the prosecution, stating the prosecution originally claimed there were three total people in the car, but midway through trial they stated there were four.

She also argued the prosecution is refusing to provide all of the evidence they have for the incident. “If they’re withholding evidence, you cannot trust them,” she stated.

“D’Andre ended the confrontation,” Smith insisted, stating he did not intend to help anyone commit a crime and only did so in his own defense.

Smith claimed Barksdale was “shot as he was attacking D’Andre,” arguing it’s not normal for someone to run up in the dark saying “what’s up bruh,” without wanting to cause harm.

She urged the jury to evaluate the likelihood that Barksdale was the first aggressor, highlighting his history of aggressive behavior, claiming he had banged on a cop’s car window stating “I’ll f**k you up.”

“All D’Andre wanted to do was get his people and get the hell out of there,” Smith insisted. “Nothing about what happened that night is shown to be in furtherance of a conspiracy.”

“There is no question you have to doubt their case,” Smith told the jury, “You must find D’Andre Montgomery not guilty.”

“Montgomery doesn’t get to hide behind self-defense when he brought the danger to that neighborhood,” the prosecution rebutted. “He’s given you some options in ways to find him guilty.”

“In every single scenario, Montgomery is guilty of the murder,” the prosecutor said, adding their plans to check cars included “plan A: take the car, plan B: what happened to Mr. Barksdale.”

“That is why they killed him, he caught them redhanded,” the prosecutor declared.

She claimed Montgomery, Hider and Sheffield are “bold and indifferent to the harm they caused.”

“You are the collision course Montgomery never wanted,” she urged the jury to convict him of all charges.

Parties are set to reconvene when the jury reaches a verdict.

‘It Was Not My Intention For Anyone to Get Hurt,’ Shooting Defendant Says, Expressing Remorse

DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park sentenced two co-defendants on May 15 for their involvement in a 2024 shooting.

On March 16, Vance McIlwain, 34, pleaded guilty to aggravated assault knowingly while armed and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his involvement in a non-fatal shooting on Nov. 8, 2024, on the 700 block of Chesapeake Street, SE. Kenneth Johnson, 33, pleaded guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his involvement.

Judge Park accepted the sentences agreed upon in the plea deals, describing the agreements as reasonable and compliant with voluntary sentencing guidelines.

McIlwain was sentenced to 10 years in prison and Johnson was sentenced to six years in prison, both followed by five years of supervised release.

According to court documents, the victim arrived at the hospital with seven different gunshot wounds to the chest, abdomen, arm and ear and underwent four surgeries during a month-long stay. While the victim sustained seven wounds, the prosecution emphasized the severity of the incident, noting the firearm was used to fire “at least 15 rounds” at the victim.

To show the defendants’ involvement, the prosecution played surveillance footage from an apartment building on the 600 block of Chesapeake Street, SE. The prosecutor said the video showed Johnson and McIlwain inside the building at 3:49 p. m. The prosecution said the defendants appeared to look out a window toward the victim before exchanging a firearm between them, minutes before the shots were fired at 3:51 p. m.

The prosecution explained the context of the plea agreements, noting that concerns with witness testimony influenced the decision to offer the deals. McIlwain reportedly fired the shots while Johnson knew of his intentions.

While discussing the defendants’ backgrounds, the prosecution said Johnson showed an “escalating pattern of very serious and troubling conduct.” The prosecution noted McIlwain had an increasing amount of criminal conduct over the last five to six years despite having no prior convictions. According to prosecutors, McIlwain had several arrests for simple assault and threatening conduct.

Lisbeth Sapirstein, McIlwain’s attorney, said her client was “incredibly drunk” at the time of the shooting. Sapirstein stated that McIlwain is now making direct efforts to address substance abuse issues and completed a program while incarcerated.

Reflecting on a statement Johnson made in a pre-sentence report, “if I knew what was going to take place I would have to remove myself from the situation. It was not my intention for anyone to get hurt,” Judge Park noted this statement was “obviously contrary” to the aiding and abetting theory of Johnson’s guilty plea.

Johnson’s attorney, Matthew Davies, addressed Judge Park to clarify that Johnson was “trying to make a statement of remorse,” and that his statement was being “misconstrued.” Davies emphasized that Johnson was not trying to deny his actions but was instead trying to say, “I’m sorry that this happened.”

Judge Park noted the “extraordinarily concerning” nature of the case where an individual was shot multiple times.

As part of their sentences, Judge Park ordered both defendants to pay $200 to the Victims of Violent Crime Compensation Act fund and to undergo mental health, drug, and alcohol assessments.

No further dates were set.

‘He is a Menace, He is a Coward,’ Homicide Victim’s Family Says at Sentencing

DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan sentenced a homicide defendant to 20 years of imprisonment for his involvement in a fatal stabbing at a gas station, during a hearing on May 22.

On Nov. 12, 2025, Tywan Morris, 30, was convicted of second-degree murder while armed, carrying a dangerous weapon, and two counts of misdemeanor possession of a prohibited weapon, for his involvement in the fatal stabbing of 27-year-old Danielle Stuckey on Oct. 17, 2021 at a gas station on the 2800 block of Alabama Avenue, SE.

Morris’ girlfriend, Key Juan Sinclair, 28, accepted a plea deal on Nov. 7, 2024 for her involvement in the incident.

During the hearing, prosecutors read a letter by Stuckey’s child, who witnessed the murder. In it, he stated he was compelled to express his deep concern about the possibility of Morris re-offending and forcing another family to sustain the pain they have endured the past five years. “He must be held accountable for his actions and made to reflect on the irreversible trauma he has imposed,” the son wrote.

“The trauma that her kids suffered behind this is something that we will never get over,” Stuckey’s mom cried. She requested Judge Ryan not show him any leniency, “because he showed none to my daughter or my grandson.”

She highlighted the fact Morris’ own infant was in his vehicle during the incident, and added “this guy has no remorse and no feeling for human life… his acts were cowardly, and he was brazen when he did it.”

“My sister, had he not ended her life, would surpass any amount of time you give him,” Stuckey’s sister stated. “He is a menace, he is a coward. What man stabs a female? He doesn’t deserve your mercy,” she told Judge Ryan.

“We just want justice,” another sister and an aunt stated.

Prosecutors requested the harshest sentence the judge could impose based on the sentencing guidelines, which ranged between 156-and-300 months for second-degree murder. They highlighted Judge Ryan’s statement that a sentencing is not meant to make the victim’s family whole, as it would be an impossible task. However, they argued, retribution and punishment is necessary.

They deemed the incident a “truly senseless act,” during which the prosecution claims Stuckey was out buying food for her children with her oldest kid, and they ran into someone she knew. “And they argued, something that people do every day and go on and live their lives.” However, the prosecutor stated, Stuckey was unable to do that, “because he [Morris] chose not to just argue with Ms. Stuckey, get in his car and leave. Instead, he made the conscious decision to seek and obtain a weapon, run her down and stab her.”

They highlighted Morris’ refusal to accept responsibility and express remorse, arguing that his statements to the pre-sentence report writer show him as he “continues to cast himself as the victim and attempts to justify his actions.”

Through the sentence, the prosecution hoped Judge Ryan would “convey to him that this is a very serious thing he has done and he cannot do anything similar in the future.”

Steven Kiersh, Morris’ attorney, argued Morris did not go to the gas station that day looking for trouble. “He simply went with his girlfriend in the car, their child in the back seat, with the sole purpose of purchasing gas.”

He stated they understand how sincerely affected the Stuckey family is by the tragic offense, but requested Judge Ryan sentence Morris to the lower end of the guidelines because he didn’t go into the incident with an intent to harm anyone.

“He is a very decent person who committed a very serious offense,” Kiersh stated, asking Judge Ryan to judge him not just on the offense, but the totality of his character.

“I apologize to the Stuckey family for the hurt that this has caused them,” Morris read. He asked Judge Ryan to recommend programs that will help with his anger management and drug issues. “Please give me the help that I need,” he said.

Judge Ryan stated that punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation are needed, but “when a person is fatally harmed, we must look at punishment and deterrence much more than rehabilitation.”

“To say this was an entirely avoidable crime is entirely accurate,” Judge Ryan said, adding “It would appear Mr. Morris just lost control in some way, and acted in a very brutal manner that ended in the horrible death of Ms. Stuckey.”

As for the request to judge Morris’ character, Judge Ryan argued “that’s not my job. My job is to look at the act that they’ve committed and sentence them for that.”

He imposed a 20 year sentence for the murder, 28 months for carrying a dangerous weapon, and 180 days for each of the misdemeanor charges. The sentences will run concurrently, and Morris will be required to serve 5 years of supervised release, pay $300 to the Victims of Violent Crime Fund, and participate in anger management courses and mental health treatment.

No further dates were set.

Judge Orders Mental Competency Exam For Fatal Beating Suspect

DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz ordered a preliminary mental competency screening on May 22 for a defendant accused of a fatal beating.

Lavaughn Barnes, 35, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the beating and dismembering of Abdulio Arias-Lopez on Nov. 4, 2022 on the 1300 block of Kearny Street, NE.

According to court records, at the last hearing on April 28, the parties scheduled the present hearing to determine whether Barnes would formally waive his right to a jury trial.

At the hearing, Judge Kravitz inquired if Barnes decided about his trial rights. His attorney, Hannah Claudio requested a preliminary mental competency screening before Barnes makes his decision. To stand trial, Barnes must understand the charges against him and be able to assist in his own defense.

Judge Kravitz granted Claudio’s request and ordered a preliminary competency evaluation for Barnes.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on May 28 for a mental observation hearing.

Court of Appeals Overturns Conviction in 10-Year-Old Stabbing Case

DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz allowed the prosecution time to determine how they will proceed in a stabbing case on May 22 after an appellate court overturned the defendant’s conviction.

A jury convicted Onzay Gibbs, 36, on May 22, 2018 of assault with intent to kill while armed and aggravated assault knowingly while armed for his alleged involvement in a stabbing on Sept. 15, 2016 on the 3300 block of 23rd Street, SE. The victim sustained multiple sharp force injuries to his face, neck, and body that required emergency surgery.

DC Superior Court Judge Ronna Beck sentenced Gibbs to 20 years in prison on Dec. 14, 2018.

A mandate from the DC Court of Appeals, filed on May 15, reversed the trial court’s denial of Gibbs’ motion to suppress evidence obtained from a search of his cell phone. The appellate court found the search violated Gibbs’ constitutional rights and therefore vacated his conviction because prosecutors presented the evidence at trial.

The appellate court based its decision on Burns v. United States (2020), a DC Court of Appeals ruling that established warrants for cell phone searches must establish probable cause for narrow, specific data, not an unlimited review of the contents.

At the hearing, Judge Kravitz acknowledged that the prosecutor, and Gibbs’ attorney, Terrence Austin, were both recently appointed to the case. The prosecutor said she was assigned the case the day prior and asked for two weeks to determine whether the case could proceed without the cell phone evidence, or if some evidence would remain admissible under the Burns case.

Austin noted that Gibbs was not present for the hearing because he was in custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) but indicated he will likely file a motion requesting Gibbs release to argue at the next hearing.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on June 4.

Homicide Defendant Needs More Time to Consider Plea Offer

DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park granted a homicide defendant more time to consider a plea offer on May 15.

Tyquan Jennings, 27, is charged with second-degree murder while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business. The counts stem from his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 19-year-old Vonte Martin on the 3000 block of Stanton Road, SE, on Aug. 19, 2024.

The offer would require Jennings to plead guilty to voluntary manslaughter while armed. In exchange, the prosecution would dismiss his remaining charges in this case and an unrelated felony possession offense.

The prosecution and defense attorney Nathaniel Mensah addressed the terms in a written plea offer. Mensah said the offer included “additional language” regarding sentencing enhancements that was not previously discussed.

The prosecutor expressed frustration with the delay and said the plea offer has been open for several months. He did not see how the discussion of “reserving step back and reserving allocution” would confuse the terms of the plea offer.

The prosecution suggested a brief “pass” to allow Jennings to talk with his lawyer and return later that afternoon.

Mensah rejected the afternoon return, stating that he was not asking for a 15-minute break but for a separate date to ensure Jennings understood the offer. The prosecution eventually agreed to wait to resolve the plea.

Judge Park allowed Jennings to confer briefly with Mensah and noted that the law requires a clear record that a defendant has time to consider any offer.

“He’s not prepared to make that decision at this time,” said Mensah because he hadn’t seen “additional language” regarding sentencing enhancements.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on June 5.

Homicide Defendant Says He Followed Shooter for Money, Not to Help Him With a Gun

A murder defendant testified that he followed a man outside to get his money back, not bring a weapon inside a club during a homicide trial before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on May 19.

Cotey Wynn, 45, is charged with first-degree premeditated murder while armed, three counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, and four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a Sept. 23, 2023 mass shooting that resulted in the death of 31-year-old Blake Bozeman and injuries to three other victims at the CRU Lounge, on the 1300 block of H Street, NE. Bozeman sustained two gunshot wounds.

Under questioning from Brian McDaniel, Wynn’s attorney, Wynn testified that he had no prior interaction with the shooter, did not know Bozeman or anyone at CRU Lounge that night, and had no knowledge that a gun was brought into the club. Wynn said that when he followed the shooter outside it was to retrieve money and that he had no knowledge that the man grabbed a gun before he reached a car.

Wynn told jurors that after the first gunshot he ducked and that a hand gesture he made was directed at the shooter in confusion for why he fired in the lounge. Wynn maintained he had no plan or intent for anyone to be harmed.

McDaniel also elicited testimony about the security procedures and Wynn’s role at CRU. Wynn testified that he had worked as a promoter at the club since around May 2023, earning a percentage of nightly sales, and that security guards’ pat-down practices varied based on who conducted them. McDaniel asked Wynn to demonstrate the pat down that the shooter received the night of the incident, to which Wynn patted down McDaniel’s waistband and legs in front of the jury.

Wynn stated he went outside with the shooter prior to the incident over a concern about his table’s open bar tab. Wynn said he retrieved roughly $500 in cash from the shooter, and accompanied that man back through the security tent, where the pat down of the shooter was conducted. Wynn maintained he never asked security to skip patting anyone down and was not trying to help bring a gun inside.

On cross-examination, the prosecution questioned the lack of documentation for Wynn’s promoter arrangement. The prosecutor noted Wynn was paid in cash and could produce flyers or messages confirming contact with a guest who reserved a table through his services that night. The prosecutor pressed Wynn on his detailed memory of the pat downs against his inability to recall other nights or who had accompanied him, to which Wynn responded that the night had altered his life. Wynn reaffirmed his reasoning for leaving the bar with the shooter was to be paid.

When questioning Wynn about the hand gesture, the prosecution told Wynn that they were all adults in the room, and asked what his true intent was behind the gesture. Wynn clarified that his hand gesture meant “get the f*** outta here,” and “what the f*** you do that for?” Prosecutors asked if he was telling the shooter to escape, to which Wynn said no.

The prosecution analyzed video footage of Wynn’s position while the shooting occurred, arguing that he stood upright, rather than ducking behind the bar or laying on the ground. Wynn replied that he was bent over, not upright, and that he was frozen by fear and shock. The prosecutor also asked why it appeared in video that Wynn made eye contact with the shooter, to which Wynn said that he was looking at him out of confusion and frustration as he left the bar.

On redirect, McDaniel played the incident video at full speed, emphasizing how fast it occurred, and that Wynn did not have the time to react in the ways the prosecution described. McDaniel asked Wynn if his frozen stance or eye contact was a signal to the shooter that the plan was executed, and Wynn said no. McDaniel asked if there was any plan to be executed at all, and Wynn said no.

Wynn concluded his testimony by reiterating that he did not attempt to hurt anyone that night and he had no relation to any of the people involved in the incident.

Without the jury present, Judge Brandt denied a defense motion to dismiss the case because of the deportation of a bouncer at CRU Lounge and late-disclosed body-worn camera footage that would have accompanied his testimony.

McDaniel argued that they were not made aware of the identity of the bouncer until January, and that they were unaware the witness had been deported until halfway through the trial. The prosecution responded that they were never asked by the defense to provide additional information about bouncer or the body-worn camera footage.

Judge Brandt found that the prosecution’s conduct did not violate Wynn’s right to a fair trial, but said it fell short of the prosecution’s obligation to turn over relevant evidence to the defense before trial. She noted that the lost testimony and footage offered a different perspective rather than crucial proof, and ruled the related video could come in for the jury to weigh during the defense’s case.

The trial is set to resume on May 20.

‘This Case is Not About Murder, it’s About Survival,’ Asserts Defense in Killing of Three Brothers

The parties disputed whether the defendant or victims fired the first shots in a triple-homicide trial before DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz on May 21.

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 during a crime of violence with a prior conviction greater than a year. The charges stem from his alleged involvement in a shooting that killed three brothers, 34-year-old James Morgan, 30-year-old Jamal Morgan, and 42-year-old Vincent Martin, on Aug. 5, 2023 on the 2500 block of Ontario Road, NW.

Renza Bryant, 30, was charged with three counts of first-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the same incident. DC Superior Court Judge Robert Okun found there was no probable cause for the charge against Bryant and dismissed his case on Jan. 16, 2024.

In opening statements for Thompkins’ trial, prosecutors argued he “chose to pursue his own version of justice” that constituted murder. At Unity Park, on the 1700 block of Columbia Road, NW, in the Adams Morgan neighborhood, Thompkins, Bryant, and the three victims had a confrontation. The three brothers walked southeast, Bryant northeast, and Thompkins followed the brothers southeast, said prosecutors.

A shoot out ensued that left James, Jamal, and Martin dead. “This case isn’t about good guys and bad guys, it’s about decisions,” said prosecutors, and emphasized Thompkins decision to walk the same direction as the brothers after their initial confrontation. Thompkins decided to walk that direction and 37 seconds later, the shooting occurred, leaving 52 shell casings.

The prosecution acknowledged there was no video footage of the shooting itself, only the confrontation beforehand, but said the evidence from the scene would prove Thompkin’s guilt. A firearms analyst expert will testify that the markings on the casings reflect five guns were present. Although, a stand-alone casing could be from a gun unconnected to the incident, said the prosecution.

According to the prosecutors, two of the firearms were linked through DNA to James and Martin. Thompkins DNA was associated with three .45 caliber casings that likely matched the bullets found in Jamal. The prosecutor said .40 caliber bullets were found in James and Martin. According to court documents, prosecutors previously alleged Bryant fired the .40 caliber firearm.

The case will likely not be a “whodunnit,” said the prosecution because eyewitness accounts, cell site data, and surveillance footage from nearby allegedly place Thompkins at the scene. The prosecution concluded, “you cannot take the law into your own hands,” as they assert Thompkins did.

Thompkins’ attorney, Brandi Harden, asserted “this case is not about murder, it’s about survival.” For Thompkins, Harden said, it was “live or die,” and with less than a second to decide he acted in self-defense.

In the park, Harden said Thompkins was “confronted with three armed men…who were ready to kill.” Harden asserted that Thompkins went in the same direction as the victims not to follow them, but to retrieve his parked car. Thompkins’ license plate started with “JD,” and Harden told the jurors, “J like justice, D like defending yourself.”

Harden claimed the victims shot first, firing 23 shots at Thompkins, and “bullets were raining down on his head.” According to Harden, a witness will testify that they watched Thompkins crouch and hide from the gunfire. Harden claimed witness testimony will also reveal that one of the victims said, “He right there” when they saw Thompkins nearby. “They had found their target,” said Harden.

In addition, Harden said the medical examiner will testify that the .45 caliber casings were found in one victim, not three.

The prosecution’s case is “weak and unreliable,” argued Harden. The evidence will prove the other side fired the first shots and Thompkins “acted to protect himself.” Therefore, the jury must find him not guilty.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on May 26.

‘I Was 12, and My Father Was Gunned Down in Broad Daylight,’ Says Homicide Victim’s Son at Sentencing

DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman sentenced a homicide defendant to 10-and-a-half years in prison after emotional impact statements from the victim’s family on May 15.

Khalid Claggett, 42, was convicted by a jury on Feb. 24 of voluntary manslaughter while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction greater than a year. All charges face an aggravating factor of being committed while Claggett was on release for a prior offense.

The conviction stemmed from Claggett’s involvement in the fatal shooting of 30-year-old Isaac Aull on June 11, 2021, on the 1600 block of Franklin Street, NE. Aull sustained eight gunshot wounds.

At Claggett’s sentencing, Aull’s mother said “that moment shattered me.” She elaborated, “Watching my son call out for help…is something that will live in my mind for the rest of my life.”

“Issac was chased, hunted down, and killed,” asserted his mother and argued Claggett’s actions did not reflect his self-defense claim. “Life should matter,” said Aull’s mother, and asked Judge Kravitz to impose the maximum sentence in the name of accountability and justice.

“Ten days before my birthday, I was 12, and my father was gunned down in broad daylight,” said Aull’s son. “I’ve been lost for words ever since,” he said, and continued that the loss “took a piece of who I was becoming.”

Claggett should “spend life in jail, he shouldn’t get out,” concluded Aull’s son.

In a letter, Aull’s cousin said he was “a light taken too soon,” that “family gatherings are quieter, birthdays are incomplete,” and Aull’s loss is a pain his family carries every day. “We ask for justice not out of hatred, but because his life deserves dignity,” wrote Aull’s cousin.

The prosecution requested a total sentence of 21-and-one-third years in prison, which Judge Kravitz noted was towards the top of the guidelines range. The prosecutor acknowledged that Aull shooting at Claggett in the Walgreens parking lot that day was not right, but argued Claggett responded with “vigilante justice” when “the remedy is supposed to be acting within the law.”

The prosecutor elaborated that after Aull fired shots, Claggett returned fire, left the scene, and returned with a new gun and different appearance to “conceal his identity.” In addition, the prosecutor noted Claggett “had an opportunity to walk away, to let Aull live,” because video footage and witnesses reported that his gun jammed before he fixed it and fired more shots while Aull was unarmed on the ground.

Claggett declined to accept responsibility prior to sentencing, including his testimony in the trial, asserted prosecutors, and said “that level of selfishness should be concerning.” The prosecutor argued Claggett’s statements were entirely about himself.

The prosecutor also noted Claggett’s two prior felony convictions, multiple revocations of release, repeated possession of firearms, and that he was on release for two separate matters when the shooting occurred.

Howard McEachern, Claggett’s attorney, requested a seven year prison sentence and asked Judge Kravitz to rely on mitigation factors for the below-guidelines sentence. “Claggett’s life was put in danger in this case,” said McEachern.

The conflict between Claggett and Aull did not start in the Walgreens parking lot, but was “a culmination” of events, said McEachern. Prior to that day, McEachern emphasized, Claggett did not respond to their conflict in a way that jeopardized Aull’s life. McEachern acknowledged “certainly different decisions could have been made” by Claggett, but the incident happened in a blur.

In regard to Claggett’s testimony, McEachern said there was no forum to express remorse because he was explaining his actions and the reasoning behind them.

McEachern said during almost five years of incarceration he’s learned Claggett is a “thoughtful, measured, caring individual, and a loving father.” Claggett wants to better himself and prepare for reintegration into society, said McEachern.

Claggett apologized to Aull’s family and said “I know I’ve been a tremendous source of the grief you’ve felt.” To Judge Kravitz, Claggett said, “I would like to ask for leniency.” He concluded, “my emotions got the best of me.”

Judge Kravitz said “the pain experienced by Aull’s mother and son is profound,” and demonstrated the real world impact of violent crimes. “It’s a pain that no one should have to live through” and “a terrible loss for Aull and his family,” said the judge.

The defense request for a downward departure from the guidelines was “unpersuasive and unavailing,” said Judge Kravitz. The jury already considered the mitigating factor in their verdict since Claggett was originally charged with first-degree murder.

Judge Kravitz did acknowledge Claggett’s demonstration of his capacity to address his needs and make a better life for himself upon release.

Judge Kravitz sentenced Claggett to nine-and-a-half years for manslaughter, five years for possession during a crime of violence, and one-and-a-half years for unlawful possession, all to run concurrently, followed by five years of supervised release. In addition, Claggett will serve an extra year in prison for committing the offenses during release. Upon release, Claggett will be required to register as a gun offender in DC.

No further dates were set.

Search