‘She is a Survivor,’ Says Defense Attorney Requesting Stabbing Defendant’s Release

DC Superior Court Judge Robert Salerno granted a stabbing defendant’s request for release, despite failure to comply with terms of her probation, on July 1.

Charmece Morrison, 45, was sentenced to 24 months, with all but six months suspended, and 180 days of incarceration, for simple assault and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business on June 11, 2025. The charges stem from Morrison’s involvement in a stabbing incident that wounded her 20-year-old daughter on Dec. 12, 2024 at the 2700 block of Douglas Place.

Morrison received two-years of probation under conditions that she comply with an intervention plan provided in a presentence report. However, Morrison was rearrested on April 20 for another charge of simple assault towards her daughter while on probation and has been incarcerated since.

At the probation show cause hearing, a representative from the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) offered insight into Morrison’s probation behavior. She stated that Morrison sent a recommendation letter to Judge Salerno, arguing she is in compliance with ways in which she can change her life. The representative stated that Morrison was set to join a women’s group and other programs prior to her rearrest. If released, she urged that Morrison be reintroduced to these programs.

When referencing her release, the representative said Morrison needs a thorough chance to be on probation and that although she needs a lot of help she “believe[s] [Morrison] has good intentions.”

Morrison’s attorney, Kyle McGonigal, emphasized that she is suitable for release stating that Morrison has shown she cans ustain her life and has evident intelligence. McGonigal stated, “She is a survivor.”

Judge Salerno allowed Morrison to continue probation, and ordered her to report for treatment of drugs and mental health if released. After reviewing the intervention plans and probational conditions, Judge Salerno dismissed the hold on her probation.

Parties are slated to reconvene for a probation review on Dec. 7.

Stabbing Defendant Gets Suspended Sentence, Showing ‘Genuine Remorse’

Stabbing defendant sentenced by DC Superior Court Judge Robert Salerno avoided additional jail time after showing “genuine remorse” on July 2.

On March 20, Veronica Jackson, 54, pleaded guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon for her involvement in a stabbing on the 700 block of H Street, NE on Aug. 28, 2025.

The presentence report confirmed Jackson had no prior criminal history. Prosecution requested a 24-month sentence, with all but six months suspended, and two years of supervised release, and a stay away order from the victim.

The prosecution discussed the dashcam video evidence recorded by a nearby Tesla which allegedly showed the altercation between Jackson and the victim. Prosecutors confirmed the victim suffered three slash wounds to her hand and was attempting to get away from Jackson during the offense.

Jackson’s attorney, Sellano Simmons, argued this offense was the result of PCP, alcohol, and “one horrible day.” Since the incident, Jackson has been actively changing her lifestyle by receiving treatment and maintaining sobriety.

The defense also noted that Jackson lost her job as a home health aide because of her actions and no longer has a steady source of income. Simmons added that “this case is about addiction,” arguing that additional treatment would be more beneficial to Jackson, rather than jail time.

Jackson read a note directly to the judge, expressing remorse and guilt. She cried as she took responsibility for her actions, stating, “I have failed myself, my community, and my family.”

Judge Salerno also watched the Tesla footage and noticed a person in the video that seemed to be smiling and recording the incident – insinuating Jackson could’ve been provoked. He noted that this individual’s actions may imply Jackson planned the attack, rather than it being a mere chance encounter. Neither party knew who the person’s identity.

The prosecution established Jackson and the victim knew each other. The defense confirmed this fact, adding that the defendant may have seen the victim at her ex-boyfriend’s work the night of the offense. Simmons argued this incident was a chance encounter that stemmed from “a fight over a loved one.”

Judge Salerno said this type of offense usually results in jail time, however, he believes that Jackson already paid the consequences of her actions, shows “genuine remorse,” and has taken the proper steps toward positive change.

Judge Salerno sentenced Jackson to 24 months and three years of supervised release, with all time suspended. Jackson will be required to serve 18 months of probation, with conditions including a stay away order from the victim, regular drug tests, anger management, 30 hours of community service, and a $100 payment to the Victim of Violent Crime Fund.

No further dates were set.

Judge Denies Release Request for Shooting Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro denied a shooting defendant’s request for release during a status hearing on July 6.

Toron Taylor, 18, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for allegedly shooting his mother in the leg on May 30 at the 4600 block of 6th Street, SE.

Taylor’s attorney, Georgia Rochon, requested that Taylor be released while plea negotiations are still in discussion. The prosecutor opposed the motion to release, noting that Taylor’s release had previously been revoked.

Judge Di Toro denied Taylor’s request for release.

Parties are slated to reconvene on July 15.

After Attorney Departs, Defense Wants Separate Trial for Suspected Carjackers

DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro told parties on July 6 she’d consider a severance motion after a co-defendant’s attorney withdrew, causing delays in a carjacking case.

Lamar Stephens, 39, and Peguy Sikadi, 32, are charged with armed carjacking, 11 counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, five counts of robbery while armed, five counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, and unlawful possession of a firearm after a felony conviction for their alleged involvement in the armed robbery and carjacking of five victims on May 26, at the 2000 block of 13th Street, NW.

Sikadi’s attorney, Sharon Weathers, argued that her client should be severed from Stephens due to the recent dismissal of his attorney, Susan Ellis, which delayed the proceedings. Weathers argued that this is forcing Sikadi to wait for Stephens to obtain a new lawyer, violating Sikadi’s constitutional rights to a speedy trial.

Weathers asked Judge Di Toro to consider modifying the release conditions or granting severance, which would separate the trials. Judge Di Toro noted that Stephens would need new representation for the case to move forward and apologized to Stephens for the delay in appointing a replacement attorney.

Judge Di Toro explained that she would take the motion into consideration but did not rule on the matter. The court expects to appoint Stephens a new attorney sometime this week.

The parties are slated to reconvene on Aug. 24.

Stabbing Defendant Rejects Plea Offer, Ready for Trial

A stabbing defendant rejected a plea deal at a felony status conference before DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean on July 6.

Troy Ivy, 57, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury, and possession of a prohibited weapon for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal stabbing that took place in a Metrobus at the intersection of H and 2nd Street, NE on April 14. The victim suffered a stab wound to the upper shoulder.

Ivy, alongside his attorney Craig Ricard, rejected the prosecution’s agreement, which required him to plead guilty to misdemeanor possession of a prohibited weapon. If Ivy had accepted, the prosecution would dismiss all other indictment charges and not pursue any enhancements.

Ricard and the prosecution agreed to a trial starting on March 2, 2027.

Parties are set to reconvene on Feb 19, 2027 for a trial readiness hearing.

Despite Infractions, Shooting Defendant Released After Taking a Plea

A shooting defendant accepted a plea deal extended by prosecutors before DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean on July 1, and allowed him to remain on release pending sentencing.

McKinley McClain, 19, was originally charged with assault with intent to commit robbery while armed for his involvement in a non-fatal shooting and attempted armed robbery on Dec. 30, 2025, in the 1600 block of W Street, SE.

According to charging documents, prosecutors alleged multiple armed suspects assaulted the victim while he attempted to purchase shoes arranged through Instagram, also striking him in the head with a firearm, attempting to steal his property, and firing a shot as the victim fled the scene.

During the hearing, McClain accepted a plea agreement from the prosecution, which required him to plead guilty to assault with intent to commit robbery. Although the offense carries a statutory maximum of 15 years, the parties agreed that the appropriate sentencing range is 24-to-39 months in prison.

Before accepting the plea agreement, Judge McLean addressed concerns about McClain’s conduct while on pretrial release. According to the prosecution, McClain’s GPS monitor had stopped transmitting before turning back on later that night. The judge also noted that McClain missed a week of reporting to his case manager at the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) and violated his curfew twice.

McClain’s attorney, Darryl Daniels, argued that McClain reported both curfew violations himself and had addressed them, but said PSA failed to include those details in its report. The prosecutor requested a step bac, meaning a return to jail, citing the multiple violations of release conditions were concerning.

Although the evidence favored detention prior to sentencing, Judge McLean ultimately agreed that McClain is not a threat to his community and allowed him to remain on release.

Judge McLean made it clear that McClain’s conduct must improve by charging his GPS monitor and meeting his strict curfew. If not, she will have no choice but to factor that into her sentencing decision.

Parties are set to reconvene for sentencing on Sept. 18.

Defense Questions Carjacking Victim’s 100 Percent ID of Suspect

A carjacking victim admitted to having doubts about who he identified to a detective as the person who robbed him before DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld on July 2.

Orlin Lemus-Cruz, 22, is charged with armed carjacking, two counts of armed robbery and two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a robbery that took place on the 3100 block of Hiatt Place, NW, on March 26, 2025. Two victims sustained assault injuries to their heads.

During questioning from the prosecution through the aid of an interpreter, the victim was asked about the robbery that he and his cousin experienced. He testified that multiple suspects approached him and his cousin outside of a soccer field in Columbia Heights.

The victim recounted that at first it was just two people then “more of them came over, they circled around me and began to hit me.” The prosecution showed a photo of the location and a video of the attack. It was clear that two men approached them first, one of them on a scooter and one on a bike. Then a few other people joined the attack.

The victim testified that the suspects began attacking them after asking if they were affiliated with a gang, injuring his face. The prosecution projected a photo of the witness after being hit in the face. He also testified that his cousin was hit in the back of the head with a firearm.

The victim also recalled stolen items, including a wallet, work permit, ring, phone, and Moncler jacket. He remembered that, “They said if I didn’t give it to them they would kill me,” adding that the jacket was a gift from his cousin. The Moncler jacket is a luxury item which could retail for $2,000. It was presented to the court as an exhibit. The witness recognized unique aspects about the jacket, a broken zipper and the tags on the inside. The robbery ended once people noticed. The witness recalled hearing them say, “Stop it, stop it. Leave them alone.”

Lemus-Cruz’s attorney, Quiana Harris, spent more than 20 minutes questioning the victim’s account of what happened following the incident but he didn’t understand most of Harris’ questions.

The victim was given a chart of nine faces shortly following the incident, according to the prosecution’s direct question, he chose the person in spot number seven – Lemus-Cruz.

For much of the victim’s cross-examination, he remained steadfast that Lemus-Cruz was 100 percent the person who robbed him. Harris attempted to changer the narrative, alleging that the victim told a prosecutor that his 100 percent positive identification wasn’t 100 percent.

Harris finally got the victim to admit he had doubts. However he was still sure that Lemus-Cruz was a part of the incident.

Prior to the victim’s testimony, Harris cross examined the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) responding officer. She raised complaints made against the officer, including a pending investigation he wasn’t aware of – including possible use of force and racial bias. She also asked about his knowledge of the consequences for police misconduct.

During the re-direct, the officer said that he “learned to conduct my investigations more thoroughly” and “learned from my mistakes, not to repeat them.”

Parties are slated to reconvene July 7.

Shooting Case Dismissed After Prosecutors Fail to Indict

DC Superior Court Judge Andrea Hertzfeld dismissed a shooting defendant’s charges after prosecutors failed to indict her under a 90-day deadline on July 2.

Dominque Hansberry, 41, was charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and destruction of property less than $1,000 for her alleged involvement in a Sept. 26, 2025 non-fatal shooting on the 500 block of 60th Street, NE. No one was injured.

A trial date was initially set for July 7, 2026.

Hansberry’s attorney, Peter Cooper, indicated that 120 days had passed since Hansberry was held. This exceeds the 90-day deadline that prosecutors have to secure an indictment, given the charge

Cooper requested Judge Hertzfeld dismiss the case and release Hansberry, which Judge Hertzfeld granted.

No further dates were set.

Judge Finds Probable Cause in a Carjacking, Calling Defense Argument, ‘Absurd’

In a preliminary hearing on July 1, DC Superior Court Judge Dorsey Jones found probable cause for an attempted carjacking charge against Demond Robinson.

Robinson, 27, was originally charged with unlawful possession of a firearm and carjacking from an incident that occurred on June 11 at the intersection of Pennsylvania SE and Minnesota Avenues SE.

According to the prosecution, Robinson allegedly attempted to flee from police by recklessly driving through traffic. The alleged absconding resulted in a multiple car collision, with Robinson allegedly attempting to escape on foot after failing to enter a nearby vehicle.

The lead responding U.S. Park Police officer testified that while he responded to an unrelated incident, Robinson observed the marked police cruiser approaching a red light with activated lights and sirens–prompting him to run the red light and drive both on the opposite side of the road, and the wrong way down a one-way street resulting in a crash.

While questioning the officer, defense attorney Neveen Hammad asked if during the incident the officer had ever turned off the audio or visual capture features of his bodyworn camera. The officer acknowledged that he had turned off the audio capture of his bodyworn camera multiple times after Robinson was arrested.

Hammad cited Park Police orders that require officers to have both video and audio capture on their body cameras during incidents. The officer claimed he was able to turn off the audio capture for an “officer conference.” Hammad stated she had never heard of this exception.

Through the use of the body camera footage, Hammad was able to show the officer had turned off his audio on two separate occasions for a total of six minutes.

“It’s not the officer’s job to exclude audio whenever they feel like it,” said Hammad.

The footage also showed that the officer had lost sight of Robinson during the subsequent foot chase. The footage captures the officer yelling, “Where’d he go?”

Hammad insisted that Robinson was scared of the police thus justifying his response. She attempted to use portions of the body camera footage to support her argument.

Noting Robinson’s body language and actions while allegedly attempting to access a second vehicle following the crash, Hammad stated Robinson was “startled or in fear.” The footage shows Robinson using both hands to attempt to open the passenger side door of an already occupied stopped vehicle.

Because Robinson was attempting to enter from the passenger side of the vehicle, rather than the driver side like most carjacking cases, Hammad asked the officer if he had ever seen a carjacking occur in this manner, stating it looked m“like he was seeking refuge with a stranger.”

Judge Jones later responded to this theory by calling it “absurd,” and found probable cause for attempted carjacking.

However, Judge Jones found no probable cause for the unlawful possession of a firearm, citing a lack of evidence. Specifically, there was no evidence identifying the owner of the vehicle in which the firearm was found and, therefore, no basis to attribute ownership or possession of the items inside the vehicle.

The parties are scheduled to reconvene on July 16.

Judge Considers Shooting Defendant’s Release Request Based on Self-Defense Claim

DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean granted the prosecution additional time to respond to a shooting defendant’s motion for release on July 6.

Ervon Clyburn, 34, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a June 20 physical altercation and exchange of gunfire on the 1500 block of F Street, NE. No injuries were reported.

James Brockway, Clyburn’s attorney, filed a motion for release on July 5, arguing that Clyburn does not pose a threat to community safety and should be allowed to return to his family.

Clyburn is a life-long DC resident and “a proud father of a four-year-old daughter,” according to Brockway. If released, Clyburn is eager to resume his two demanding jobs, fulfill his parental responsibilities, and receive support from his biological mother and adoptive family, wrote Brockway.

The motion also emphasized that the person the prosecution identified as Clyburn “has a strong self-defense claim.” Surveillance footage showed a man in a black T-shirt, which the prosecution alleged is Clyburn, being “restrained, choked, punched, and shoved” by multiple individuals, according to Brockway. The affidavit likewise affirmed that the man in the black T-shirt was shoved to the ground by an unidentified person.

After a failed attempt to flee, the man in the black T-shirt fired a single gunshot, while multiple rounds of gunfire were returned in his direction, according to both the motion and affidavit.

The prosecution’s “own evidence strongly suggests that the person it claims is Mr. Clyburn is not the perpetrator of a crime, but is instead a victim,” wrote Brockway.

No person at the scene of the incident identified Clyburn as the man in the black T-shirt, and the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer who identified Clyburn from surveillance footage had no prior familiarity with him, according to Brockway.

Brockway wrote that the prosecution’s evidence showing Clyburn was the man in the video is “exceedingly weak.”

As Clyburn has no history of failing to appear in court or bench warrants, Brockway argued that there is nothing to suggest he would fail to comply with release conditions, if placed on electronic monitoring and home confinement. Continuing to separate Clyburn from his family is “contrary to the law, fundamental fairness, and common sense,” wrote Brockway.

The parties are slated to reconvene on July 10, where the prosecution will respond to the defense’s motion for bond review.

Judge Questions Agency’s Probation Timeline in Shooting Case

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt expressed concern on July 6 that she and the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) had different end dates for a shooting defendant’s probation.

Aaron Williams, 26, was sentenced to 36 months for assault with a dangerous weapon and 66 months for possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, with all of his time suspended and three years of supervised probation, for his involvement in a shooting on March 24, 2023, at the 100 block of Darrington Street, SE.

During the hearing, CSOSA and Judge Brandt confronted a discrepancy in the official end date of Williams’ probation. While CSOSA proceeded as though Williams would remain under supervision for another year, requesting GPS monitoring and a curfew, Judge Brandt noted that his probation was set to end on Aug. 29.

According to the present probation Officer, Williams had missed several programming dates and drug tests. In addition, the officer cited an arrest in Virginia for mail theft as reason for the extended supervision.

Defense attorney Varsha Govindaraju argued that despite the arrest, Williams had been released immediately and no probable cause had been found in court.

Judge Brandt questioned CSOSA’s end-date, mentioning that the cited violations happened more than a year ago, limiting their scope. She also mentioned that the programming cited by CSOSA had not been ordered as part of the court’s original judgment. While defendants must comply with CSOSA’s supervision requirements, she noted that it is the court that ultimately determines the duration of probation.

As parties deliberated, Judge Brandt expressed concern over the conflicting dates on CSOSA’s part, and said she is inclined to terminate the probation in August as originally planned.

Judge Brandt also noted that the longer defendants remain on probation, the greater the likelihood they will violate its conditions, further reinforcing her inclination to end Williams’ probation as originally scheduled.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Aug.12.

Shooting Defendant Pleads Not Guilty at Felony Arraignment

A shooting defendant pleaded not guilty to all indictment charges before DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe on July 2.

Donnell Hannah, 27, 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, possession of an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, unlawful possession of ammunition, unlawful discharge of a firearm, and endangerment with a firearm in a public place. These charges stem from his alleged involvement in a shooting on the 800 block of Chesapeake Street, SE, on July 21, 2022. No injuries were reported.

During the hearing, Russell Hairston, Hannah’s attorney, alerted the court to his intent to plead not guilty to all charges and asserted his constitutional rights.

Hairston indicated that parties are in plea negotiations.

Parties are set to reconvene on Aug. 12.

Shooting Case Dismissed After Defense Claims ‘Significant Negligence’ by Prosecution

DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz granted a shooting defendant’s request to dismiss his case due to continuous prosecutorial delays on July 6.

Jaymario Kirksey, also known as Mario Kirksey, 36, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with significant bodily injury while armed, three counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unauthorized use of a vehicle. These charges stem from his alleged involvement in the non-fatal shooting that injured one person on Feb. 28, 2024, on the 1300 block of Okie Street, NE.

Kirksey’s trial was originally scheduled to begin on July 6.

On July 5, prosecutors filed a motion requesting a warrant for a material witness, which Judge Kravitz denied. They also sent an email asking the judge to reconsider, as they would not be ready for trial. Judge Kravitz denied their request for reconsideration.

Kirksey’s attorney, Kevin O’Sullivan, motioned for Kirksey’s indictment to be dismissed with prejudice, arguing that the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and possibly the United States Attorney’s Office handled the case with “significant negligence.”

The prosecutor requested that the indictment remain, but if were to be dismissed, that it be without prejudice, meaning the case could be reopened. He characterized it as “a classic case where we just do not have the complaining witness.”

Judge Kravitz dismissed the indictment without prejudice, citing a lack of “intentionality” in the prosecutor’s decision to delay trial and no violation of speedy trial rights.

The judge also noted that MPD has been “less than careful” in their handling of the case – which included the detective prematurely releasing the suspect vehicle before it was fully investigated.

As parties were dismissed, prosecutors clarified that they had one more “slightly unusual request” to discuss. They alerted the court that a DNA technician will be unavailable for a period of time and requested to schedule a deposition in the event the case is re-indicted.

O’Sullivan objected to the prosecution’s request, highlighting that Judge Kravitz already ruled the indictment be dismissed.

Prosecutors requested that the judge stay the order for dismissal until the technician can be deposed. Kirksey, though he has another case pending, will still be released in this incident.

Judge Kravitz held the order for dismissal in abeyance, clarifying that the indictment will be dismissed July 7, regardless of the technician’s testimony. Prosecutors clarified that this was not a “strategic move.”

Parties are slated to reconvene on July 7 for the witness’s deposition.

Defense Argues Murder Defendant is Mentally Incompetent, Unable to Stand Trial

DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman told a homicide defendant’s attorney he’d consider their argument that he is not mentally competent to stand trial during a July 1 hearing.

Daniel Simon, 44, is charged with second-degree murder and carrying a pistol without a license for his alleged involvement in the fatal beating of Michael Jones, 52, on the 200 block of 15th Street, NW, on Jan. 4, 2023.

Simon’s attorney, Molly Bunke, challenged the prior testimony of an expert who testified on April 24. The specialist, a licensed clinical psychologist, found Simon mentally competent to stand trial.

Bunke reviewed the Dusky Standard, which establishes that a defendant can only be found competent if they have a factual, rational understanding of the case against them, and an ability to consult with counsel.

Bunke argued that Simon doesn’t meet any of these standards, much less all three, and is “unrestorable” — meaning that it is highly unlikely he would be able to meet these standards. She also mentioned that Simon’s two previous attorneys had raised similar concerns about his competency.

She noted that Simon is diagnosed with paranoid schizophrenia and is actively psychotic, as seen in medical records. Bunke stated that Simon still experiences “delusional thought,” even though he has been on medication and other symptoms have improved. She also challenged the expert’s characterization of Simon as having a “lack of effort,” when that can be a symptom of schizophrenia.

Bunke further stated that Simon had to be tutored on many aspects of the court proceedings in mental evaluations, and he was unable to remember what he had learned.

In a previous behavioral evaluation, it was determined that Simon did not believe there was a criminal case against him, further evidence of delusional thought. Simon had also repeated this sentiment to a third expert in a separate evaluation, and asked Bunke to investigate a “stolen identity.”

A specialist in brain function who had testified on June 29, performed several cognitive tests on Simon, concluding that he had “cognitive deficits” and cerebral dysfunction in the frontal lobes. The tests also indicated that Simon was not “malingering, “a term which refers to the intentional overstatement or fabrication of symptoms.

Bunke accused the first expert of having “spoon-fed” Simon answers in her evaluation, without providing evidence that Simon understood the content of their discussion. In one such instance, the expert had asked Simon if he believed in a conspiracy about the case, which Simon denied. Bunke stated this is because he believes his delusions to be fact.

Bunke was “baffled” by the expert’s findings, believing them to be based on “very limited information.” Notably, the expert had not met with Bunke. She also found it “troubling” that the expert had claimed to testify at something she hadn’t.

Bunke concluded that Simon is not currently competent and there is no likelihood he will attain competency. She asked for a Jackson finding, referring to the landmark Jackson v. Indiana case, in which The Supreme Court found that the prosecution could not indefinitely keep defendants in mental institutions if they are unlikely to regain competency.

In response, the prosecutor stated that Simon’s previous attorneys had raised concerns of his competency very early, when he was unhoused and unmedicated. He argued against a standard of needing to consult with attorneys to determine a defendant’s competency, claiming that Simon did not have a relationship with his attorneys.

The prosecutor stated that it’s important to view things from Simon’s perspective, arguing that what is rational to him is based on his life and experiences. Judge Edelman challenged this, claiming that there has to be “objective rationality.”

The prosecutor continued, claiming that little is known about Simon and his past, and when he first interacted with the court in 2012, the primary focus became his competency. He suggested Simon may not have an understanding of the American court system, as he may not be native to the United States. Judge Edelman asked the prosecutor if it is “rational” for Simon to believe there isn’t a court case against him when he has been brought to jail and court for several years. The prosecutor said it could be. What can Simon think is happening, Judge Edelman asked, as a “competent person?”

The prosecutor argued that competence is a “fluid concept,” and Simon only needs “the basics” to be found competent.

The prosecutor also claimed that the psychologist who previously testified has known Simon for three years, longer than “any of us,” and is an independent party. He referenced her recent report as claiming that Simon had been able to identify the charges against him and evidence, in testimony that the prosecutor characterized as “frankly great.”

He suggested that Simon doesn’t “care to engage” and is making a “volitional choice” not to make effort. The prosecutor alleged that the previous two experts who’d evaluated Simon had not challenged him enough and didn’t try to “meet him where he was,” noting that one expert only met with the defendant for 26 minutes.

Mental exams have shown improvement, the prosecutor said. He stated that the only attempts to educate Simon have been in the mental evaluations. Nonetheless, he claimed Simon’s trajectory is “only upward,” and that this is the first time to their knowledge that Simon had been consistently medicated. The psychologist noted him attending more groups and appearing more kempt in her most recent evaluation.

The prosecutor also argued that Bunke overstated the importance of cognitive tests, which neglect to take biographical context into account.

The prosecutor claimed that this is not a “complex case,” and Simon has demonstrated “basic but adequate” rational knowledge and is aware of “a lot of things about his case.” He also stated that Simon has “no incentive” to be found competent in this case.

In response to these points, Bunke stated that she was offended by the prosecutor using Simon’s background to hold him to a lower level of competence. The prosecution, she said, had an “alarmingly” low level of the mental competency requirement.

She reiterated that there is no testimony of any attempts by the psychologist to meet with defense counsel, and that there is no evidence either of the two other experts not meeting Simon “where he was,” or were motivated to make a finding one way or another. Bunke claimed that the cognitive tests offer important details on Simon’s “unrestorability,” and that his upward trajectory is all in non-competency categories.

Bunke also claimed that Simon wants to be found competent as he believes himself to be. She also noted that there is a difference between Simon knowing what he’s charged with and believing there is a legitimate case against him.

Bunke pleaded with Judge Edelman to find him incompetent and unrestorable.

Parties are slated to reconvene on July 10, in which Judge Edelman will provide a ruling of competency.

Judge Denies Release for Shooting Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro denied a shooting defendant’s request for release on July 1.

Alonte Nolan, 20, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, and possession of a irearm During a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on March 29 at 400 block of 8th Street, SE.

Defense attorney, Darryl Daniels, asked to release Nolan, citing his minimal criminal record and age. He has family that live locally and can be provided with housing. He is also the sole provider of an infant during the day, since the child’s mother works. The defense further noted that there is “nothing tying him to the case besides a fist fight,” which allegedly occurred before the shooting. Daniels further argued he was never seen holding a firearm or in possession of one.

Judge Di Toro noted that Nolan was on release for an unrelated matter when the incident occurred. Therefore, his release was denied.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Aug. 5.

Search