Judge Releases Stabbing Defendant to In-Patient Drug Treatment

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt released a stabbing defendant to an in-patient drug treatment program on Jan. 10.

John Scogins, 53, is charged with aggravated assault and assault with intent to kill while armed for his alleged involvement in a stabbing that injured one individual on Dec. 9, 2024, at a bus stop on the 1700 block of Minnesota Avenue, NE.

According to court documents, Scogins, the victim, and a third individual were aboard a bus when a verbal altercation ensued between the victim and Scogins, before it led to a physical altercation that turned into a stabbing.

Alvin Thomas, Scogins’ attorney, had requested he be released during a Jan. 7 hearing. Judge Brandt delayed the ruling, stating she wanted Scogins to receive a drug and mental health assessment by the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) to see if he was eligible for release.

During the hearing on Jan. 10, a PSA representative told Judge Brandt Scogins was eligible for a 30-day in-patient treatment program for drugs, but was ineligible for mental health treatment from PSA.

The prosecution objected to the request for release to a treatment program, stating that residential treatments allow the defendants to “come and go as they please,” stating she was worried about him leaving based on an outstanding bench warrant from Frederick County, Maryland, issued in 2018.

The representative from PSA clarified that Scogins could wear a GPS monitor during his time at the treatment facility, and Thomas argued Scogin’s wife had assured him she would ensure he won’t run away.

Judge Brandt said the weight of the evidence against Scogins is “relatively significant,” despite Thomas stating they plan to argue self-defense – stating the victim threw the first punch.

“I don’t worry that he’s a danger to the community,” Judge Brandt stated, adding she would require a stay-away order that would prohibit Scogins from contacting or being near the victim.

She ordered him to reside with his wife once treatment is successfully completed.

Parties are slated to reconvene Jan. 24.

Stabbing Defendant Accepts Plea Deal, Drops Challenge of Competency For Trial

A stabbing defendant withdrew a planned challenge to a finding he was competent to stand trial and accepted a plea deal before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Jan. 10.

Kenneth Garner, 33, was originally charged with assault with intent to kill while armed for his involvement in a non-fatal stabbing that occurred on Jan. 17, 2023, on the 700 block of Brandywine Street, SE. One individual sustained life-threatening injuries.

On Sept. 19, 2024, following a report from the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) that found Garner competent to stand trial, Janai Reed, his defense attorney, alerted Judge Brandt of her intent to contest the finding and hire an expert to evaluate the defendant.

During the hearing on Jan. 10, Reed told Judge Brandt she believed they could move forward and withdraw the challenge to the finding, stating that Garner was ready to take responsibility for his involvement in the incident.

The prosecution stated the deal required Garner to plead guilty to aggravated assault while armed in exchange for the prosecution not seeking an indictment, and the dismissal of a misdemeanor case from 2022.

According to the prosecution, had the case gone to trial, they would have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim attempted to go into an apartment in which he and multiple others, including Garner, were staying. Garner opened the door and stabbed the victim multiple times.

The prosecution added that the victim ran away as Garner chased after him trying to stab him again, and was able to get into a friend’s house, where he called 911. He was transported to the hospital with more than ten injuries to multiple organs, head, and torso.

The prosecution argued that Garner acted voluntarily and not in self-defense.

Garner agreed with the facts, and accepted the deal.

Parties are slated to reconvene March 6.

Fatal Shooting Suspect Declines Evidence Testing

In a Jan. 10 hearing before DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz, a murder suspect turned down DNA testing of the prosecution’s evidence.

Antwain Ulmer, 20, is charged with premeditated first-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 30-year-old Charles Sullivan on July 9, 2023, on the 700 block of Kenilworth Avenue, NE.

Ulmer’s attorney, Frances D’Antuono, said even though there was physical evidence in the case including clothing, blood residue and the victim’s gun there was little to test.

Judge Kravitz acknowledged the defense’s position and advised Ulmer of his right to test the evidence and if he understood he was waiving the opportunity guaranteed by the Innocence Protection Act. Ulmer said he agreed.

Meanwhile, Ulmer’s co-counsel, Thomas Healy suggested that Ulmer would be pleading self-defense in the killing.

Judge Kravitz set Ulmer’s trial to begin on June 15.

‘People Intend the Natural and Probable Consequences of Their Actions,’ Prosecutors Say in Shooting Trial

Parties delivered opening statements and heard testimony from a victim during a trial on Jan. 8, before DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan.

Antoine Johnson, 28, is charged with with two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, unlawful discharge of a firearm, possession of an unregistered firearm, and unlawful possession of ammunition. These charges stem from his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on May 21, 2023, on I-695 southbound near exit 2B. No injuries were reported from the incident.

“People intend the natural and probable consequences of their actions – [Johnson] intended to kill [the victims],” the prosecution insisted in opening statements. According to the prosecutor, “tensions were high, people were angry,” in the moments leading up to the shooting.

The prosecutor told the jury the incident stemmed from a disagreement in which the complainant’s then 17-year-old son was found in bed with his 14-year-old girlfriend by her parents. They called the police to arrest the boy, but the complainant was allowed to drive his son home.

According to the prosecution, Johnson arrived at the scene as the complainant and the girl’s mother spoke outside her home, with Johnson allegedly telling the woman “We ain’t doing no talking, I’ve seen his face.”

The prosecutor argued the complainant and his son got into their Jeep SUV and drove away from the scene, as Johnson closely followed behind them in a white Chevy Malibu – later shown in surveillance footage cutting people off in traffic and running a red light to follow the complainant’s vehicle onto I-695.

According to the prosecutor, the vehicle was registered to Johnson’s longtime girlfriend.

In the shooting a bullet lodged in the driver’s door of the Jeep, and others shattered the passenger side windows, according to the prosecution.

“By some miracle, [the complainant and his son] survived that night,” the prosecutor told the jury, adding “[Johnson] tried to kill [the complainants].”

The prosecutor told the jury surveillance footage and cell-site data would help prove that Johnson was in the area of the initial incident and the shooting.

However, Matthew Rist, Johnson’s attorney, disagreed with the prosecutors, stating “this entire case is speculation.”

According to Rist, the complainants told officers from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) they had smoked marijuana before the shooting and provided two different descriptions of the shooter to the police.

Rist argued they missed important descriptors for Johnson, including his facial tattoos and red dreadlocks.

He argued MPD developed Johnson as the suspect because an officer recognized him at the original scene from an earlier contact. He insisted they didn’t peg the Malibu as the suspect vehicle until months later, when Johnson was arrested.

“They want you to follow breadcrumbs,” Rist said about the prosecution’s arguments.

The prosecution called on the victim, who provided his version of the confrontation. He dropped his son off at a female friend’s home on the day of the incident, and arrived to pick him up about an hour later as his son had requested.

“I was outside, and a parent of the young lady came out,” the complainant said, stating the mom was upset because she hadn’t invited his son into the house. “It was a lot of yelling,” according to the complainant.

“When she came out, she said she called the police and was going to hold him,” the complainant stated, adding he called MPD himself and told them to hurry as he knocked on the front door.

The complainant testified the police were able to get the parents to release his son, but he was unable to leave the area because his car broke down. “They [MPD] didn’t give me a jump fast enough, I feel like,” the complainant argued. “I couldn’t leave and they didn’t help me.”

According to the complainant, a crowd began to form outside the girl’s home before he and his son left the area.

He testified he drove from the 1000 block of 5th Street, SE towards M Street to go to the bridge that took him to I-695, and noticed a car following him as he weaved through traffic. As he attempted to get on the freeway, the complainant stated, “I was shot at.”

“I was hitting gas, trying to move,” the complainant recalled, stating he was worried for his and his son’s safety.

The complainant told Rist he had no memory of the shooter, and that MPD never provided him with an image of the suspected shooter or suspect vehicle.

“I’ve tried to forget about it,” the complainant said.

Parties are slated to reconvene Jan. 10.

Court Gets Mixed Reviews For Snow Day Performance

Looking distinctly un-judge-like without his ceremonial robe, DC Superior Court Judge Neal Kravitz appeared on a WebEx connection for a 10 a.m. Jan. 6 hearing.

However, he was the only one in attendance as the Superior Court, like other institutions in the District, was feeling the impact of the Sunday into Monday snowstorm. The hearing was pushed back from its original 9:30 a.m. start time.

The court’s instruction seemed clear enough: “On January 6th all remote oral arguments and remote hearings will proceed at the originally scheduled time.” But not everybody got the message.

The judge asked his clerk to call the parties to begin the proceeding in Christopher Moore’s case.

Moore, 24, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, threat to kidnap or injure a person, assault with intent to kill while armed and aggravated assault knowingly while armed in connection to a March 1 stabbing on the 700 block of 15th Street, NE.

According to court documents, the victim was stabbed multiple times after being assaulted by five or six people. He flagged down a police cruiser asking for help then subsequently collapsed and immediate aid was required to save his life.

The prosecutor, appearing virtually, apologized for being late, attributing the delay to the weather. Shortly after, Moore’s attorney, Sellano Simmons, also joined the hearing virtually.

Moore, meanwhile, didn’t participate because he was at the DC jail which has no remote capability.

Judge Kravitz apologized to the parties for any confusion noting that the usual procedure in bad weather is to roll over the cases to the following day. However, on the previous Friday, the judge said the decision was made to hold the hearings remotely.

The only action at Moore’s hearing was to reschedule it for Jan. 8. Overall, the number of cases followed by D.C. Witness was about one-third less than a comparable Monday in October.

So was there a general question about how things were supposed to happen during the snow event?

“There was not –just a matter – as in most days – who shows up, virtually, and is ready to proceed – while adding nearly a foot of snow to the mix,” according to court spokesman Doug Buchanan.

D.C. Witness found that some court officials fared better than others in the inclement weather. One veteran defense attorney reported he had no trouble.

“I thought the instructions were pretty clear.I had to come in to cover arraignments in [courtroom] C-10, which is open for business,” said Charles Murdter in response to a D.C. Witness email.

Todd Baldwin who heads the Superior Court Trial Lawyers Association said the court’s performance was overall effective. “There really wasn’t much confusion. Cases were called virtually whenever possible and almost all were continued until another day,” said Baldwin.

Another attorney provided a negative assessment saying he’d received multiple emails from colleagues whose clients couldn’t figure out whether their hearings were postponed or if they were supposed to attend virtually. “There was a huge amount of consternation,” he said.

The lawyer made the point that the court put in an elaborate electronic network during the pandemic for remote proceedings but was still trying to figure out how to use it to full advantage.

While the US Attorneys Office was closed, they continued to work remotely and didn’t report any disruption, according to a spokesperson.

Murder Defendant Pleads Not Guilty at Arraignment, in Plea Negotiations

A homicide defendant pleaded not guilty to five charges during an arraignment before DC Superior Court Judge Jason Park on Jan. 8.

Trenton Collins, 22, is charged with first-degree murder while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, robbery while armed, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict, for his alleged involvement in the death of 41-year-old Philip Prendergast on March 27 on the 5100 block of Georgia Avenue, NW.

During the hearing, David Akulian, Collins’ attorney, alerted the court of his intent to plead not guilty to all charges, asserting his constitutional rights to a speedy trial.

Akulian also told Judge Park the parties are in plea negotiations, and hope to find a way to resolve the matter in the coming months.

Parties are slated to reconvene May 16.

Case Acquitted: Judge Bars Defense Lawyer From Murder Case Citing Conflict of Interests

Editor’s note: Aaron Murchison was acquitted of all charges by a jury on Feb. 11, 2025.

DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson preliminarily ruled on Jan. 6 that a defense lawyer in the Murder trial of Aaron Murchison must recuse herself based on a conflict of interest.

The ruling came after the prosecution discovered that Paige White previously represented a client who is a potential witness in the Murchison matter.

Murchison, 28, is charged with second-degree murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of 32-year-old Jamontate Brown on Oct. 16, 2022, on the 2500 block of Pomeroy Road, SE.

Judge Dayson said that even if the parties agreed to waive the conflict it would not be sufficient to resolve the problem. The prosecution said they may call the witness to provide rebuttal testimony. In effect, White could be put in the potential position of representing both clients who may have competing interests.

“Ms. White hasn’t done anything with ill intent,” said Judge Dayson.

In response, lead counsel for Murchison, Kevann Gardner, filed an emergency motion countering the prosecution’s claims.

“The government refused to give Ms. White the basis of a potential conflict and simply rested on her past limited representation of the witness in an unrelated matter,” wrote Gardner. He said the prosecutor was simply using the issue as a pretext to further postpone the longstanding case.

Judge Dayson said it doesn’t appear, “The government is trying to manufacture a conflict of interest to prevent a competent defense attorney from sitting at the defendant’s side.”

“It’s a waste of time to keep discussing this,” said the prosecutor.

For her part, White suggested the possibility of “building a firewall” between herself and Gardner, to moot the conflict issue. However, Judge Dayson said that was impractical given that there are only two lawyers on the defense team.

The judge said she might reconsider her ruling but “don’t count on it.”

Given that the trial date is set for Jan. 21, Gardner said he found the situation “incredibly frustrating” in what amounts to getting a new co-counsel at the last minute.

The prosecution suggested getting an attorney from a pool of lawyers designated to represent indigent defendants apart from the Public Defender Service (PDS). But, speaking as one of the group, White said her members are already “overloaded” with cases.

Last November, D.C. Witness published two articles documenting the “untenable” situation facing panel attorneys given the increasing number of clients and shrinking availability of lawyers willing to represent them.

The next hearing in the case is on Jan. 10.

Stabbing Defendant Waives Right to a Preliminary Hearing, Considers Plea Deal

A stabbing defendant waived his rights to a preliminary hearing and requested he be released as pending a plea deal decision before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Jan. 7.

According to court documents, Scogins, the victim, and a third individual were aboard a bus when a verbal altercation ensued between the victim and Scogins.

In video shown to the court, the three individuals exited the bus, and the victim allegedly threw the first punch, before the individual identified as Scogins is seen stabbing the individual multiple times.

During the hearing, Alvin Thomas, Scogins’ attorney, alerted Judge Brandt Scogins planned to waive his right to a preliminary hearing as he continues to review a plea offered by the prosecution to plead guilty to assault with intent to kill and assault with a dangerous weapon in exchange for not seeking an indictment. Through the deal, the prosecution would agree to request a concurrent sentencing for both charges.

Alvin requested Scogins be released as he awaits further hearings, stating they have a strong self-defense claim, adding “this is not an individual that just attacked someone randomly.”

The prosecution objected, stating by waiving his preliminary hearing right Scogins accepted there is probable cause, and he was the only individual armed during the incident. The prosecution argued that the video shows the victim attempting to walk away from the situation before Scogins follows after him and stabs him multiple times.

“Until I can get some extra information, I am going to defer making a finding,” Judge Brandt stated about the request for release. She stated she wants Scogins to receive a drug and mental health assessment from the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA).

Parties are slated to reconvene Jan. 8.

Judge Detains Suspect in Road Rage Incident

“This is pulling a firearm and pointing it at someone,” said DC Superior Court Judge Robert Salerno ruling to continue the detention of a road rage suspect in a Jan. 3 hearing.

Eddy Perez, 21, is charged with threat to kidnap or injure a person, assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and fleeing a law enforcement officer in connection with a series of incidents on Dec 16, 2024.

According to a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) report, officers initially stopped a vehicle in which a person described as Perez was driving erratically on the 1300 block of Randolph Street, NW. They were following up on a report of a gunshot in the area.

However, police say Perez fled the encounter, ultimately winding up near the intersection of Georgia Avenue, NW and Missouri Avenue, NW.

Picking up the story from there, prosecutors played a dashcam video from the victim’s car allegedly showing Perez pulling in front of the car, then suddenly making a U-turn and brandishing a firearm outside of the driver’s side window aimed toward the victim.

“Obviously, that just can’t happen,” said the prosecutor, branding the action as unjustified road rage. He also noted that Perez had eight prior convictions and that DC Superior Court Judge Robert Hildum had previously found probable cause Perez committed the crime.

Defense attorney Julie Swaney countered that Perez had no violent criminal history and that his actions were an “aberration.” Acknowledging that the video was disturbing, Swaney said Perez could be trusted if released into the community. Meanwhile, she said a plea offer from the prosecution was on the table, although the terms weren’t revealed.

Noting the seriousness of the offense, Judge Salerno agreed with the prosecution’s request to keep Perez in custody.

His next hearing is scheduled on Jan. 22.

Jury Finds Murder Defendant Guilty on All Counts

A jury found Amard Jefferson guilty on all five counts in a murder trial before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Dec. 20.

Jefferson, 25, was found guilty of second-degree murder while armed, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict, carrying a pistol without a license outside his home or business, and obstruction of justice. The charges stemmed from the fatal shooting of 20-year-old Kendall Brown on the 3000 block of Nelson Place, SE, on Aug. 7, 2021.

The shooting took place at the apartment of Jefferson’s then-girlfriend, who was an acquaintance of Brown.

In trial, a witness testified to going to the apartment with Brown to recover some bottles of liquor left by a mutual friend. According to the witness, Brown and Jefferson began shouting at each other, leading to Jefferson shooting Brown.

Jason Clark, Jefferson’s defense attorney, cast doubt on the witness’ reliability by highlighting contradictions between what she told police immediately after the incident and what she said in her court testimony. Clark also drew attention to the witness’ medical history of memory issues.

Throughout the trial, Clark characterized the visit by Brown and the witness as a home invasion. In closing arguments, he suggested Jefferson might have accidentally fired his gun while defending his home.

The prosecutor focused her closing arguments on the strong evidence that Jefferson was the one who shot Brown. She told the jury Jefferson locked Brown in the apartment and fled, delaying first responders from providing Brown medical aid.

Jefferson’s sentencing is scheduled for Feb. 14, 2025.

Murder and Conspiracy Defendant Accepts Plea Deal For Assault with Intent to Kill

One of the defendants charged for the shootings that killed 13-year-old Malachi Lukes accepted a plea offer from the prosecution and pleaded guilty to assault with intent to kill while armed before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Dec. 20.

Aaron Brown, 28, was originally charged with conspiracy, first-degree murder while armed, four counts of assault with the intent to kill while armed, carrying a pistol without a license, five counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict, five counts of possession of an unregistered firearm, and three counts of tampering with physical evidence.

The charges stemmed from two shootings on March 1, 2020. One occurred on the 600 block of S Street, NW, resulting in Lukes’ death and the injury of a second juvenile. No injuries were reported from the other shooting, which occurred on the unit block of Channing Street, NE.

The shootings also involved Koran Jackson, 24, Tyiion Freeman, 25, and Stephen Nelson, 34. Judge Brandt sentenced the individuals to 164 years, 108 years, and 108-years-and-six month of incarceration, respectively, on Sept. 13 and Sept. 19.

In addition, Reginald Steele, 25, is currently facing 37 criminal charges related to the shootings.

The prosecutor in Brown’s case said the charge of assault with intent to kill while armed is based on Brown’s shooting a firearm at one individual. Although Brown didn’t strike his victim, his shooting displayed the intent to kill.

Brown’s defense attorney, Destiny Fullwood-Singh, told the court the maximum sentence for assault with intent to kill while armed is 30 years incarceration and a fine of $75,000. The minimum sentence is five years incarceration.

The prosecution said they will dismiss all other charges in the case in return for Brown’s guilty plea. They agreed not to request a sentence of more than 18 years.

The prosecutor told the court the DNA evidence in this case includes swabs from multiple firearms, the shooters’ vehicle, and clothing collected in accordance with search warrants on the defendants’ residences. Brown waived his rights to independently test the DNA evidence.

The sentencing in this case is scheduled for March 21, 2025.

Shooting Defendant Maintains Innocence at Sentencing

A shooting defendant’s attorney told DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt her client maintains his innocence and plans to appeal his conviction after he was sentenced to 24 years of imprisonment on Jan. 3.

On Aug. 7, 2024, Deon Cannon, 30, was convicted of assault with intent to kill while armed, assault with intent to kill while armed of a minor, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, assault with a dangerous weapon, assault with a dangerous weapon of a minor, unlawful possession of a firearm by a convict, carrying a pistol without a license, possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device, a misdemeanor charge of possession of an unregistered firearm, and a misdemeanor charge of unlawful possession of ammunition.

The charges stemmed from his involvement in a shooting on Sept. 5, 2021 on the 2700 block of Terrace Road, SE, in which prosecutors claim he shot at an individual and his six-year-old son with intent to kill. No injuries were reported during the incident.

During the hearing, the prosecution requested Judge Brandt sentence Cannon to 30 years of incarceration, arguing that, “it’s a miracle that no one was hurt in this case.”

“This was a plan,” the prosecutor insisted, adding, “the plan could have caused indiscriminate harm.” According to the prosecution, Cannon and his accomplices waited for the victim and his son to leave a park before “ambushing” them with 25 shots.

“The timing was not a coincidence – he’s hiding because he wants to ambush [the victim],” the prosecutor told Judge Brandt.

The prosecutor stated the victim shot back at the assailants, which led to his arrest on charges of illegally possessing a firearm despite having a conviction with a sentence greater than a year.

“It is truly a blessing no one was hurt,” the prosecutor stated, arguing that Cannon has had multiple opportunities to change. According to the prosecutor, Cannon had only been on release for 36 days after he was convicted and served a sentence in connection to another shooting incident, in which a person was injured.

Quo Judkins, Cannon’s attorney, alerted Judge Brandt he plans to appeal his conviction, stating that Cannon continues to assert his innocence. However, Judkins asked Judge Brandt to impose a 15 year sentence, suspending all but 10 years, since he asked to get the help he needs while incarcerated.

Judkins requested Judge Brandt consider the “lack of loss of life,” in the case, arguing she did not aim to diminish the allegations or convictions, but letters of support for Cannon showed he is an individual that’s “on a path to give back to the community.”

“This was an exercise in urban gun violence,” Judge Brandt stated, adding “had any of those bullets actually connected with human flesh – this could have been a higher death toll.”

“Sprays of bullets flying through a neighborhood,” Judge Brandt said, “I can only imagine what would have happened if [the victim] didn’t have the gun,” stating she did not condone his illegal possession of a weapon, but “[the victim] breaking the law might have saved his and his son’s life.”

She imposed a sentence of 12 years for both assault with intent to kill charges, which will run consecutive to each other – totaling 24 years of incarceration.

He was also sentenced to five years for each charge of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, five years for both assault with a dangerous weapon charges, two years for unlawfully possessing a firearm with a prior conviction, two years for carrying a pistol without a license, one year for possessing a large capacity ammunition feeding device, and 180 days for each of the misdemeanor charges. These sentences will run concurrently to the 24 years.

Cannon was also ordered to pay $1,200 to the Victims of Violent Crime Fund (VVCF), as well as register as a gun offender.

No further dates were set.

Stabbing Victim Urges Treatment for Attacker at Sentencing

“If I had died, my blood would be not only on his hands but on the hands of a mental healthcare system that had failed him,” a stabbing victim said about his assailant at a sentencing before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Dec. 20.

On Oct. 15, Cristian Martinez, 19, pleaded guilty to assault with intent to kill for the non-fatal stabbing of one individual on March 13 on the 1700 block of Lamont Street, NW.

Judge Brandt sentenced Martinez to five years of incarceration but suspended two years of the sentence. She gave him 18 months of probation and a suspended sentence of three years of supervised release. Martinez is required to pay $100 to the Victims of Violent Crime fund.

Addressing the court virtually, Martinez’s victim described how he was attacked while out taking a walk. He said he needed extensive physical therapy in the months after the assault and was told by a doctor he would have died if the angle of the stabbing had been slightly different.

“My immediate reaction was anger. I felt violated,” said the victim.

After talking to Martinez and his parents, though, the victim felt much angrier at “the mental healthcare system in our country that is broken.” He learned Martinez had sought treatment but couldn’t afford the medication he needed.

“I know that to admit you need help and to seek it out are difficult things, and Cristian has done both,” said the victim.

The victim said Martinez’s attack was inspired after hearing voices in his head that had been controlled by medication he has been given in DC Jail and St. Elizabeths Hospital. The victim expressed concern Martinez might not continue receiving adequate care if sentenced to the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BoP).

“I worry about the person Cristian will become after three years in prison,” said the victim. If Martinez’s issues are not addressed, he continued, society may be safer while he’s incarcerated, but not when he gets out.

The victim asked Judge Brandt to find an alternative to prison so Martinez can get the help he needs. He noted Martinez’s youth and said treatment is most likely to be successful if it occurs early on.

“You have just blown my mind with your openness, your honesty, your kindness,” said Judge Brandt.

“Here you are, the victim of a stabbing, and you are allocuting for a better system, better treatment for your attacker. You have just given us all a masterclass in this courtroom for what grace is supposed to look like,” Judge Brandt said. “I think, if you were here in this courtroom, I would walk off the bench and just hug you.”

The prosecutor called Martinez’s attack “a gratuitous, wanton act of violence.” She said Martinez cut the victim’s jugular vein, displaying clear intent to kill, since the victim could have bled out and died before he was rescued.

The prosecutor asked Judge Brandt to sentence Martinez to five years in prison. She said Martinez has failed to comply with treatment in the past. If he were released on probation, he might stop treatment and attack someone else, perhaps fatally.

“He wants to get the help. He doesn’t want to be doing the things he has done,” argued Martinez’s attorney, Alvin Thomas, Jr. “He has not made any excuses. He has not talked about how he could get out of this.”

Thomas asked Judge Brandt to sentence Martinez to the minimum time in prison and to request his placement at a facility where he has access to mental health care.

“He is going to get out sometime. Without the treatment, without some structure, he might come out worse than he’s going in,” said Thomas.

“I just want [the victim] to know that I’m so sorry for attacking him, and I want you to know that my mental health has been better since I’ve been in jail. The only thing is I feel like I’m starting to get worse while I’m in jail,” Martinez told the court. “I feel like I’m in a spaceship. I don’t feel like I’m in jail. But the voices have stopped.”

“A lot of kind things have been said about you. A lot of loving things have been written about you from your parents,” Judge Brandt told Martinez. “Knowing as you do that you suffer from mental health issues, you cannot let drugs enter into the equation. You did that to yourself.”

Judge Brandt said she would recommend Martinez be placed at a federal medical center while in prison so he can receive mental health care. She ordered him to complete a General Education Diploma (GED) during his incarceration.

Judge Brandt ordered the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (CSOSA) to develop a treatment plan for Martinez and place him in a supervised mental health unit during his probation. She ordered him to abstain from all drugs, including marijuana.

Judge Brandt sentenced Martinez under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA), which will allow his conviction to be sealed if he successfully completes his sentence.

“[The victim] moved me, and so I’m paying it forward,” Judge Brandt told Martinez. “Don’t squander it.”

No further hearings are scheduled in this case.

Is the D.C. Jury Pool Representative?

D.C. Witness discovered in the Tony Mcclam v. United States jury bias case, a convoluted statistical section that raises a core question: Is the Superior Court calling a racially representative sampling of the population to jury duty?

The original case argues jury verdicts during COVID-19 should be overturned as unconstitutional because juries were racially unrepresentative of the DC population. Specifically, Black jurors were underrepresented relative to the racial makeup of DC.

The brief from the U.S. Attorneys Office (USAO) cites court data, stating of 86,426 new potential jurors sent jury summons, 35.9% are Black in a city that is currently 46.6% Black. According to both the court and the plaintiffs, the Black juror population should be around 44.5% as noted in the government’s response to a defendant’s motion.

That lower number, 44.5%, means that there is a 8.6% disparity between the percentage of potential jurors who were Black and the number of Black jurors needed to be representative in the District.

D.C. Witness previously reported the Public Defenders Service of the District of Columbia (PDS) commissioned an analysis showing that Black jurors were underrepresented by 10.5 percent relative to the city’s population.

The numbers are significant because, according to The Center for Juror Studies, most courts have adopted a system where anything over 10% shows de facto systemic discrimination. This questions if the existing DC jury system would qualify as systemically racially biased. The reduction number from the USAO brings DC under that “systemic” line for discrimination, but the analysis from PDS puts DC over the line.

When asked about that disparity, the court responded with its new plan for improving the jury selection process.

Homicide Defendant Denied Youth Consideration in 12 Year Sentence

A homicide defendant accepted a plea deal extended by prosecutors before DC Superior Court Judge Michael O’Keefe on Oct. 10 and received a 12 year sentence on Dec 13.

On Oct. 10, Trevon Devore, 24, pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter while armed for his involvement in the fatal shooting of 27-year-old Daqual Covington who was wounded eleven times on May 17, 2021, on the unit block of O Street, SW.

Devore also pleaded guilty to carrying a pistol without a license for an unrelated 2020 incident.

During the hearing, Covington’s aunt spoke to the court stating that not only was he “kind, dependable, and well thought of by his peers,” but “no parent should have to bury their child.”

Defense attorney Veronice Holt stated that “both Daqual and Trevon had guns, and the fact remains that they shouldn’t have.” She explained that although Devore was frightened, he should have never fired the gun.

“We are living in a society where many young men, especially minority men, who feel that they are championed by the use of a gun without thinking about the freedom that they would be giving up in exchange,” Holt said.

She requested that Devore be sentenced under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA), which would seal the defendant’s conviction if he successfully completes all sentencing requirements. However court social services reported that Trevon was in a state of “pre-contemplation state of change.. In other words he still doesn’t get it, and he is still in the same condition he was in when he committed the crime… as it stands, anyone on that street could have been in the same predicament,” and declined the defense’s request for the YRA given the nature of the offense.

Devore was sentenced to 144 months incarceration with five years of supervised release for the manslaughter, and for the count of carrying a pistol without a license he was sentenced to 24 months with three years supervised probation. He will receive credit for time already served and sentences are to run consecutive to each other while the release will run concurrent with each other.

Search