Shooting Defendant Pleads Guilty, Despite Judge’s Competency Concerns

DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe repeatedly checked on a shooting defendant during a Sept. 26 hearing, concerned whether he was competent enough to accept a plea deal.

Delonte Brown, 30, was originally charged with aggravated assault knowingly while armed and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his involvement in a non-fatal shooting that injured one person. The incident occurred on June 7 on the intersection of 11th and U Streets, NW.

During the hearing, he accepted a deal that required him to plead guilty to assault with a dangerous weapon and carrying a pistol without a license. In exchange, all other charges were dropped and the prosecution agreed to deliver their arguments and recommendations upon sentencing, not seek to raise the maximum sentence based on the defendant’s prior convictions, have the defendant held in custody, or seek an indictment.

“You seem a little sedated today,” Judge Pipe told Brown, unsure if Brown was clear-headed enough to decide on the plea deal.

In order to stand trial, a defendant must show enough mental competence to understand the charges and help his attorney defend the case.

Throughout the hearing, Brown mumbled his responses, causing Judge Pipe to ask him to repeat himself.

“I do know Mr. Brown’s baseline,” Judge Pipe said, insisting he seemed off.

Brown’s defense attorney Susan Ellis clarified that Brown, who was in a wheelchair, was experiencing immense physical pain. However, she spoke with him beforehand, and he said he wanted to proceed.

“I know Mr. Brown has a number of medical [concerns],” Judge Pipe replied.

The prosecution said that on the day of the crime Brown unjustifiably responded to a comment the victim made by calling him a slur. After overhearing the victim laughing, Brown began shooting at him, The prosecutor maintained that Brown escalated the situation and his “actions were voluntary” and have no legal justification.

Judge Pipe stated “he’s clearly tired and out of it” but believed he was conscious enough to plead.

Parties are slated to reconvene for a full report and sentencing on Dec. 12.

Stabbing Defendant Requests Mental Health Help

A stabbing defendant asked for mental health treatment in a hearing before DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel on Sept. 30.

Chauncey Liverpool, 32, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal stabbing that wounded one individual on the 4300 block of 3rd Street, SE, on Sept. 9.

According to defense attorney Howard McEachern, Liverpool had requested mental health assistance after being previously recommended for a full mental competence evaluation. To stand trial, a defendant must be mentally compentent enough to understand the charges and work with his lawyer.

McEachern told the court he was trying to get a doctor to evaluate Liverpool, but was having difficulties. Judge Israel told the court that she would ask a doctor from the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) to evaluate Liverpool again.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 30.

Frustrated Judge Rules Phone Warrant Illegal in Shooting Trial

DC Superior District Court Judge Neal Kravitz declared an executed search warrant illegal the day before jury selection begins in a non-fatal shooting trial on Oct. 1.

Daquawn Lubin, 30, is charged with two counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, conspiracy, two counts of aggravated assault, and seven counts of possession of a firearm. The charges are in connection to a non-fatal shooting that occurred on July 24, 2023 at the 4600 block of Benning Road SE. Two individuals were injured.

Defense attorney Kevin O’Sullivan filed a motion to suppress evidence collected from Lubin’s cell phone, on the basis that the evidence obtained was gathered from an illegal search warrant.

The warrant, O’Sullivan argued, was executed without the required probable cause establishing that there would in fact be evidence on Lubin’s cell phone.

O’Sullivan stated that each piece of information a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective was looking for was too “overbroad and unparticularized”, not evidentiary as required.

The prosecution argued that the MPD detective working the case provided probable cause in the affidavit. “Based on my training and experience, I know that perpetrators often communicate between themselves before, during, and after a crime,” the detective wrote in a report.

After reviewing the warrant, the judge ruled with the defense that the warrant did not have probable cause.

A “reasonably well trained officer… would have known it was illegal to execute this warrant even though it was signed by a judge,” Judge Kravitz stated in his ruling.

“There are no facts cited. There are no facts listed,” he continued; “There’s got to be some accountability for this stuff.”

Judge Kravitz also stated that the justification provided by the MPD detective was likely a template copied and pasted into the warrant, which he called a “danger” to search warrants.

He did rule that the actual seizure of the phone was legal, even if the search through its contents were not.

The prosecution asked Judge Kravitz for a “good faith exception,” which means even if a warrant was ruled illegal, if an officer was acting in good faith while executing the order, evidence from the search would still be introduced into a trial as evidence.

Judge Kravtiz denied this motion as well. “Nothing ever changes,” he said in his decision, describing how often he sees overboard cell phone warrants brought to him by MPD and the United States Attorney’s Office, which are said to infringe on the constitutional right to privacy stated in the Fourth Amendment.

After hia rulings, Judge Kravitz asked both parties what evidence was actually found in the phone. The prosecution revealed that the only evidence they were actually planning on submitting at this point was Lubin’s phone number.

Judge Kravitz slammed his palm into his face when he heard this answer.

Parties concluded by discussing jury selection proceedings, which will occur Oct. 2.

‘Backed Into a Corner’ By Prosecution, Judge Releases Carjacking Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean released a carjacking defendant on Sept. 23 after the prosecution failed to provide the defense with key witness information before a court ordered deadline.

Rodale Broadus, 21, is charged with armed carjacking and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a carjacking at the 900 block of 24th Street, NW on Aug. 15, 2024.

According to court documents, Broadus is allegedl threatened an Amazon driver at gunpoint while on a delivery route.

Broadus’ attorney, Lauren Morehouse, told the court that she was still waiting to receive information about changes in a detective’s testimony that the prosecution was supposed to have provided to the defense before the hearing. The Jencks Act requires prosecutors to provide defendants with verbatim statements made by prosecutorial witnesses after they testify in a grand jury.

The prosecutor said that she had asked the officer involved to submit an updated form to the Department of Forensic Science (DFS) but that he still had not done so.

Judge McLean ordered the prosecution to provide all Jencks information relating to the officer by Oct. 7.

Morehouse told the court that not only had the prosecution failed to turn over Jencks information before the court-ordered deadline, but she also asked Judge McLean to impose deadlines on the prosecution to turn over evidence that the defense had sought for months.

Morehouse noted that the prosecution had still not turned over evidence from targeted requests she made in June, and said that prosecutors had not turned over phone extraction and records from Prince George’s County. The prosecutor noted that she herself had not received the phone extraction until the night before the hearing and that she was having difficulty communicating with Prince George’s County authorities.

Judge McLean also ordered prosecutors to turn over Prince George’s County records and comply with the defense’s requests within two weeks and reminded the prosecutor that it is her duty to review all the evidence in the case and turn it over to the defense expeditiously..

Morehouse also requested that Judge McLean release Broadus because the delay was not fair to him or his family. Morehouse pointed to the audience to show Broadus’s family was in attendance.

“I want to start by saying that Mr. Broadus has had his family present at every hearing,” Morehouse said.

She further explained that DC Superior Court Judge Heide Herrmann had noted on her finding of probable cause that the evidence in the case was relatively weak.

Judge McLean granted the request for release over objection from the prosecution, saying that the prosecution had indicated they had reviewed the defense’s evidence request and had generally limited information in the case.

“I’m constantly feeling backed into a corner,” Judge McLean said about cases where the defendant faces serious charges but delays threaten the constitutional guarantee to a speedy trial.

McLean released Broadus with a stay-away order from the victim and under the conditions of 24 hour home confinement and GPS monitoring. Several of Broadus’ family members ran out of the courtroom to celebrate in the hall when McLean reached her decision.

Parties are slated to reconvene Oct. 19.

Defendant Accepts Carjacking Plea Deal

A carjacking defendant pleaded guilty to robbery before DC Superior Court Judge Robert Salerno on Sept. 22.

Teon Hatton, 31, was originally charged with armed carjacking and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his involvement in an incident on the 400 block of C Street, SW on Jan. 23, 2023.

During the hearing, Hatton’s attorney, Emma Mlyenic, alerted Judge Salerno of his intent to accept a deal which required him to plead guilty to robbery in exchange for the prosecution not seeking an indictment.

Through the deal, parties agreed to a sentencing range of 48-to-78 months, with a minimum of three years supervised release. The maximum possible sentence for robbery in DC is 15 years. Through the plea, prosecutors also agreed to waive any enhancement requests at sentencing.

The prosecution stated that their evidence would have proven Hatton’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Hatton admitted his involvement in the carjacking in court, acknowledging that he forcibly stole a Honda Accord from the victim.

Parties are slated to reconvene Nov. 24 for sentencing.

Non-Fatal Stabbing Defendant Acquitted of All Charges

A jury in DC Superior Court Judge Michael Ryan’s courtroom handed down a not guilty verdict, acquitting a non-fatal stabbing defendant on Sept. 30.

Jerrell Smith, 31, was charged with aggravated assault while armed and carrying a dangerous weapon within the District for allegedly stabbing a victim on June 2, 2023. Court documents are not clear on where the incident occurred but police responded at the United Medical Center on the 1300 block of Southern Avenue, SE.

The jury unanimously found Smith not guilty on both counts.

Smith has an additional case pending trial. A status hearing is set for Oct. 15 to address next steps for the parties.

Judge Sentences Defendant For Domestic Stabbing

DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe imposed a partially suspended sentence for a stabbing defendant on Sept. 26.

Walter Romero-Ventura, 32, was initially charged with kidnapping while armed and assault with a dangerous weapon for his involvement in a kidnapping and stabbing on May 6, 2024, on the 1300 block of 15th Street, NW. Romero was arrested on May 20, 2024.

According to court documents, the victim, his then-girlfriend, said Romero-Ventura allegedly forced her into a vehicle, stabbed her with a knife or box cutter and threatened to kill her.

During the hearing, Romero-Ventura accepted a deal that required him to plead guilty to simple assault and felony contempt. In exchange, all other charges were dropped and the prosecution did not seek an indictment.

The prosecution read the victim’s impact statement addressing how women are common targets of domestic abuse.

“No more women should keep being victims. We are worth a lot,” the victim wrote.

The prosecution argued that Romero-Ventura had a “complete lack of remorse” for his actions and continues to blame the victim rather than take accountability.

The prosecution asked for supervised release but did not think Romero-Ventura is fit for probation because he is not trustworthy. They highlighted that those who sent the defendant letters of support are “completely in the dark” about his infidelity regarding the victim and emphasized that he violated the judge’s stay-away order.

Judge Pipe asked whether the victim wants a stay-away order because she can only impose one if she puts Romero-Ventura on probation. The prosecution did not know the answer.

Jude Pipe noted even though she imposed a stay-away order, the U.S. Parol Commission is not obligated to enforce it. According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School, the parol commission has the “sole authority” to enforce release conditions.

Meanwhile, Romero-Ventura’s defense attorney Henry Escoto said the defendant called the victim, thereby violating the stay-away order, because the victim contacted someone who knows him and he succumbed to the pressure.

Escoto asked for a suspended sentence with one year of probation and conditions imposed by the court.

“It wasn’t his intention to cause [the victim] any harm. … Sometimes things can be lost in translation,” Escoto said.

Escoto refuted the prosecution’s argument, arguing Romero-Ventura does not blame the victim “for what happened” but rather blames himself for “putting himself in this situation.”

Escoto added that Romero-Ventura is not in court for infidelity, dismissing that prosecution argument;

“There was no violence on his part,” Escoto argued. “We don’t see that on the .”

Romero-Ventura apologized to the victim and apologized for violating the judge’s order.

“This happened during a time of weakness and depression I was going through,” Romero-Ventura said.

Judge Pipe acknowledged the defendant has no criminal history but remained concerned that he violated the only condition she imposed, which was the stay-away order–common in domestic dispute cases.

“I’m not sure that this is an anomaly,” Judge Pipe said.

However, she agreed to give him probation and a longer suspension, of nine months, than the prosecution asked for.

“I’m going to give [him] an opportunity,” Judge Pipe said.

Judge Pipe said, based on the victim impact statement, it sounds like the victim wants a stay-away order. Judge Pipe said what the victim wants is most important to her.

“You have to stay away and have no contact with [the victim],” Judge Pipe said to Romero-Ventura.

She explained that if he violates the order at her encouragement, he will be arrested.

Judge Pipe sentenced Romero-Venture to 180 days for simple assault and 11 months, with all but two suspended, for contempt. Romero-Ventura will also serve three years of supervised release and one year of probation. These sentences run consecutively to each other.

No future hearings were scheduled.

Shooting Witness in Car Charger Dispute Testifies ‘I Thought I Was Going to Die That Day’

DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson heard dramatic testimony from witnesses on Oct. 6 in the jury trial of a non-fatal shooting defendant.

Ato Ocran, 46, is indicted on charges of assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, destruction of property $1,000 or more, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, and 4 counts of possession of an unregistered firearm.

These charges stem from Ocran’s alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting of a victim on June 3, at the 2000 block of 13th Street NE. The victim was shot once in the left shoulder in a dispute about an unplugged vehicle charger that quickly escalated into violence.

The prosecution recalled an eyewitness who was in the vehicle with the victim when shots were fired.

He told the jury that as he and the victim were driving down 10th Street when a blue Tesla pulled up beside their car and he heard “pow, pow, pow”. When asked how many gunshots he heard he said “like four”. He went on to say that a bullet flew right in front of his face and he “thought I was going to die that day”.

According to the witness, after the shots rang out the victim said “I got shot”. When asked about his relationship with the victim he said that was his sister’s boyfriend and that they lived together.

The prosecution asked if he had a gun on him that day, he stated “no ma’am”. The prosecution also asked the witness if he was the same individual who had pleaded guilty to multiple cases of possession of drugs with intent to distribute, and he agreed.

In cross examination Ocran’s attorney, Elizabeth White, asked the witness if in 2024 he pled guilty for attempting to distribute the drug PCP (Phencyclidine). He said he was.

He stated that on June 3, the day of the incident, he was using PCP, crack cocaine and drinking alcohol.

The witness stated that when he arrived at the Giant grocery store where the defendant and victim were having an argument, the victim was angry. When asked if the victim told the witness he was going to follow the blue Tesla, the defendant’s vehicle, he said yes.

He said that after the shooting, the victim continued driving and pulled over at 15th Street where the witness got out. The witness said that the victim drove off and he remained on 15th Street talking to the victim’s family.

White asked if it was correct that he did not see the victim when he arrived at his sister’s house after exiting the vehicle on 15th Street. He stated that the victim was there when he arrived. He was then approached with his grand jury transcript where he had stated that the victim was “pulling up” to the house, not already on scene. He stood by his original statement in which he said the victim was already at his sister’s house.

In redirect the witness altered his testimony about the use of drugs during the day of the incident. He said that he got mixed up with the days and did not know that June 3 was the day that the victim was shot. He went on to say on the day of the shooting he was not on any drugs.

The prosecution called another eyewitness, the victim’s daughter.

She said that on the day of the shooting she had returned home from an interview and was taking a nap when she woke up to her mother on the phone with her father yelling “fight, fight”.

She testified she walked the five minutes from her house to the Giant supermarket parking lot where she saw her father and another man. According to the witness, when she arrived, the victim and another man were not physically fighting, but were yelling at each other. .

According to the witness, the other man got into his blue Tesla and said something to the effect of “stay right there I have something for you” and then drove off. She stayed at the parking lot for approximately ten more minutes while waiting for her mother to pick up her vehicle from the parking lot.

During this time, the witness testified, the victim and the witness’ uncle drove off in the gold Jeep. While the witness and her mother were in the parking lot, her mother received a call from the victim that he had been shot.

The witness testified that she immediately called 911 and started running towards her house – she stated she could track her dad’s location and saw he was heading home.

The 911 call was played in court in which the witness could be heard stating the incident address and asking for an ambulance.

She testified that she went with her father to the hospital.

After the incident, she was shown a photo array of individuals where she identified and circled one individual based on the fact that she had seen this man arguing with her father in the Giant parking lot.

In the defense’s cross examination, the witness told Kevann Gardner, Ocran’s attorney, that her father had been nice to the other man. She stated the victim told her he would be picking up his other children from school as he left the parking lot.

The witness stated that she did not see an altercation, a golf club, a gun, or the shooting. The defense then played the 911 call that the witness placed.

In the call the witness and her mother could be heard trying to get her father to stop driving and wait for an ambulance after he had been shot.

In the prosecution’s redirect, the witness reasserted that she heard the man say something about a gun. She recalled hearing “stay right here, I got something for you” as well as seeing the man “digging in his back seat” leading her to believe he had a gun.

The prosecution also called a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer who responded to the 911 call and took part in the preliminary investigation. The officer made contact with the victim, testifying he arrived on scene and witnessed a male in a white shirt bleeding from his left shoulder. He identified this individual as the victim.

On stand he identified the gold Jeep as having bullet holes in the driver side and blood on the interior. He stated that the Department of Forensic Services (DFS) were called to the scene later to take pictures of the vehicle. Those photos were used as prosecution evidence for the witness to identify.

He stated no one on scene had a gun.

In cross examination by White, the officer was asked if he received information about a witness that said that they saw gunfire coming from the gold Jeep. He said he could not recall and was shown his body worn camera footage, in response he said that the information about this possible witness was relayed to another officer.

Judge Dayson instructed the jury that the question and answer may not be taken as evidence that the victim had a gun and can only be used to weigh the effectiveness of the investigation by MPD.

In the same line of questioning the officer was asked if to his knowledge no officers followed up on the witness that allegedly saw gunfire coming from the victim’s car. He stated he did not know.

When asked if to his knowledge officers did not get a search warrant for the victims house or search the victims hours, he did not know.

The prosecution presented more DFS photos to the officer where he was questioned if he knew that there was a knife in the victim’s car, he stated that he did not know that there was.

In redirect the prosecution asked if to his knowledge any officers followed up with the witness, he stated he did not and that it was up to the lead detective.

Prosecutors called an MPD detective who testified to showing the victim’s daughter a photo array of different individuals after the incident. The detective used the double-blind photo identification procedure, meaning that the detective is unaware if the suspect is among the photos.

Gardner, in a cross examination, noted that the detective does not know what happened that day and whether or not self-defense was a factor.

Another MPD officer was called by the prosecution who testified to searching Ocran’s home. During the search the officer located and recovered an instruction manual for a firearm and a cellphone.

The prosecution called an MPD sergeant with the firearms registration branch of the records division. The sergeant testified that on the day of the incident, Ocran had no firearm registration or concealed carry permit.

In the defense’s cross, the sergeant told Gardner that they do not know what happened that day and whether or not self-defense was a factor.

After the jury was excused, parties discussed the victims mental health and the use of his mental health records. Judge Dayson noted that case law surrounding this topic is specific.

The defense characterized the victim’s behavior as “bizarre” and noted that during an emergency room visit, he was referred to the community resource team for people with mental health crises. Elizabeth White, Ocran’s attorney, stated that the victim was suffering from a mental health episode.

Prosecutors argued that the defense cannot use the records while the defense stated that they would only be used if they’re allowed and if the witness denies a history of mental health issues.

A ruling on the matter was not made.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 8.

Olivia Swaney and Skye Faison

Prosecutor’s Failure to Indict Carjacking Case Leads to Defendant’s Release

A carjacking defendant was placed on supervised release after prosecutors failed to file an indictment in time before DC Superior Court Judge Carmen McLean on Sept. 23.

Paquette Deshazier, 19, is charged with armed carjacking, armed robbery, and two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a carjacking incident on the 2000 block of Benning Road, NE on May 13.

According to court documents, Deshazier allegedly stole the victims’ keys and wallet at gunpoint before driving away in the victim’s car.

Prosecutors in Deshazier’s case were previously given a 30 day indictment extension and were supposed to come to the Sept. 23 hearing with an indictment prepared.

The assigned prosecutor requested another extension. She told the Judge McLean that she had recently parachuted into the case after the original prosecutor dropped it for medical reasons and was not aware that she needed to have an indictment filed before the hearing.

Judge McLean rejected the notion that the prosecution did not have enough time or information to prepare an indictment. She noted that the court had already held Deshazier for 90 days and that adding another 30 would be excessive.

“It’s not like this deadline began last hearing,” Judge McLean said. She also noted that the onus was on the prosecutor to familiarize herself with the case and prepare accordingly. An extension was not granted.

Deshazier’s attorney, Joseph Fay, asked for the court to release Deshazier.

The prosecution objected to release, but Judge McLean granted the motion under the conditions of 24-hour home confinement and GPS monitoring. She set a $100 cash bond for Deshazier.

Parties are slated to reconvene Oct. 16.

Defendant Pleads Guilty to Stabbing Case Involving Her Daughter

A defendant accepted a pleaded guilty to stabbing her daughter in front of DC Superior Court Judge Robert Salerno on Sept. 18.

Denise Warren, 58, was originally charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for her involvement in a stabbing that occurred on Sept. 1 at the 3500 Block of East Capitol Street, NE.

Warren pleaded guilty to one count of attempted assault with a dangerous weapon. In return, parties discussed the potential for a suspended sentence and reserved the right to make sentencing allocation.

According to the prosecution, if the case had gone to trial, they would have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that on Sept. 1 Warren attempted to assault her daughter with a kitchen knife because she became upset. The prosecution said Warren’s actions were deliberate and unprovoked, with no legal justification or mitigating factors.

After accepting the plea, Warren, through her attorney, expressed remorse, stating that she was “very sorry it happened.” She explained that she had recently received a housing voucher and requested that the prosecution consider suspending her sentence so she could obtain her own home.

The prosecution did not object and confirmed that probation would be available to her.

Sentencing is slated to be on Nov. 19.

Judge Sentences Defendant to 18 Months in Prison for Jailhouse Stabbing

D.C. Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro sentenced a jailhouse stabbing defendant to 18 months in prison on Sept. 30.

On Aug. 28, Daymark Baird, 21, pleaded guilty to assault with significant bodily injury for his involvement in stabbing an inmate on the 1900 block D Street, SE on April 17.

The prosecution asked for 18 months, to run consecutively, to sentences in two unrelated matters, arguing for incarceration because Baird has multiple cases in Maryland and DC and supervision hasn’t worked in the past.

Regarding the stabbing, the prosecution claimed that Baird wanted the assault at the jail to occur and wanted “maximum pain” for the victim because the victim was allegedly from a rival crew.

The prosecution opposed sentencing under the Youth Rehabilitation Act (YRA), which allows people under 25 who are convicted of certain crimes to have their convictions sealed or cleared after they successfully complete their sentence. The youth police also potentially offers sentencing flexibility.

Defense counsel Chidi Ogolo claimed to understand the prosecution’s concern, however, asked Judge Di Toro for an opportunity for Baird to improve himself.

Ogolo claimed that Baird had time to think about his past and has matured by acknowledging that he can’t be mad at his absent father and single working mother. Ogolo argued that Baird has aspirations to be a welder, however, hasn’t gotten his high school diploma.

The defense attorney asked Judge Di Toro to fashion a sentence that would allow Baird to get his GED, find a job, and get a stable place to live, requesting the defendant be sentenced under the YRA.

Ogolo also said the incident at the jail may have been an “attempt to get along with friends”. Ogolo claimed that Baird was susceptible to crime because of his youth.

Judge Di Toro denied the defense’s request to sentence Baird according to the YRA because his cases are becoming violent and aggressive. However, she argued it wouldn’t be appropriate to sentence Baird at the top of the sentencing guidelines either due to mental health issues.

Judge Di Toro imposed an 18 month sentence, with five years of supervised release, and $100 to the victims of violent crime fund. Baird’s sentence is set to run consecutively to any other sentence he is required to serve.

On supervised release, Judge Di Toro ordered Baird to get his GED or vocational training, transitional housing, mental health treatment, and substance abuse treatment.

Judge Adds Drug Treatment To Release Conditions For Stabbing Defendant

D.C. Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro modified a stabbing defendant’s release conditions to include substance abuse treatment on Sept. 30.

Anthony Jacobs, 59, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for allegedly stabbing a person in the abdomen on the 1300 block of Howard Road, SE on Aug. 28.

A Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) representative revealed that Jacobs has failed to check in with PSA, verify his address, and tested positive for PCP. The representative recommended Judge Di Toro add substance abuse treatment to Jacobs’ release conditions.

The prosecution agreed with this addition and Judge Di Toro informed Jacobs that community safety is negatively affected by drug use, reminding him to comply with all conditions.

Judge Di Toro added substance abuse treatment to Jacobs’ release conditions.

The parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 15.

Homicide Defendant Gets Mental Competence Evaluation

DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson ordered a mental competence evaluation for a homicide defendant in a hearing on Sept. 26.

Jordan Therman, 26, is charged with armed robbery, three counts of firearm possession during a crime of violence, felony first-degree murder while armed, premeditated first-degree murder while armed, and unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction for his alleged involvement in the shooting of Denzel Greenwood, 33, on the 1900 block of 13th Street, NW on Aug. 4, 2023.

He is also charged with two counts of assault with the intent to kill while armed, four counts of firearm possession during a crime of violence, aggravated assault while armed, unlawful possession of a firearm with a prior conviction, and endangerment with a firearm for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting incident that wounded an individual on the 3900 block Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue, SW on Feb. 7, 2024.

The prosecution extended a plea offer for assault with a dangerous weapon for the non-fatal shooting and second-degree murder for the homicide. If Therman pleaded guilty, the prosecution would dismiss the other charges. Additional terms of the plea offer were unspecified.

When asked if he had discussed the plea offer with his attorney, Therman didn’t answer, leading Judge Dayson to acquiesce to defense attorney Thomas Key’s request for a mental competence evaluation.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Oct. 3.

Plea Enables Stabbing Defendant to Continue Substance Abuse Treatment

A stabbing defendant pleaded guilty and received a suspended sentence with substance abuse treatment after she spoke to DC Superior Court Judge Jennifer Di Toro on Sept. 29 about her willingness to get help to control her alcohol abuse issues.

Saundra Berry, 57, was originally charged with assault with a dangerous weapon and simple assault for her involvement in a stabbing that occurred Sept. 7 on the 200 block of N Street, SW.

Berry accepted a plea deal that involved the stabbing and her other misdemeanor cases. She pleaded guilty to possession of a prohibited weapon and simple assault and prosecutors dismissed the assault with a dangerous weapon charge. The maximum sentence for possession of a prohibited weapon is one year in prison and six months for simple assault.

Berry’s defense attorney, David Akulian, requested that Berry’s incarceration be suspended, so she could get supervised probation and continue getting mental health and substance abuse treatment.

He said he believes the underlying issue in the incidents was Berry’s alcohol dependency. This dependency was clear, said Akulian, from body-worn camera footage of Berry refusing to give a can of beer to a uniformed officer during a separate incident.

The prosecution requested Berry serve the maximum sentences, with 18 months of supervised probation upon her release. The prosecution requested this length of time due to Berry’s past behavior of threatening and assaulting others.

According to court documents, the incident occurred at Berry’s apartment, where a verbal dispute between the victim and Berry escalated. Berry then struck the victim with a kitchen knife on the finger and bit a second victim who was attempting to restrain her during the altercation.

Berry expressed her regrets and her desire to handle her problem with alcohol. She acknowledged that she needed to get the problem under control to prevent future incidents.

Judge Di Toro sentenced Berry to six months in prison, suspending the entire duration, and 18 months of supervised probation. Berry will continue substance abuse treatment with Prestige Healthcare.

No further dates were scheduled in this case.

Judge Modifies Non-Fatal Shooting Defendant’s Release

DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel modified the release conditions of a non-fatal shooting defendant on Oct. 1.

Davian Raines, 20, is charged with three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon and one count of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting. The incident occurred on the 900 block of U Street, NW on May 11. Three individuals sustained injuries.

During the hearing, Raines’ attorney, Todd Baldwin, made representations to Judge Israel that were not disclosed to the public. Following the representations, Judge Israel stated that Raines’ release would be switched from home confinement to a curfew with GPS monitoring. All other conditions remain the same.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Nov. 14.

Search