Defense Attorney And Victim Argue in Shooting Trial

A victim argued with a defense attorney in the ongoing trial of a shooting defendant before DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman on Oct. 1.

Nigel Pulliam, 32, also known as “Michi,” 27, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, two counts of assault with intent to commit robbery while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, five counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, two counts of carrying a dangerous weapon outside home or business, two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm, two counts of possession of an unregistered firearm, two counts of unlawful possession of ammunition, for his alleged involvement in two separate 2022 shootings: an alleged highway drive-by on Aug. 29, 2022, and a September 23, 2022, shooting outside an apartment on the 2100 block of Benning Road, NE.

Prosecutors introduced surveillance footage from Aug. 29, 2022, showing a person said to be Pulliam in a store before returning to a vehicle, followed by later video capturing gunfire. Law enforcement also verified photographs of Pulliam as the suspect.

The victim testified under subpoena, recounting that he had received text messages from Pulliam about a firearm the day before the shooting. The victim also described Pulliam pressing a pistol against his side and later being shot in a drive-by. The victim admitted he did not call the police immediately, saying he “didn’t have time.”

During cross-examination, defense attorney Sara Kopecki highlighted how the victim did not disclose all details of the incident to the police while in the hospital, suggesting he was untruthful during the initial investigation, the grand jury process, and his current testimony. When confronted, the victim acknowledged the error, telling Kopecki, “You did good; you got that one. I made a mistake.”

Questioning by Kopecki quickly became heated, marked by aggressive exchanges and repeated objections.

The victim testified that he went to get medical attention on his own after sustaining a gunshot wound in the incident on Aug. 29, 2022. Surveillance footage from United Medical Center was introduced, showing him attempting to walk out of the hospital.

When asked by the defense whether he was trying to leave to avoid law enforcement, the victim responded firmly, “Hell no.” When the question was repeated, he added, “You can’t be that dumb. Hell no.”

Much of the defense’s questioning focused on why the victim did not initially disclose the involvement of an individual known as “Michi” during police interviews. The victim admitted to withholding information, stating that he was disoriented, in pain, and concerned about incriminating himself.

“I said what I said just to get them out of my face,” he testified. “My opportunity is now… I am telling the truth right now under oath.”

The tone escalated when Kopecki pressed him on perceived inconsistencies, prompting the victim to exclaim, “You are acting like him [the defendant], a d***!” The outburst led to a momentary pause as the court restored order.

The victim also admitted under oath that he had lied to law enforcement during initial interviews, citing confusion and emotional distress in the aftermath of the shooting. He described struggling to recall specific details and expressed frustration at the repetition of the defense questioning.

Following the victim’s testimony, the prosecution called the victim’s close friend, a longtime acquaintance of both the victim and the defendant. He testified that he had previously acted as a mediator during a dispute involving the victim and the defendant, though he claimed to have limited recollection of events due to past drug use and ongoing medication.

He stated he did not recognize the defendant in the courtroom.

Parties are slated to resume the trial on Oct. 6.

Witness Says She Was Threatened Not to Testify in Shooting Trial

A jury trial for a shooting defendant began with the defense raising concerns it should have received important evidence from the prosecution. Meanwhile, a prosecution witness implied her life was threatened if she took the stand. The proceeding was before DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe on Oct. 1.

Dominick Jackson, 41, was charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, assault with significant bodily injury while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, unlawful possession of a firearm in an intrafamily offense, and obstructing justice by attempting to influence or delay a witness or officer.

These charges stem from an incident that occurred Nov. 20, 2022 on the 700 block of 12th Street, NE, leaving one individual with gunshot wounds.

According to court documents, eight gunshots were heard and four shell casings were discovered at the scene. Responding officers from the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) noticed damage to a vehicle and learned that there was a victim who was transported to a local hospital for the treatment of non-life-threatening injuries.

Defense attorney Kevin Robertson said he had not received any paperwork from the prosecution indicating that an eyewitness failed to appear before the grand jury and did not cooperate with prosecutors.

Further, prosecutors had not documented they allegedly threatened the witness with a warrant for failing to cooperate.

Judge Pipe concluded the prosecution violated what’s known as the Brady rule for not communicating this information.

The rule requires prosecutors to disclose potentially exculpatory material to the defensef.

Judge Pipe said prosecutors are responsible for disclosing that their “critical, key witness … refuses to cooperate.”

In response, prosecutors argued that whether this information is important enough to turn over is “subjective.”

“Her stated reason is not dispositive,” Judge Pipe said, ultimately inconclusive.

The judge clarified she will not require the prosecution to provide every phone call, but they must tell the defense whenever they resort to different means.

Robertson said he told the witness not to mention during his testimony that he met the defendant in jail because it is irrelevant. Judge Pipe agreed.

Roberston said prosecutors planned to show the jury footage of the victim in which “they’re cutting his clothes off. He’s naked.”

Jude Pipe appeared surprised and asked the prosecutors whether they planned to do so, adding she did not think the victim would want that clip to be shown in front of the jury. The judge asked the prosecution to redact that portion of the footage.

During the opening statements, the prosecution claimed that Jackson shot into the victim’s car multiple times, injuring the victim’s legs. The prosecution stated they had Ring camera footage which was somewhat blocked by trees, but still clear enough to suggest Jackson could be found guilty. They also highlighted that Jackson, the victim, and the eyewitness were the only people at the crime scene.

Further, the prosecution stated the witnesses they planned to bring in, including the victim, an eyewitness, and doctors who treated the victim, among others.

They insisted all evidence would prove Jackson’s guilt.

However, Robertson argued that the prosecution’s statements were purely theoretical, saying “They weren’t there,” and that their case was built almost entirely on two witnesses. He claimed they had very little independent evidence, highlighting a lack of DNA, fingerprints, or cell location data evidence.

Robertson claimed that the victim is a known drug dealer and possibly abuser. He argued that a proper investigation into the crime could have removed Jackson from the situation, but that the prosecution didn’t follow through.

The prosecution called on an eyewitness who used to date Jackson. She said she has two children with Jackson, but stopped dating him sometime in 2021 and lost contact after the incident in 2022.

She first noted that she did not want to testify and that she was forced to be at trial. She later elaborated that she struggled to testify against the father of her two kids.

The witness claimed she was good friends with the victim. She said she visited him multiple times during his time in the hospital and took him in during his recovery. She said she had no relationship with the victim beyond being good friends.

When asked about the incident, the witness said she was cooking a meal for her kids as Jackson was on his way to drop them off. She got a call from the victim at one point who said he wanted to visit. She told the victim that he shouldn’t come over, fearing an altercation between him and Jackson. The victim visited anyway.

The witness and Jackson were both heading outside as the victim arrived. The witness turned around to go back inside to get her phone when she heard gunshots behind her. When she turned back, she said she saw the victim’s car driving away and Jackson fumble something in his hands as he returned to his car. She could not tell what the item was.

The prosecution asked if the witness recalled getting a voicemail from Jackson in which he allegedly threatened the victim. She said she did not, so the prosecution played a recording of it for her. In the voicemail, Jackson can be heard threatening to harm someone – which the prosecution claimed was aimed at the victim.

The witness remembered it afterward, and required a short break to calm down.

Once she returned, the prosecution asked if the witness was threatened against testifying and if that was why she didn’t want to testify. The witness agreed she was threatened, and testified Jackson was the one that told her not to testify.

The prosecution asked if she recalled the exact threat. She recalled Jackson saying “Snitches get stitches, and bitches end up in ditches.” She said she did not take the threat seriously at the time.

Due to time constraints, the witness’ testimony was not concluded.

Parties are slated to reconvene Oct. 2.

Prosecutors Claim Shooting Defendant Wanted Revenge For Robbery

A jury heard closing statements about a non-fatal shooting before DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel on Oct. 1 that was characterized as either in revenge or self-defense.

Daquan Toland, 25, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, possession of unregistered firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition, and carrying a pistol without a license outside of home or business.

The charges are in connection to his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on the 1100 block of 4th Street, SW on June 2. One individual sustained injuries.

In their closing statement, the prosecution claimed that Toland provoked a violent shootout with two unidentified individuals. They stated that they know the shooter in white on surveillance footage is Toland because they tracked him in the video.

The footage included many “costume changes” and included Toland’s arrest after he came out of the Gallery Place Metro Station. During his arrest the police said that Toland had a firearm, according to prosecutors. Cartridge casings from the scene suggest that the firearm was used during the shooting.

Prosecutors also insisted that the victim was shot by Toland because the trajectory from where Toland was shooting in the footage matches the location of the victim.

Prosecutors maintained that Toland did not act in self-defense, rather he intentionally provoked the other shooters and was looking for a fight.

The prosecution stated that Toland’s mother saw him on a bike and he was angry and upset about being robbed earlier in the day. They said his mother wanted him to go to the police, but he ignored her, armed himself, and went looking for the people who allegedly robbed him. Prosecutors played an audio recording of Toland on the phone with his mother allegedly stating that he went home and got a gun.

Surveillance footage of Toland on a bike allegedly “searching” for the robbers about 20 minutes before the shooting was played for the jury. When coming into contact with the individuals who allegedly robbed him, prosecutors claimed that Toland reached for his firearm and the two began backing up. Prosecutors argued that the defendant could’ve retreated, but was the first aggressor.

The prosecutors stated that they previously established that Toland was not licensed to carry a pistol and was in possession of an unregistered firearm and ammunition. They also stated that the assault charges are “transferred intent,” meaning that even if Toland intended to harm someone but accidentally harmed someone else, the intent for that individual still applies to the unintended victim.

Prosecutors also mentioned concurrent intent, meaning that by firing multiple shots Toland created a zone of danger and it can be inferred that he intended to harm everyone in that zone.

In the defense’s closing statements, Henry Druschel, Toland’s attorney, stated that Toland did not shoot first and was ambushed by the two men that robbed him previously. Shots were fired at Toland before he raised his gun, according to Druschel.

Druschel argued that the prosecution changed their story, going from Toland seeking revenge to Toland provoking an attack. He asserted that neither story had supportive evidence.

He argued that the prosecution did not present any evidence regarding the robbery and that Toland was defending himself as the law allows him to.

Regarding the firearm, Druschel asserted that Toland obtained a gun because he was scared and in imminent danger, noting that he only used the weapon after he was shot at first.

He also noted that it doesn’t make sense that Toland would know the two men would be in that location, since there has been no evidence about where the robbery took place. Toland’s mother said he went to a place where he usually hangs out and Druschel noted that Toland did not see the individuals who robbed him.

Druschel argued that Toland was just a young man on a bike and the prosecution tried to make that seem nefarious. What did seem nefarious, according to Druschel, was the other two men walking around with their hands on their waistbands, presumably where their firearms were located.

According to Druschel, the two men spotted Toland, hid from his line of sight, and then waited for him. He noted that it’s normal for a parent to want to keep their child safe or close after something bad has happened to them, but what a mother wants her son to do does not always happen. Toland was not required to stay home after being robbed.

Additionally, the investigation into the robbery was handled poorly with a detective testifying that they did not investigate the robbery because it wasn’t their job, according to Druschel.

Regarding the phone calls, Druschel noted that you don’t hear Toland say that he was looking for the people who robbed him.

Druschel also stated that the prosecution was “cherry picking” evidence as they did not show the jury what happened before the shooting and primarily focused on Toland in the footage. Footage played for the jury said to show two men backing up while drawing their guns, one of them allegedly shooting at Toland before he raised his firearm.

The multiple witnesses called by the prosecution did not advance the jury’s understanding of what led to the shooting, said Druschel. The prosecution also only talked about six shell casings consistent with Toland’s firearm but ignored 11 casings connected to the other firearms.

Druschel claimed that a complete and thorough investigation was not done as the lead detective did not interview every witness, which they testified is usually the case.

Druschel asserted that the prosecutors are looking at everything Toland does through a lens of guilt. He reminded the jury that their role is to review Toland’s actions with the presumption of innocence. He urged the jury to consider Toland’s perspective as he was not able to pause or rewind, he had to make a decision in seconds. He urged the jury to find Toland not guilty.

Regarding their change of story, prosecutors stated that their account has not changed and they still maintain that Toland was out for revenge.

Prosecutors also asserted that they embrace the burden of proof and that they still have to establish their case even if the defense is not contesting certain things.

With regards to witnesses, the prosecution claimed that one witness testified about the direction of gunfire and another witness said they heard shooting and identified the person in the surveillance footage.

Concerning the investigation, prosecutors noted that the detective’s focus was the shooting. They stated that Toland did not deserve to be robbed but that did not give him the right to take justice into his own hands. They also claimed that the detective wasn’t able to fully investigate the robbery because Toland did not report it and that the detective was not required to speak to every witness.

The prosecution also insisted that Druschel made “inflammatory statements” to distract from the case. They argued that the victim possessed a firearm even before the robbery. They stated that he was riding his bike around Waterfront 20 minutes before the shooting, he was in no imminent harm.

Prosecutors stated that the other two men weren’t blameless and their actions are still being investigated. However, they maintained that Toland was the provocateur and the first aggressor and had the opportunity to retreat.

Following closing statements final jury instructions were given.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Oct. 2.

Witness Spars With Judge, Prosecutor in Teen Homicide Trial

A reluctant witness delivered heated testimony in a homicide trial before DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt on Oct. 1.

Reginald Steele, 26, is charged with conspiracy, first-degree murder, ten counts of assault with intent to kill while armed, assault with a dangerous weapon, 11 counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, four counts of carrying a pistol without a license, five counts of possession of an unregistered firearm, and two counts of tampering with physical evidence.

The counts stem from Steele’s alleged involvement in four separate shootings including the murder of 13-year-old Malachi Lukes and injury of another juvenile on March 1, 2020, on the 600 block of S Street, NW. Steele’s accused of a separate shooting the same day with no reported injuries on the unit block of Channing Street, NE.

Steele is also accused of include a non-fatal shooting that injured two individuals on Feb. 22, 2020 on the 700 block of Farragut Street, NW, and a non-fatal shooting that injured three on Feb. 24, 2020 on the 1700 block of 9th Street, NW.

Arrested by US Marshals and compelled to testify, the handcuffed witness was brought into the courtroom. As the questioning proceeded he became increasingly combative to the prosecution and the judge.

When asked if he wanted to be in court, the witness stated, “I ain’t got no choice but to be here.”

He continued, “Y’all swarmed me like I was a suspect or something.”

At one point, Judge Brandt threatened to remove have him stating “I’m holding the pen that’s keeping you locked up, the longer you make this take, the longer you will be locked up.”

The witness ranted against the proceedings calling a prosecutor a b****, while being escorted out of the courtroom.

Judge Brandt responded, “I do not tolerate disrespect in my courtroom.” She said when you are disrespecting the prosecutor, “You are disrespecting me.”

During his testimony, the witness was able to identify images of Steele as “Gordo”, and a co-defendant who has already been sentenced in this case, Tyiion Freeman, 26. The witness also confirmed the identity of 19-year-old rapper Tahlil Byrd. calling him “that dead guy you keep asking about.” Byrd, also known as the NW Goon, was killed on Sept. 29, 2019 which may have triggered the mass shooting in retaliation as part of an ongoing feud with the 9th Street crew.

Steele and his alleged co-conspirators are said to belong to the 3500 crew, a criminal gang according to the prosecution.

With the jury in the room, the witness was asked about his relationship with Freeman. He explained that Freeman lived with him a few times around 2020.

The witness also said that he would take Freeman to his girlfriend’s house, but does not remember her name. In his grand jury testimony, he reportedly identified Freeman’s girlfriend by a nickname.

When asked about the relationship between Freeman and Byrd, the witness confirmed that they were best friends.

The witness claimed he was informed about Byrd’s death through a video in which he heard Byrd screaming and the sound of gunshots.

The prosecution asked the witness if he was aware of any feuds between 9th Street crew and the 3500 block crew. The witness said he was unaware of any conflicts.

However, in his grand jury testimony, the witness explained, “You all know it’s a war zone, you all know it’s a conflict, that’s common sense,” allegedly referring to the beef between 9th Street and the 3500 block crews.

But during his testimony the witness claimed, “I was talking about Northwest. I ain’t say nothing about 9th Street.”

Additionally, the prosecution also asked the witness about a phone when the witness told a prosecutor that she ruined his reputation in the streets.

The witness denied ever saying that .

Parties are slated to reconvene Oct. 2.

Judge Orders Full Mental Exam For Stabbing Defendant

DC Superior Court Judge Errol Arthur ordered a full competency evaluation for a defendant accused of stabbing his stepfather on Oct. 6.

Darryen Kenney, 24, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon for his alleged involvement in a domestic violence related non-fatal stabbing on Aug. 23 on the 3400 block of 18th Street, SE.

According to court documents, Kenney and his stepfather were allegedly in a verbal argument that escalated into a physical altercation during which Kenney reportedly cut his stepfather with a knife. The stepfather sustained a severe laceration to his hand.

Judge Arthur granted Kenney’s defense attorney, Sharon Weathers’ request for a preliminary competency screening on Sept. 23.

Following a discussion with parties at the bench, Judge Arthur ordered Kenney undergo a full competency examination. The judge also ordered Kenney’s transfer from the DC Jail to Saint Elizabeths Hospital. To stand trial, a defendant must understand his charges and be able to help his attorney.

Parties are scheduled to reconvene on Nov. 4.

Homicide Defendant Deemed Incompetent to Stand Trial, Restoration Ordered

DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman ordered a homicide defendant undergo competency restoration on Oct. 3, after receiving a report from the Department of Behavioral Health (DBH) that initially concluded he was incompetent to stand trial.

D’Aundrey Scott, 31, is charged with first-degree murder, assault with intent to kill, and two counts of arson after allegedly igniting multiple fires on May 13, 2020 on the 900 block of H Street, NE. 62-year-old Darryl Finney died from burns on May 15, 2020, from a firebomb that Scott allegedly threw at him.

The DBH report said that Scott was unable to understand the complexities of his own case, but claimed that Scott’s competency could be restored, if transferred for treatment to Saint Elizabeths Hospital for DC psychiatric patients..

Jesse Winogard, Scott’s defense attorney, stated that DBH’s report was not just about Scott’s competency, but also about the possibility of using a Not Guilty By Reason of Insanity (NGRI) defense. Winogard said that in Scott’s current state, it had been difficult to communicate the pro’s and con’s of the NGRI defense with his client, meaning he would claim he didn’t know right from wrong when commiting the crime and couldn’t conform his conduct to the law.

Judge Edelman ordered that Scott, therefore, be transferred from his current placement in the Central Treatment Facility (CTF) at DC Jail, and undergo treatment for competency restoration. All previously scheduled dates were also vacated until when and if Scott’s competency is restored.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Nov. 14.

Judge Finds Probable Cause in Fatal Stabbing, Rape Case

DC Superior Court Judge Rainey Brandt found probable cause that a defendant was the perpetrator in a homicide incident during a hearing on Sept. 29. .

George Mudd, 71, is charged with first-degree murder while armed for his alleged involvement in the fatal stabbing of 24-year-old Susan Cvengros on May 21, 1999, on the 400 block of F Street, NE.

According to court documents, Mudd entered Cvengros’ apartment, raped and stabbed her 13 times in the neck and torso. His DNA was allegedly found on her vagina and nightgown.

During the hearing, Judge Brandt alerted the parties that she found probable cause for Mudd’s involvement in Cvengros’ fatal stabbing, citing seven different factors, including his DNA evidence allegedly recovered from her body, the fact that Mudd lived near the scene of the crime, and Mudd’s reported habit of getting high and grabbing a knife while under the influence.

Judge Brandt cited a Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) detective’s testimony, who stated that they knew that Cvengros was seeing a man from Massachusetts, and would practice safe sex due to a fear of contracting HIV.

The defense called on an investigative specialist working for the Public Defenders Service, who stated that an ex-boyfriend of Cvengros, who lived in Baltimore, had threatened to kill her between 1997 and 1998.

During arguments, the prosecution hammered at the fact that Mudd’s DNA had an extremely high probability of being on Cvengros’ vaginal wall and on her nightgown.

They also brought up Mudd’s prior convictions in 2000 and 2004 for similar crimes relating to assaulting women with “pointy objects.”

Mudd’s attorney, Terrence Austin, stated that since the DNA evidence was found to be a match in 2012, the prosecution was relying on one piece of evidence, compared to the numerous other things that could point to someone else, and argued that the prosecution did not have probable cause.

During arguments for release, Austin argued that since Mudd is 71 years old, has a variety of health problems, and has been out of trouble for the better part of a decade, along with the fact that a trial is far out in advance, Mudd should be released from jail.

The prosecution argued that since Mudd had committed two similar crimes in 2000 and 2004, and had been arrested for a DUI in 2019, Mudd should be held for now.

Judge Brandt ordered Mudd to remain held pending further procedures.

Parties are slated to reconvene on Dec. 9.

Unplugged Car Charger Dispute Turns Into a Shooting

The defense attorney for a shooting defendant argued that he acted in self-defense during opening statements on Oct. 6, before DC Superior Court Judge Danya Dayson.

Ato Ocran, 46, is charged with assault with intent to kill while armed, aggravated assault knowingly while armed, two counts of assault with a dangerous weapon, five counts of possession of an unregistered firearm, four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, destruction of property worth $1,000 or more, and carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business for his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting that occurred on the 2200 block of 13th Street, NE, on June 3.

One person was harmed during the incident.

During openings, the prosecution argued that Ocran intended to kill the victim in what started as an argument over an electric vehicle charging station near the Giant supermarket at Rhode Island Place in Northeast, DC.

The prosecution claimed that Ocran unplugged the charger that was in the victim’s red Nissan LEAF. The victim confronted Ocran which led to a physical altercation. The prosecution claimed that the victim was in possession of a golf club but never struck Ocran with it.

The victim claimed he heard Ocran say, “I’m gonna get my gun,” and proceeded to the trunk of his blue Tesla, according to the prosecution. The victim said he kicked at the door of Ocran’s vehicle to prevent him from retrieving his firearm.

The conflict seemingly fizzled out when both men reportedly got into their vehicles and left the parking lot. However, when both vehicles approached each other at 10th Street, NE, the prosecution claimed that Ocran fired four gunshots into the victim’s vehicle. One bullet entered the victim’s shoulder. Another man that was sitting in the passenger’s seat of the victim’s car was not injured. However, the prosecution claimed that Ocran aimed for the victim’s head.

The prosecution argued, “shooting point blank at someone’s head is a deadly force.”

Although there was video footage of the altercation that occurred in the parking lot, no video of the shooting has been found, according to the prosecution.

Defense attorney Kevann Gardner argued that Ocran never fired a gun until he was “hunted down, cornered, and was about to be shot.” Gardner stated that Ocran acted in self-defense.

Gardner claimed that Ocran was charging his vehicle first. Ocran then received an alert on his phone that indicated his vehicle was no longer charging. Gardner claimed Ocran got on his scooter, traveled to the charging station, and saw that the victim had removed the charger from Ocran’s vehicle and plugged it into the victim’s Nissan LEAF.

Gardner claimed that Ocran removed the charger from the victim’s vehicle and plugged it back into his Tesla.

The victim approached Ocran in a gold Jeep Liberty and started yelling at him, according to the defense. Gardner claimed that once his car was parked, the victim approached Ocran, still yelling, and punched Ocran in the face.

Ocran walked back to his vehicle and the victim followed him, claimed Gardner. Moments later, the victim approached Ocran while in possession of a golf club. Gardner argued, “you bring in a golf club to knock someone’s head off.”

Gardner claimed that the victim ran up and kicked Ocran’s vehicle as he drove away.

While driving, Ocran claimed he saw the victim’s Jeep speeding towards him in his rearview mirror, according to Gardner. Ocran then sped through a yellow light. However, Gardner claimed that the victim took an alternate route and met Ocran on 10th Street with both vehicles facing each other.

Gardner claimed that the victim drove toward Ocran’s car and got out while in possession of a firearm. Ocran tried to reverse his vehicle until he no longer could. The victim got back in his vehicle and drove towards Ocran, which is when Ocran got his gun and shot at the victim’s vehicle, Gardner stated.

Gardner claimed that Ocran is innocent for three reasons.

First, Gardner claimed that Ocran was trying to leave the situation, but the victim did not let him.

Second, the victim used anything he could get his hands on as a weapon, which consisted of his fist, a golf club, gun, and a knife that was in his vehicle. Gardner emphasized that Ocran never grabbed his firearm until after the victim drew his gun on Ocran.

Lastly, the prosecution’s inadequate investigation in this case, in which they never collected and preserved key evidence such as the victim’s golf club, gun, and knife.

Additionally, Gardner argued that there were eyewitnesses in the parking lot and on 10th Street, who the prosecution did not ask to testify in court. Instead, the prosecution asked three individuals, who live with Ocran, to testify in court.

Gardner also mentioned that the victim did not go to the hospital or call 9-1-1 after the shooting.

Earlier, the prosecution explained that the victim went to his old neighborhood to look for a gun after the shooting. However, Gardner argued that the victim went to the neighborhood to dispose of the gun, and if the police caught the victim in possession of a firearm, then he would have been sent to prison due to his prior felony convictions.

Prosecutors called in the victim’s girlfriend to testify. The woman said that on June 3, she worked customer service at Home Depot, located in the same parking lot where the altercation occurred.

The victim’s girlfriend confirmed that she was the owner of the red Nissan LEAF and the gold Jeep Liberty.

The victim’s girlfriend could not recall what time her shift ended but said her boyfriend, the victim, dropped her off at home and she told him to go charge her red Nissan LEAF at the Giant charging station.

At the time, only one of two charging stations were operating.

The victim’s girlfriend said that it takes one to two hours to charge the vehicle.

The victim’s girlfriend said she called the victim to check on him. He responded, “he took the car off the charger again.” The victim did not specify who he was talking about.

The victim’s girlfriend said she recalled hearing the victim say, “Can you put my car back on the charger?” While she remained on the phone with the victim, she heard profanity as the confrontation escalated. Eventually, she heard a lot of movement, which she said sounded like tussling.

The victim’s girlfriend testified that she told her daughter, who was in the room next door, “I think dad is fighting,” and sent her to the parking lot.

The victim’s girlfriend said that she was in bed at home but received a ride from a neighbor to the parking lot since the victim had driven her gold Jeep Liberty.

Shortly after, the victim’s girlfriend received a phone call from the victim who said, “come pick me up, I got shot.” The woman she said thought the victim was joking. She explained, “If a person gets shot you would think they would be screaming or something.”

The prosecution asked the victim’s girlfriend why she kept a golf club in her Jeep Liberty. The woman answered, “We live in a rough neighborhood. That’s my protection, I’m sorry.”

In her grand jury testimony, the victim’s girlfriend claimed that there were no weapons inside the Jeep Liberty. However, in addition to the golf club, photographs showed a knife in the pocket of the driver side door.

During defense attorney Elizabeth Paige White’s cross-examination with the victim’s girlfriend, she confirmed that she was not present in the parking lot during the altercation, nor did she see the shooting. The woman said that everything she heard came from the victim, her brother, and her daughter, who also did not see most of the fight or the shooting.

The victim’s girlfriend said that the victim told her that Ocran, who he described as “the other guy,” took the charger out of her car– therefore, the woman believed that the charger was in her car first.

The witness also told Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officers that she charged the car. The woman explained that there was a lot going on and she was very confused. ”

The man testified that on the day of the incident, he went to the Giant parking lot because his niece, his sister’s older daughter, told him that the victim was involved in a fight.

Upon arrival, the man saw the victim and Ocran “squared up” like they were ready to fight. The man claimed that he did not see anyone swing but confirmed that the victim kicked Ocran’s car and was in possession of a golf club.

Once Ocran drove away, the victim was upset and said he was going to follow Ocran, according to the witness.

The witness offered to ride in the car with the victim and got in the passenger’s seat of the Jeep Liberty. When asked by the prosecution why he decided to ride with the victim, the witness answered “to make sure he was straight.”

The witness claimed that the victim took an alternate route and came face to face with Ocran’s Tesla on 10th Street. According to the witness, the victim pulled in front of Ocran’s vehicle, reversed, and then parked beside it.

Afterwards, Ocran shot at the victim’s car, according to the witness.

The witness said that the bullets flew across his face, and he emphasized, “I could’ve been dead that day.”

Parties are slated to reconvene Oct. 7.

Shooting Victim Granted Immunity Before Delivering Challenged Testimony

A victim in a shooting trial was granted immunity by prosecutors before giving a questionable testimony that left out key details of the shooting before DC Superior Court Judge Judith Pipe on Oct. 6.

Dominick Jackson, 41, is charged with assault with a dangerous weapon, possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and unlawful possession of a firearm for his alleged involvement in a shooting that occurred on Nov. 20, 2022, on the 700 block of 12th Street, NE. One person was injured during the incident.

At the beginning of the hearing, prosecutors disclosed that the victim had been granted immunity, protecting him from criminal prosecution in a separate drug possession and distribution case, if questioned about it.

Judge Pipe criticized prosecutors for springing the victim’s immunity on defense attorney Kevin Robertson the morning the victim was set to testify, saying that they had ample time over the weekend to share the information. Despite the last-minute notice, Judge Pipe allowed the victim to testify under immunity.

Continuing with cross-examination, the defense referenced the last conversation before the trial was paused. They discussed previous charges, penalties, and locations, questioning how those issues could be addressed now that the victim said that he had received immunity in a prior 2024 case and downplayed concerns about going to jail.

Robertson argued the victim’s testimony was motivated by self-interest and highlighted gaps in the victim’s memory, which the victim attributed to drugs and hospital medication. The victim couldn’t recall key details of the shooting or who shot him during his testimony, though he previously identified the defendant to police and in grand jury testimony.

Prosecutors called to the stand the trauma surgeon who treated the victim immediately after the shooting. He confirmed the victim arrived in critical condition with a gunshot wound, underwent emergency surgery, and later treatment revealed a serious pelvic injury. He testified that medications could have caused confusion or memory loss. Robertson used the doctor’s statements about confusion and memory loss to question the reliability of the victim’s statements.

Judge Pipe expressed frustration with the prosecution’s approach, questioning why the trial was proceeding at all if the prosecution had failed to conduct a thorough investigation, particularly given the possibility that other individuals, including known enemies of the victim, could have been responsible for the shooting.

She emphasized that the prosecution bears the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and suggested that neglecting to pursue alternative suspects undermined that obligation.

A forensic expert also testified, confirming shell casings were collected from the scene but not swabbed for DNA, a point of contention.

Robertson brought to the stand a victim advocate who testified to comments made by the defendant’s ex-girlfriend on Oct. 1 during a break in her own testimony. The victim advocate testified to hearing her say, “If I were to tell the real truth, I would be six feet under.”

These comments add to the uncertainty of the key witness in the trial who has shared details on the shooting and the relationship between Jackson and the victim.

Throughout the trial, her reliability has been in question, particularly because prosecutors allege that Jackson has sought to intimidate her. Earlier in the trial, prosecutors played a voice message in which Jackson can allegedly be heard saying, “snitches get stitches, bitches end up in ditches.” The witness said earlier that testifying in court has made her feel threatened.

The trial is set to continue Oct. 7.

Jury Partially Acquits Non-Fatal Shooting Defendant, Judge Orders Release

DC Superior Court Judge Deborah Israel released a non-fatal shooting defendant pending sentencing on Oct. 2.

Daquan Toland, 25, was originally charged with aggravated assault knowingly while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, assault with a dangerous weapon, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, and unlawful possession of ammunition.

The charges stem from his alleged involvement in a non-fatal shooting on June 2 at the 1100 block of 4th Street, NE. The victim, an elderly and disabled individual, was grazed in the left shoulder by one of the shots fired.

The jury found Toland not guilty on the charges of aggravated assault while armed, two counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence, and assault with a dangerous weapon.

However, Toland was convicted of possession of an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license outside a home or business, and unlawful possession of ammunition.

Judge Israel granted release with electronic monitoring to the defendant, pending sentencing.

Parties are set to appear for sentencing on Oct. 3.

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.

Search