The Court of Askew v. U.S., decided on July 2, 2020, addressed to what extent the government must preserve criminal evidence for discovery purposes. Askew was convicted on four counts of assault of police officers and on appeal challenged the government’s lack of both preserving and producing material evidence. Specifically, Askew argued that the trial court erred when it declined to sanction the government for violating Rule 16 by failing to preserve and produce: Surveillance footage from the rotating MPD-operated video camera located near where he was arrested, Footage from any video cameras located inside the police station where Mr.
Read More
Archives for dc criminal lawyer
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION: 4TH AMENDMENT VIOLATION | SEARCH & SEIZURE
The Court of Appeals in U.S. v. Bumphaus, decided on May 21, 2020, affirmed the trial court in suppressing the evidence obtained through illegal search and seizure. Based on confidential tip that the defendant possessed illegal weapons, his car was stopped and before the officers had a chance to search the vehicle Bumphus locked the car and released keys to another individual who left the scene. Thus, the officers towed the vehicle in order to obtain a search warrant to break into the car and search for weapons. The search warrant for the car however was not issued until four
Read More
SEALING OF THE ARREST RECORD STATUTE DECONSTRUCTED: RECENT COURT OF APPEALS CASE
The Court of Appeals in Washington v. U.S., decided recently addressed and interpreted the implications of “interest of Justice” in connection with sealing of the arrest records. DC Code 16-803.02 provides in pertinent parts: (a) person arrested for, charged with, or convicted of a criminal offense pursuant to the District of Columbia Official Code or the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations that was decriminalized or legalized after the date of the arrest, charge, or conviction may file a motion to seal the record of the arrest, charge, conviction, and related Superior Court proceedings at any time, and (A) In cases
Read More
SEALING OF AN ARREST RECORD & THE “INTEREST OF JUSTICE” STANDARD: DC COURT OF APPEALS
The Court of Appeals recently in Larracuente v. U.S., determined and defined more precisely application of “Interest of Justice” provision of the sealing of the arrest record Statute. Appellant moved pursuant to D.C. Code § 16-803.02 to seal his records where he had pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute (PWID) marijuana. The trial court concluded that the government had shown by a preponderance of the evidence that appellant possessed an amount of marijuana that exceeded the amount decriminalized, that is more than two ounces and moreover sealing of the record was not available nor discretionary under the “interest
Read More
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION: UNLAWFUL ENTRY REVERSED
The Court of Appeals in Foster v. U.S., decided on November 7, 2019, reversed and vacated the defendant’s conviction for unlawful entry. Foster who was according to his rental lease part of a housing complex consisting of two distinct units — Hopkins I&II was barred by a security guard from the Hopkins I complex for violating the housing rules and two days thereafter was arrested for an unlawful entry into the complex. Foster argued on appeal that the trial record showed insufficient evidence that Hopkins Apartments consisted of more than one legally distinct DCHA property, especially when considering the lease
Read More
MPD USE OF PROBATION GPS TRACKING SYSTEM CONSTITUTIONAL: RECENT DC COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
The Court of Appeals in U.S. v. Jackson decided on August 22, 2019, reversed and remanded to the trial court granting of Jackson’s suppression motion for 4th amendment violations. Jackson who was on probation for Robbery was placed by Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency (“CSOSA”) on GPS tracking system. The GPS tracking system accessed by MPD revealed and placed him at a scene of another robbery which resulted in him being arrested and charged with that crime. Jackson argued at trial that CSOSA violated his Fourth Amendment rights first by placing him on GPS monitoring without judicial approval and
Read More
DC DUI RECENT CASELAW: WITHDRAW GUILTY PLEA
The Court of Appeals in Maddux v. D.C, decided on July 25, 2019, considered whether the defendant should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea to DUI after sentencing. Before sentencing the burden on the defendant is “a fair and just reason” while after sentencing the burden elevated to “to correct manifest injustice, that is, justice demands withdrawal in the circumstances of the individual case. Maddux’s central argument was that the Magistrate Judge pushed and coerced plea bargaining by threatening to detain him pending trial and pre-trial while making clear he would be treated as a first-time offender with a
Read More
REVERSAL DUE TO JURY SELECTION RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
The Court of Appeals in Haney v. U.S., decided on April 25, 2019, reversed and remanded the defendant’s weapons’ conviction based on the government’s peremptory jury strikes disproportionately excluded black jurors and black male from the jury pool. It is well established according to Batson rule that purposeful and intentional discrimination based on race or gender in the exercise of peremptory challenges is strictly prohibited. The Supreme Court had articulated in Batson a three-step process for analyzing discriminatory claims: There must be a prima facie showing that a peremptory challenge has been exercised due to race or gender; The prosecution
Read More
ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURE: RECENT DC COURT OF APPEALS DECISION
The Court of Appeals in Posey v. US, decided on February 21, 2019, reversed the trial’s court denial of the suppression motion and thus vacated the conviction. Posey was arrested after the Officer responded to a look out for Robbery suspects. The look out was vague and nondescript and essentially depicting “a black male wearing black clothes.” Because Posey had fled upon observing the approaching police officer and subsequently searched and a weapon found – the trial court determined that the fleeing from the scene by itself added to the reasonable suspicion criteria for Terry stop and thus search and
Read More
FACEBOOK v. SUBPOENA: RECENT DC COURT OF APPEALS
The Court of Appeals in Facebook v. Wint, decided on January 3, 2019, determined and analyzed if a criminal defendant is entitled to issue a criminal subpoena on a provider (here Facebook) to obtain certain communications. Specifically, Mr. Wint charged with multiple murders requested the trial Judge to authorize defense subpoenas duces tecum on Facebook for records, including communications relating to certain accounts. Facebook objected pursuant to the Stored Communications Act (“SCA”), arguing that Facebook was prohibited from disclosing such information in response to a criminal defendant’s subpoena. The trial court approved the subpoena request and held Facebook in civil
Read More