District of Columbia Court of Appeals

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that the police officers lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion to stop Marc Anthony Quarles, vacated his convictions, and remanded for further proceedings.

The Court granted Disciplinary Counsel’s motion to file the petition for suspension under seal and ordered the indefinite suspension of David J. Ontell from the practice of law in the District of Columbia on the basis of disability. The order also directed compliance with the applicable D.C.

The Court held that the police stop of Chance Cato Johnson was not supported by reasonable articulable suspicion because the confidential informant's tip lacked sufficient reliability and the trial court erred in its assessment; consequently, the convictions were reversed and the case remanded for further proceedings.

The Court affirmed the dismissal of the residents' suit because they lacked standing, but corrected the trial court's error by ordering the dismissal without prejudice and remanding for entry of a revised judgment.

The D.C. Court of Appeals reversed the trial court’s finding that Bockai acquired the Anacostia property by adverse possession, vacated the gift analysis and attorney‑fees award, and remanded for further proceedings.

The Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress GPS data, holding that the limited sharing of the defendant’s location with police was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals disbarred David A. Edelstein, conditioning reinstatement on his reinstatement in Maryland and delaying the start of his disbarment until he files a compliant affidavit, applying the rebuttable presumption of reciprocal discipline.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reviewed the trial court’s summary‑judgment rulings on five claims brought by Hamza Farooqui against Charles Wong, Zhou Qingzhi and related entities.

The Court struck Deutsche Bank's appellate brief for containing fabricated citations, affirmed the lower court's judgment on the pleadings, and explained its limited sanctioning authority, noting that the conduct did not rise to the level of bad faith required for harsher penalties.

The appellate court affirmed Brown’s aggravated‑assault convictions but held that the trial court’s admission of pre‑shooting video evidence and the government’s references to Brown’s alleged drug business, while erroneous, were harmless.

The D.C. Court of Appeals held that a custodial grandmother is a "family member" of the children’s biological mother under the Intrafamily Offenses Act, reversing the trial court’s dismissal for lack of jurisdiction and remanding for further proceedings.

The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions of Elliott Wallace and Antoine Layne arising from a traffic stop that yielded firearms and drugs. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in qualifying MPD Officer Scott Brown as a narcotics expert and allowing him to testify about the drug…

The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed Matthew Walker's bench-trial convictions for first-degree murder while armed and related offenses, holding that surveillance footage, DNA on the tracksuit, mask, and pistol recovered along the shooter's flight path, and a note bearing his phone number collectively sufficed to prove…

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed James Thomas's conviction for misdemeanor sexual abuse, holding the evidence insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he grabbed the victim's buttocks with the intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify sexual desire.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Atefeh Rokhvand's and Hazami Barmada's petitions for anti-stalking orders against Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld, holding that his comments during three incidents at a protest outside the Israeli embassy were political hyperbole and not 'true threats' unprotected…

The D.C. Court of Appeals reversed Charles Brooks's conviction for possession of a prohibited weapon (PPW), holding the evidence insufficient beyond a reasonable doubt to prove he possessed the taser used in a two-on-one street assault: the record left it equally likely that Brooks was the armed assailant or the…

The court held that Peoples adequately pleaded claims for breach of the warranty of habitability and sexual assault, so dismissal of those claims was improper. Although her complaint did not adequately plead race discrimination, the court held that the claim should have been dismissed without prejudice because she was…

The court approved an amended petition for negotiated discipline after respondent admitted multiple professional-conduct violations arising from his representation of an asylum-seeking client.

The court affirmed dismissal of both appellants' counterclaims and summary judgment for Wilmington in the judicial foreclosure action. Ms. Edwards failed to plead that Wilmington was a CPPA merchant or that she relied on an allegedly inaccurate default notice, while Ms.

The court held that the Burtons’ requests for declaratory and injunctive relief were not moot because the condominium association’s new rule did not permit them to install their specific charging system under their preferred plans and vendor.

The court held that the District of Columbia's violent-crime sentence-enhancement statute does not apply when the two prior convictions occurred during the same proceeding on the same day, even if the underlying offenses were committed at different times.

The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting a detective's testimony about unauthenticated, unavailable surveillance footage and by admitting prejudicial testimony that the victim feared Watkins.

The court affirmed the Superior Court's decision granting Jeffrey Rice a fifteen-year IRAA sentence reduction but denying immediate release. It held that the court acted within its discretion by considering codefendant sentencing disparity as part of the individualized interests-of-justice analysis, and that any error…

The court affirmed Morehead’s conviction for assaulting A.A., holding that transferred intent applies to a nonfatal assault when the defendant intentionally assaults one person, unintentionally injures another, and the unintended victim is actually injured.

The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing a deliberating juror on the sixth day of deliberations because the record left a reasonable possibility that the juror was removed for holding views favoring acquittal.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed Kenneth M. Davis's convictions, held that the trial court did not err in admitting the lay testimony of a Maserati service director, the victim's photo‑array identification, and the flight evidence, and found sufficient evidence for the assault‑with‑dangerous‑weapon…

The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed confirmation of a JAMS arbitrator's final award allocating a 46% contingency fee among four law firms that represented Wye Oak Technology in its litigation against Iraq, an allocation that gave appellant QRG zero percent.

The D.C. Court of Appeals vacated Hawkins's convictions for attempted threats and attempted possession of a prohibited weapon because the government disclosed body-worn camera footage—revealing that a security guard had viewed private surveillance video contradicting the complainant's account—too late for the defense…

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed Hatcherson-Ross's firearm and ammunition convictions, holding that he was not seized under the Fourth Amendment until officers grabbed his arms and directed him to come out from under a stranger's porch.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for a residential buyer who defaulted on a $665,000 home purchase. The court held that neither the buyer's failure to form the LLC named as purchaser nor the seller's alleged failure to deliver TOPA documents was a condition precedent under the…

The D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed Marvin Lopez's first-degree murder and firearm convictions, holding that the trial court did not plainly err in failing to declare a mistrial sua sponte after the government's intimate partner violence expert twice exceeded court-ordered limits on her testimony, where the defense…

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals vacated the trial court's denial of Henry Allen's motion for compassionate release under D.C. Code § 24-403.04(a)(3). The court held that trial courts may consider a movant's rehabilitation when assessing eligibility under the catch-all provision, and that trial courts must…

The court held that the trial court improperly treated failure to exhaust administrative remedies as a jurisdictional defect, because exhaustion is a judicial-administration requirement rather than a limitation on subject matter jurisdiction.

The court affirmed Rogers's convictions after concluding that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to be present at trial and that his physical presence at the courthouse, combined with face-to-face interaction and livestreaming, satisfied the applicable presence requirement.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s denial of pre‑trial release and refused to dismiss the indictment, holding that the court had jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal, the case was not moot, and the only remedy for a § 23‑102 violation is release, not dismissal of the…

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed James A. Doby’s convictions, holding that the officers possessed reasonable articulable suspicion to stop and frisk him after he fled, and therefore denied his motion to suppress the handgun.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals reversed C. Wilson's conviction for attempted second-degree cruelty to children, holding the evidence insufficient to disprove his reasonable-parental-discipline defense beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court affirmed Perry’s convictions and restitution order, holding that the Instagram video was adequately authenticated and did not violate the best evidence rule, hearsay rules, or the Confrontation Clause.

The court imposed a six-month suspension from practice in the District of Columbia based on a six-month consent suspension imposed by the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board. The court applied the presumption favoring identical reciprocal discipline, noting that respondent did not contest the proposed discipline or…

The en banc court held that officers had reasonable articulable suspicion to seize D.W. when they grabbed his leg after he immediately fled upon seeing officers approaching from a substantial distance.