A District man convicted of murder is getting a new trial after an appeals court ruled his attorney was improperly barred from questioning a detective about allegations of coaching witnesses. The appeals court also said the trial judge erred in preventing Damon Q. Smith’s attorney from introducing a statement the slain man made about a stabbing attack for which Smith was also convicted.
A D.C. Superior Court jury convicted Smith of fatally shooting Bradley Gant at the Anacostia Metro station in March 2004 and of stabbing him during a fight a few weeks before the slaying.
Recommended Stories
The key witness was Ahman Driver, a friend of Smith’s who testified that Smith told him he stabbed Gant and asked for a gun in case Gant tried to get revenge. Driver also testified that Smith told him
he shot Gant to death. Court records say Driver initially disclosed only a few details to police.
Driver was repeatedly questioned by D.C. police Detective Milagros Morales, who was being investigated for coaching witnesses in a 2005 homicide at Club U in Northwest Washington. Defense attorneys weren’t permitted to bring up the Club U investigation or try to show she had coached Driver.
That error “unfairly handicapped Smith’s ability to defend himself,” the appeals court wrote.
“Driver’s testimony was the most important part of the government’s case, and the existence of the Club U investigation would have been a powerful reason for the jury to question Driver’s story,” the court’s opinion says.
Morales was indicted for trying to sway witnesses in the Club U case, but acquitted of all charges.
Smith’s trial judge also improperly refused to let the defense use Gant’s statement to police after the nonfatal stabbing, the appeals court said. Gant told a detective he “was approached by six or seven black men” and had “no idea” who stabbed him. Prosecutors said that was hearsay. The judge agreed, but allowed testimony from a friend of Smith and Gant who testified that Gant told her Smith stabbed him.
“Knowledge that Gant himself had provided conflicting stories about who stabbed him might well have shaken the jury’s confidence in Smith’s involvement in the stabbing, the murder, or both,” the court wrote.
A spokesman for the U.S. attorney for the District said the office was reviewing the opinion and declined to comment further.
