Parker, McCray, and Fortson v. United States


Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS Nos. 17-CO-755, 17-CO-870, & 17-CO-1024 TIMOTHY PARKER, MARCELLUS MCCRAY, AND ANTONIO FORTSON, APPELLANTS, V. UNITED STATES, APPELLEE. Appeals from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CF2-12342-10, CF1-4749-11, CF1-4729-11) (Hon. Henry F. Greene, Trial Judge) (Argued January 13, 2021 * Decided July 22, 2021) Peter H. Meyers for appellant Parker. David H. Reiter for appellant McCray. William R. Cowden for appellant Fortson. * This court originally heard argument in these appeals on October 23, 2018, when the division consisted of Chief Judge Blackburne-Rigsby, Associate Judge Glickman, and Senior Judge Pryor. After that argument, (1) Judge Pryor recused himself and Judge Ruiz was appointed to replace him on the division; and (2) appellants supplemented their appeals to add arguments based on the subsequent rehearing petitions, briefing, and decision in Fleming v. United States, 224 A.3d 213 (D.C. 2020) (en banc). In light of the change in the composition of the division and the expansion of appellants’ claims, this court called for reargument in these appeals, which was held on January 13, 2021. 2 David P. Saybolt, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Jesse K. Liu, United States Attorney, Michael R. Sherwin, Acting United States Attorney, and Elizabeth Trosman, Suzanne Grealy Curt, Laura Bach, and Silvia Gonzalez Roman, Assistant United States Attorneys, were on the briefs, for appellee. Before BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Chief Judge, GLICKMAN, Associate Judge, and RUIZ, Senior Judge. GLICKMAN, Associate Judge: After a trial in 2012, a jury convicted appellants Timothy Parker, Marcellus McCray, and Antonio Fortson of voluntary manslaughter while armed and other felony offenses.1 In their direct appeals, this court rejected most of appellants’ claims of error and remanded their cases to the trial court for further proceedings and rulings on two issues. These concerned (1) whether the government suppressed favorable evidence in violation of its obligations under Brady v. Maryland,2 and (2) whether the trial court precluded appellants from establishing that a government witness suffered from a mental disability that seriously diminished his credibility. The present appeals are from the trial court’s rulings against appellants on each of those issues on remand. In addition, for the 1 See McCray v. United States (“McCray I”), 133 A.3d 205 (D.C. 2016). The indictments charged appellants with participating in a series of “shootings, assaults, and murders that occurred in the Benning Terrace Housing complex in the Southeast quadrant of the District of Columbia from 2009 to 2011.” Id. at 210. The jury found appellants guilty of voluntary manslaughter while armed as a lesser-included offense of the charge of second-degree murder while armed. 2 373 U.S. 83 (1963). 3 first time in these appeals, appellants contend that their manslaughter convictions must be vacated because the trial court gave the jury the “urban …

Original document

Add comment


Recent Posts

Recent Comments