Connect with us

District of Columbia

Fourth man charged in 2016 D.C. trans murder sentenced to seven years

But with credit for time served, Cyheme Hall could be free in two years

Published

on

<strong.Deeniquia ‘Dee Dee’ Dodds was shot to death in 2016. (Photo via Facebook)

A D.C. Superior Court judge on May 10 handed down a sentence of seven years in prison for the last of four men originally charged with first degree murder while armed in the July 4, 2016, shooting death of transgender woman Deeniquia “Dee Dee” Dodds on a street in Northeast Washington.

Judge Milton C. Lee delivered his sentence on Tuesday for D.C. resident Cyheme Hall, 26, just under three weeks after he issued the same seven-year sentence to Hall’s brother, Shareem Hall, 28, who, along with two other D.C. men, were initially charged with first degree murder while armed in connection with the Dodds case.

Police and prosecutors said Dodds was one of several transgender women that the Hall brothers and co-defendants Jalonta Little, 31, and Monte Johnson, 26, targeted for armed robberies in the early morning hours of July 4, 2016. Court charging documents say Johnson allegedly fatally shot Dodds in the neck after she fought back during the robbery attempt.

Lee acknowledged at the Tuesday, May 10 sentencing hearing that Cyheme Hall and his brother agreed to an offer in 2019 to cooperate with police and prosecutors following their arrests in exchange for being allowed to plead guilty to a second-degree murder charge. The two brothers testified as government witnesses at Little and Johnson’s trial in 2019 on the first degree murder charge and other charges, including armed robbery.

The judge noted that because of that cooperation, prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. issued a recommendation that the two brothers be sentenced to seven years in the Dodds case, a sentence that Lee pointed out is far lower than the potential sentence for a second-degree murder conviction. Under D.C. law, a second-degree murder conviction has a maximum sentence of life in prison.

As part of the plea offer that Cyheme Hall accepted in 2019, he also pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy to commit a crime of violence. Lee on May 10 sentenced him to seven years for that charge in addition to the seven years for the second degree murder charge. However, Lee ordered that the two sentences be served concurrently for a total of seven years.

Under standard sentencing practices, Lee gave Cyheme Hall and his brother credit for the just over five years the two have already served in jail since the time of their arrest. That means Cyheme Hall could be released in less than two years, after which he must serve five years of supervised probation after being released as part of the sentence handed down by Lee.

Cyheme Hall’s attorney, Jonathan Zucker, told Lee at the sentencing hearing that his client faces a possible sentence of nine years for a parole violation charge in connection with an unrelated burglary case in Prince George’s County, Maryland. Zucker said Hall was given a nine-year suspended sentence in the burglary case on the condition that he would not become involved in criminal activity during the time of his parole.

Lee declined a request by Zucker that Lee consider making a recommendation to the judge overseeing Hall’s parole violation case in Prince George’s County that the nine years be served concurrently with the seven years for the D.C. case.

Zucker said this means that it will be up to a Maryland judge to decide whether Cyheme Hall should serve up to nine years or less time in the Maryland case upon his release in the Dodds case.

The 2019 trial for Little and Johnson, meanwhile, ended with Judge Lee declaring a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict. Before the case went before the jury, prosecutors dropped their initial designation of the murder as a hate crime after Lee ruled in favor of a defense motion that there was insufficient evidence to prove a hate crime. Prosecutors said they filed the hate crime charge because they believe the men targeted Dodds because she was transgender.  

After initially saying they planned to request another trial on the murder charge, prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney’s Office offered Little and Johnson a plea bargain deal, which they accepted, in which they pled guilty to a single count of voluntary manslaughter with the murder charge dropped.

The offer included a promise by prosecutors to ask for a sentence of eight years for the two men. Lee agreed to that request when he sentenced Little and Johnson to eight years last December.

Some LGBTQ activists have expressed concern that prosecutors should have pushed for a second trial for Johnson and Little. Activists have said reducing the charge from first degree murder to manslaughter sends a message that targeting members of the LGBTQ community for crimes of violence, especially trans women of color, can result in a lenient sentence of little more than a slapping of the wrist.

Attorneys familiar with criminal cases like this have said prosecutors sometimes offer a plea deal after determining that going to trial a second time could result in a not-guilty verdict based on the circumstances of the case.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Sharon Donovan, the lead prosecutor in the Dodds murder case, discussed prosecutors’ rationale for agreeing to a sentence of eight years for Little and Johnson during their sentencing hearing last December in response to a question from Lee asking whether the sentence was too lenient.     

“Your honor, we believe that this takes into consideration the first trial and the evidentiary difficulties that were highlighted during the first trial and other incidents that occurred during the first trial,” Donovan told Lee. She added that the impact of a sentence on the victim’s family and the community was also considered. “And we believe that taking all of that into consideration, that it is an appropriate sentence,” she said.

At his sentencing hearing on May 10, Cyheme Hall offered his apologies to the family of the victim and said he was deeply sorry for his role in the incident that took the life of Dodds.

In a written statement submitted to the court, Hall expressed his “deepest remorse” for his actions. “I know that no matter what I say or do, I cannot change what has happened but going forward I vow to dedicate the rest of my life righting my wrong,” he wrote. “I feel like I owe this to the victim as well as the family and my community.”

Lee thanked Hall for his statement but said he could not lower the sentence to six years, as requested by Hall’s attorney, nor could he ask the Maryland judge to consider a lower sentence for the parole violation.

“You did not have the strength to say no to this crime,” Lee told Hall. “You could have extricated yourself from this, but you didn’t. There are some things you can’t get out of,” Lee said. “It was shameful what you did.”

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

‘Sandwich guy’ not guilty in assault case

Sean Charles Dunn faced misdemeanor charge

Published

on

Sean Charles Dunn was found not guilty on Thursday. (Washington Blade file photo by Joe Reberkenny)

A jury with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday, Nov. 6, found D.C. resident Sean Charles Dunn not guilty of assault for tossing a hero sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10. 

Dunn’s attorneys hailed the verdict as a gesture of support for Dunn’s contention that his action, which was captured on video that went viral on social media, was an exercise of his First Amendment right to protest the federal border agent’s participating in President Donald Trump’s deployment of federal troops on D.C. streets. 

Friends of Dunn have said that shortly before the sandwich tossing incident took place Dunn had been at the nearby gay nightclub Bunker, which was hosting a Latin dance party called Tropicoqueta. Sabrina Shroff, one of three attorneys representing Dunn at the trial, said during the trial after Dunn left the nightclub he went to the submarine sandwich shop on 14th Street at the corner of U Street, where he saw the border patrol agent and other law enforcement officers  standing in front of the shop.

 Shroff and others who know Dunn have said he was fearful that the border agent outside the sub shop and immigrant agents might raid the Bunker Latin night event. Bunker’s entrance is on U Street just around the corner from the sub shop where the federal agents were standing.

 “I am so happy that justice prevails in spite of everything happening,“ Dunn told reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict while joined by his attorneys. “And that night I believed that I was protecting the rights of immigrants,” he said.

 “And let us not forget that the great seal of the United States says, E Pluribus Unum,” he continued. “That means from many, one. Every life matters no matter where you came from, no matter how you got here, no matter how you identify, you have the right to live a life that is free.”

The verdict followed a two-day trial with testimony by just two witnesses, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent Gregory Lairmore, who identified Dunn as the person who threw the sandwich at his chest, and Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who told the jury she witnessed Dunn toss the sandwich at Lairmore while shouting obscenities.

Shroff told the jury Dunn was exercising his First Amendment right to protest and that the tossing of the sandwich at Lairmore, who was wearing a bulletproof vest, did not constitute an assault under the federal assault law to which Dunn was charged, among other things, because the federal agent was not injured. 

Prosecutors  with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge. But the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” the criminal complaint states, “pointing his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1. 

Prosecutors repeatedly played the video of the incident for the jurors on video screens in the courtroom. 

Dunn, who chose not to testify at his trial, and his attorneys have not disputed the obvious evidence that Dunn threw the sandwich that hit Lairmore in the chest. Lead defense attorney Shroff and co-defense attorneys Julia Gatto and Nicholas Silverman argued that Dunn’s action did not constitute an assault under the legal definition of common law assault in the federal assault statute.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael DiLorenzo, the lead prosecutor in the case, strongly disputed that claim, citing various  provisions in the law and appeals court rulings that he claimed upheld his and the government’s contention that an “assault” can take place even if a victim is not injured as well as if there was no physical contact between the victim and an alleged assailant, only a threat of physical contact and injury.

The dispute over the intricacies of  the assault law and whether Dunn’s action reached the level of an assault under the law dominated the two-day trial, with U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols, who presided over the trial, weighing in with his own interpretation of the assault statute. Among other things, he said it would be up to the jury to decide whether or not Dunn committed an assault.

Court observers have said in cases like this, a jury could have issued a so-called  “nullification” verdict in which they acquit a defendant even though they believe he or she committed the offense in question because they believe the charge is unjust. The other possibility, observers say, is the jury believed the defense was right in claiming a law was not violated.

DiLorenzo and his two co-prosecutors in the case declined to comment in response to requests by reporters following the verdict.

“We really want to thank the jury for having sent back an affirmation that his sentiment is not just tolerated but it is legal, it is welcome,” defense attorney Shroff said in referring to Dunn’s actions. “And we thank them very much for that verdict,” she said.

Dunn thanked his attorneys for providing what he called excellent representation “and for offering all of their services pro bono,” meaning free of charge.

Dunn, an Air Force veteran who later worked as an international affairs specialist at the U.S. Department of Justice, was fired from that job by DOJ officials after his arrest for the sandwich tossing incident. 

“I would like to thank family and friends and strangers for all of their support, whether it  was emotional, or spiritual, or artistic, or financial,” he told the gathering outside the courthouse. “To the people that opened their hearts and homes to me, I am eternally grateful.” 

“As always, we accept a jury’s verdict; that is the system within which we function,” CNN quoted U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro as saying after the verdict in the Dunn case. “However, law enforcement should never be subjected to assault, no matter how ‘minor,’” Pirro told CNN in a statement.

“Even children know when they are angry, they are not allowed to throw objects at one another,” CNN quoted her as saying.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

Trial begins for man charged with throwing sandwich at federal agent

Jury views video of incident that went viral on social media

Published

on

Posters depicting Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sandwich quickly appeared around the city last summer. (Blade photo by Joe Reberkenny)

Prosecutors showed jurors a video of Sean Charles Dunn throwing a sub sandwich into the chest of a U.S. Customs and Border Protection agent at the bustling intersection of 14th and U streets, N.W. at around 11 p.m. on Aug. 10 of this year on the opening day of Dunn’s trial that has drawn national attention.

According to a knowledgeable source, Dunn threw the sandwich at the agent after shouting obscenities at him and other federal law enforcement officers who were stationed at that location after he was refused admission to the nearby gay bar Bunker for being too intoxicated.

Charging documents and reports by witnesses show that Dunn expressed outrage that the federal officers were stationed there and at other locations in D.C. under orders from President Donald Trump  to help curtail crime in the city.

Prosecutors with the Office of the U.S. Attorney for D.C. initially attempted to obtain a grand jury indictment of Dunn on a felony assault charge, but the grand jury refused to hand down an indictment on that charge, court records show. Prosecutors then filed a criminal complaint against Dunn on the misdemeanor charge of assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers of the United States.

“Dunn stood within inches of Victim 1,” a criminal complaint states, “pointed his finger in Victim 1’s face, and yelled, Fuck you! You fucking fascists! Why are you here? I don’t want you in my city!” 

The complaint adds, “Dunn continued his conduct for several minutes before crossing the street and continuing to yell obscenities at V-1. At approximately 11:06 p.m. Dunn approached V-1 and threw a sandwich at him, striking V-1 in the chest.”

The complaint continues by stating, “An Instagram video recorded by an observer captured the incident. The video depicts Dunn screaming at V-1 within inches of his face for several seconds before winding his arm back and forcefully throwing a sub-style sandwich at V-1.”

At the opening day of testimony at the trial on Tuesday, Nov. 4, V-1, who was identified as Customs and Border Patrol Agent Gregory Lairmore, testified as the first government witness. Also testifying was Metro Transit Police Detective Daina Henry, who said she was present at the scene and saw Dunn throw the sandwich at Lairmore.

The position taken by Dunn’s defense attorneys is outlined in a 24-page memorandum in support of a motion filed on Oct. 15 calling for the dismissal of the case, which was denied by U.S. District Court Judge Carl J. Nichols.

“This prosecution is a blatant abuse of power,” the defense memo states. “The federal government has chosen to bring a criminal case over conduct so minor it would be comical – were it not for the unmistakable retaliatory motive behind it and the resulting risk to Mr. Dunn.”

It adds, “Mr. Dunn tossed a sandwich at a fully armed, heavily protected Customs and Border Protection {CBP} officer. That act alone would never have drawn a federal charge. What did was the political speech that accompanied it.” 

The trial was scheduled to resume at 9 a.m. on Wednesday, Nov. 5.

Continue Reading

District of Columbia

D.C. mayor announces use of local funds for SNAP food aid

Md., Va. arrange for similar local replacement of federal money

Published

on

Mayor Muriel Bowser has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C. funds to be used for SNAP. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser announced on Oct. 30 that she has arranged for at least $129 million in local D.C funds to be used to support as many as 141,000 D.C. residents in need who depend on the federal food assistance programs known as SNAP and WIC whose funding will be cut off beginning Nov. 1 due to the federal shutdown.

SNAP, which stands for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and WIC, the Women, Infants, and Children Program, provide food related services for 10 million or more people in need nationwide.

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, and Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer also announced similar plans to provide emergency state funds to replace the federal funds cut off beginning Nov. 1 for the two food programs. 

Similar to Bowser, Moore and Youngkin said their replacement funds at this time would only last for the month of November. Each said they were hopeful that Congress would end the shutdown before the end of November.

“We know that SNAP and WIC play a critical role in keeping thousands of Washingtonians and millions of Americans put food on the table each month,” Bowser said in a statement. “We were hopeful it wouldn’t come to this – and we will need the federal government to reopen as soon as possible – but for right now, we’re moving forward to ensure we take care of D.C. residents in November,” she said.

The mayor’s statement says about 85,000 D.C. households, consisting of 141,000 individuals, receive SNAP support each month, with an average monthly allocation of $314. It says more than 12,500 city residents in 8,300 households benefit from the WIC program.  

A spokesperson for the D.C. Mayor’s Office of LGBTQ Affairs couldn’t immediately be reached to determine whether the city has an estimated count of how many LGBTQ residents receive support from the SNAP and SIC programs. 

Continue Reading

Popular