NEW YORK (1010 WINS/WCBS 880) – A Brooklyn man who spent 16 years in prison for murder had his conviction overturned Friday after prosecutors determined that a fair trial was compromised because a key surveillance video was not turned over and was never reviewed by law enforcement.
Following a reinvestigation by his Conviction Review Unit (CRU), Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez moved to vacate the 2008 murder conviction of Arvel Marshall, 52, in Crown Heights who would have been eligible for parole in 2033.
Prosecutors stated that a surveillance video showing the gunman shortly before and after the shooting was not turned over to the defense. The video, which the defendant had repeatedly requested during the trial, likely would have led to a different outcome.
The CRU report also found that the defense attorney "abdicated his role as an advocate" and the judge "abandoned his role of a neutral arbiter."
"An investigation by my Conviction Review Unit found that everyone involved in this case – defense, prosecution, police, and the Court – failed, depriving Mr. Marshall of a fair trial," Gonzalez said.
The murder occurred on July 15, 2008, when 22-year-old Moustapha Oumaria was fatally shot in the head while sitting outside his Crown Heights home with three friends. Marshall became a suspect due to claims of an ongoing dispute between him and the deceased, who had dated the same woman as the defendant. The three friends present at the scene identified Marshall as the shooter, despite initial descriptions of the gunman as a teenager, while Marshall was 36 at the time.
Marshall maintained his innocence throughout the trial. Although there was mention of surveillance footage that could have identified the shooter, the prosecutor was unable to play the video in court and relied on still photos instead. The CRU report later found that no one reviewed the full video, leading to Marshall's conviction and 25-to-life sentence.
The CRU reviewed the surveillance footage, which provided two different angles of the scene. It shows a young man in a white shirt and dark pants, matching the shooter's description, handling an object from his waistband. After the two men leave the frame, two older men are seen looking toward the shooting area before turning back. Moments later, the younger men are seen sprinting away, with the man in white appearing to hold something.
The footage, which the defendant repeatedly requested during the trial, was grainy but suggested a different suspect. The CRU concluded the footage was favorable to the defense and should have been disclosed.
The reinvestigation revealed that a pre-trial defense investigation had uncovered a tip which suggested the shooting was ordered by a drug dealer who lived next door to the victim, targeting someone else. The tipster claimed the shooting was a case of mistaken identity by a 16-year-old. Although the dealer confirmed the dispute to the CRU, he denied involvement in the murder. The CRU also found serious errors by all parties: ineffective defense counsel, failure to challenge the video's readability, and inadequate preparation and questioning of the defendant.
"The prosecutor should have watched the video footage and not state without firsthand knowledge that the stills represented everything of significance in the footage," the District Attorney's office stated in a press release.
While Marshall had multiple outbursts during court, the judge responded with disdain; he instructed him to "shut up" and "be quiet" and told him, in front of the jury, that the footage was "not relevant" despite never having watched it; when Marshall was testifying, the judge denigrated and belittled him in front of the jury; and he did not insist on playing the video, according to prosecutors.
Because of these mistakes and the failure to turn over evidence, Gonzalez found that Marshall was deprived of a fair trial. He recommended that his conviction be vacated and the indictment dismissed.
"A critical piece of evidence was not turned over, leading to this unjust conviction," Gonzalez said. "The CRU's work often reveals systemic failures, and this is a prime example of that. We will continue to expose, correct, and learn from every wrongful conviction that took place in Brooklyn."
