Acquitted: Closing Arguments Conclude for 20-Year-Old Homicide Defendant’s Trial

By Carly Schiller [former] , Sarah Driver [former] - August 2, 2021
Court | Daily Stories | Homicides | Shooting | Suspects | Victims |

Editor’s note: The defendant was acquitted of charges in this case.

Closing arguments concluded on Aug. 2 in the murder trial for a 20-year-old defendant. 

Baltimore resident Tyrek Hodge is charged with first and second-degree murder, use of a handgun in a violent crime, possession of a handgun as a minor, carrying a handgun on his person, and transporting a handgun in a vehicle. 

In her closing arguments on Monday, the prosecutor pointed out that there were moments between each of the six shots that Hodge made a premeditated choice to shoot again, which supports a first-degree murder conviction. While first-degree murder is “premeditated, willful, and deliberate,” Judge Williams noted to the jury, second-degree murder lacks premeditation.

On July 30, Judge Barry G. Williams approved Hodge’s defense attorney Adam Frank’s motions to dismiss the two arson charges.

Frank and the prosecution contested a number of facts about the case. 

The prosecutor’s arguments relied heavily on testimony from July 29 when an eyewitness claimed he saw Hodge shoot the victim, Evan Brewington, on the night of Aug. 17, 2019, on the 700 block of Whitmore Avenue. 

However, Frank said the entire case relied on the testimony of one witness. Frank said, the eyewitness was allegedly protecting a missing witness, who could not be located, because the two were “boys.”

He also questioned the witness’s reliability because his testimony changed from what he told police. On that Thursday, Frank played a recording of the witness’ interview with the Baltimore Police Department on Nov. 6, 2019, which showed discrepancies between his testimony at the time of the interview and the first day of the trial. 

During the proceedings Aug. 2, the prosecution said the witness was terrified, and his fear may have affected his initial actions. He cooperated with police despite his fear. 

Furthermore, Frank suggested that numerous components of the case were not analyzed correctly. The car involved in the crime had its rear passenger window shot out, which he said did not make sense given where the defendant was sitting.

Frank said the prosecution was ignoring relevant evidence in favor of one witness’s testimony. 

He asked the jury why the missing witness, who had committed a burglary shortly before the incident, was not a suspect in the case. He also maintained that Hodge would not have killed the victim because they were friends. 

In response, the prosecution told the jury to focus not on Frank’s speculation but the evidence that a witness identified Hodge in a photo array.

Deliberation among the 12 members of the jury is ongoing after beginning on Monday.