In closing statements on June 15 before Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Lawrence P. Fletcher-Hill, the prosecution highlighted that a verdict did reflect on the victim but rather the circumstantial evidence surrounding a road rage incident.
Boaz Hinton, 47, is charged with attempted first- and second-degree murder, first-degree assault, failure to stop vehicle, attempt to elude a police officer and various firearm charges in connection to a Nov. 27, 2025 incident.
An officer allegedly witnessed the shooting and attempted a traffic stop. Hinton allegedly fled and then stopped. The officer ordered the suspect to show his hands, then the HInton fled again, turning down a dead end on the 1700 block of Montpelier Street. He surrendered to authorities.
Hinton’s defense attorney, Marc Zayon didn’t single out a reason Hinton had repeatedly fled and stopped. However, he suggested someone would fear, illegal substances in the vehicle or prior arrest warrants.
The prosecution claimed that Hinton drove down the dead end alley to discard the gun.
While a search was being conducted, body camera footage showed Hinton allegedly saying that the officer was searching for something “that ain’t there.” The prosecution viewed this as Hinton revealing he had already discarded the gun. However, a gun was never recovered by investigators.
The prosecution contended that in a jail call Hinton had admitted to the shooting when he said he was booked “for shooting of somebody.” At this time Hinton was only charged with discharging a firearm, which led the prosecution to believe this was a confession.
When the arresting officer told Hinton he was being charged with discharging a firearm, Hinton responded with “who” and abruptly stopped talking, according to body camera footage.
The prosecution said the suspect got out of his vehicle, took steps toward the victim’s car and shot twice. Despite failure to recover the gun, ShotSpotter was alerted and the victim’s rear window was damaged by the gunshot.
The defense claimed that no one was able to identify Hinton as the shooter.
The case lacked physical evidence such as the weapon, DNA, fingerprints and gun residue, Zayon said.
He continued that the officer claimed to have witnessed the discharge, but this does not align with the officer’s body camera footage. In testimony, the officer apparently changed his earlier statement, now claiming that he could not really see what occurred.
The defense added how the victim claimed the perpetrator was 5 ‘8-5’ 9, wearing a hoodie and had “regular hair.” Hinton is taller and has distinctive hair that does not match the victim’s description.
As to the jail call, the defense attorney said this was not a confession but simply just the way people speak.
Hinton is guilty of fleeing and eluding but nothing else, his defense attorney claimed.
Jury deliberations began June 15.
