Retrial Set for Man Accused of Killing 13-Year-Old Boy in 2016

Thank you for reading Baltimore Witness. Help us continue our mission into 2024.

A Baltimore man previously sentenced to 90 years for his role in the fatal shooting of 13-year-old Diandre Barnes is headed for retrial following a ruling by Maryland’s Court of Special Appeals.

In June 2016, 31-year-old Anthony Clark Jr. was accused of Barnes’ murder around 1:30 a.m. on the 900 block of Pennsylvania Avenue, Fox45 News previously reported. Barnes was not the intended target, police said, and was pronounced dead at Maryland Shock Trauma.

The second victim, who was the intended target, was injured.

Clark is facing charges of second-degree murder and firearm use during a felony-violent crime in regards to Barnes and attempted second-degree murder and firearm use in a violent crime in regards to the second victim.

During reception court on Dec. 15, the prosecution informed Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Melissa M. Phinn that the case was remanded by the court. Clark was offered a plea of 100 years, suspending all but 90, and five years supervised probation—the original sentence imposed on Clark by Judge Dana M. Middleton in 2018.

The plea was for the four charges across the two cases.

Clark and his defense attorney, Michael Cooper, rejected the offer on Wednesday, and a five-day trial date was specially set to begin on July 11, 2022, before Judge John S. Nugent.

According to the Baltimore Sun, police found Clark two days after the shooting, but when they went to confront him, the defendant ran away, turned, and fired a gun at police who returned fire. Clark then barricaded himself on a roof on Fremont Avenue, where he later surrendered.

Police found a .40-caliber handgun matching the bullet that killed Barnes in Clark’s home during the execution of a search warrant.

Following a guilty verdict in early 2018, an appeal was filed with the Maryland Court of Special Appeals that May, citing the court’s admittance of inadmissible hearsay in a detective’s testimony, violation of Clark’s confrontation rights, and admitting evidence that was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Follow this case