Timms v. United States, 25 A.3d 29

Appellant Timms was convicted of AWIKWA, AAWA, and several weapons offenses arising from a shooting of Lorenzo Williams in DC; witnesses included Williams, his fiancée, and Jaquan Taylor, who testified about the twelve gunshots and injuries.
The defense sought to elicit further cross-examination about third-party presence; the court restricted, finding Williams’ testimony not inconsistent with prior statements.
Two certificates of no record (CNRs) were admitted over defense objection; the admission was challenged as violative of confrontation rights.
The trial court defined serious bodily injury with a standard ‘red book’ instruction that was later criticized for syntax; an attitude and conduct instruction was also given.
Two PFCV convictions were at issue for merger; government conceded merger and the court vacated one, leaving one PFCV conviction intact alongside AWIKWA and AAWA.
On appeal the DC Court of Appeals reversed three weapon convictions (CPWL, UF, UA) as affected by the CNR error, affirmed the PFCV on the merits but with merger, and remanded to vacate one PFCV conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Confrontation: cross-examination limits	Timms claims preclusion of further cross-exam violated confrontation.	State maintained limits were permissible; cross-exam sufficient.	No reversible error; cross-exam meaningful but not prejudicial.
Confrontation: admissibility of CNRs	CNRs were testimonial and should have allowed confrontation.	Objection preserved; trial court could correct; later plain error standard applies.	CNRs improperly admitted; convictions CPWL, UF, UA reversed.
Serious bodily injury instruction	Instruction syntax risked misinterpretation by jurors.	No plain error; no timely objection; no evidence of confusion.	No plain error found; no reversal on this issue.
Attitude and conduct instruction	Instruction impermissibly urged jurors to override opinions.	Instruction not obvious plain error at time of trial.	No reversal for plain error; instruction rejected as reversible error.
Merging of PFCV convictions	Two PFCV convictions arising from same act should merge.	Not disputed; merger appropriate.	One PFCV conviction vacated; the remaining PFCV affirmed.

Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (Supreme Court, 1974) (cross-examination rights subject to reasonable limits)
Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36 (Supreme Court, 2004) (confrontation rights and testimonial statements)
Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 557 U.S. 304 (Supreme Court, 2009) (certificate-of-no-record testimonial; confrontation applies)
Tabaka v. District of Columbia, 976 A.2d 173 (D.C.2009) (Melendez-Diaz governs admissibility of certificates)
Scott v. United States, 954 A.2d 1037 (D.C.2008) (instruction on 'substantial risk of' syntax error not reversible per se)
Jones v. United States, 946 A.2d 970 (D.C.2008) (attitude and conduct instruction concerns)
Jones v. United States, 999 A.2d 917 (D.C.2010) (attitude and conduct instruction analysis; plain-error standards)