Akers v. United States

── Akers v. United States ── Court: District of Columbia Court of Appeals Date: May 28, 2026 Category: General Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS No. 23-CM-0782 DEJA AKERS, APPELLANT, V. UNITED STATES, APPELLEE. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (2023-DVM-000405) (Hon. Jennifer Anderson, Trial Judge) (Argued June 4, 2024 Decided May 28, 2026) Russell A. Bikoff for appellant. Ari B. Rubin, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Matthew M. Graves, United States Attorney at the time the brief was filed, and Chrisellen R. Kolb and Alexis Dunlap, Assistant United States Attorneys, were on the brief, for appellee. Before BLACKBURNE-RIGSBY, Chief Judge, and BECKWITH and SHANKER, Associate Judges. BECKWITH, Associate Judge: Appellant Deja Akers appeals her conviction for attempted second-degree cruelty to children stemming from an incident in which Ms. Akers yelled at her five-year-old son and struck him with a lanyard after receiving a phone call reporting that he had misbehaved at school. See D.C. Code  2 §§ 22-1101(b)(1) and -1803. Ms. Akers argues (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction, and (2) that even if there was sufficient evidence to support her conviction, the parental discipline defense applies. We hold that the government presented insufficient evidence of the charged offense and therefore vacate Ms. Akers’s conviction. I. At Ms. Akers’s bench trial, the government presented the following evidence regarding an interaction that took place between Ms. Akers and her son, T.A., at their home. T.A.’s father, Antonio Avery—who lived elsewhere and had partial custody of T.A.—testified that the incident occurred when he was dropping T.A. off at Ms. Akers’s apartment. As Mr. Avery entered the apartment with T.A., Ms. Akers told Mr. Avery that she was going to discipline T.A. for misbehaving at school. According to Mr. Avery, Ms. Akers began to “repeatedly” hit T.A.’s legs with a lanyard, prompting Mr. Avery to start filming Ms. Akers’s conduct with his phone because he thought it was excessive. On the video, which the government introduced at trial, Ms. Akers can be heard dressing down T.A. while Mr. Avery films from down the hall. The footage captures Ms. Akers yelling at T.A. for roughly two and a half minutes while he cries. She repeatedly tells T.A. “to shut the fuck up” and “stand [his] ass up,” all while  3 referring to his poor conduct at school. Something that sounds like an object striking another is audible in the background, but the source of that sound is not apparent from the footage. Shortly after he starts filming, Mr. Avery enters the room, and Ms. Akers can be seen on the video with a lanyard in her hand. Ms. Akers tells T.A.: “don’t you ever let me hear in your motherfucking life . . . that your ass couldn’t sit the fuck down . . . don’t let your teacher call my motherfucking phone.” When Ms. Akers then sends T.A. to do his homework, Mr. Avery says to T.A., “when you wake up in the morning . . . ,” at which point Ms. Akers quietly finishes the sentence: “you’re getting your ass whupped again.” Mr. Avery then tells Ms. Akers not to hit T.A. anymore “because I don’t want him to have physical damage.” To that, Ms. Akers responds that “he ain’t going to have no physical damage, he’s going to have a severe mental one.” 1 In