After mistrial in City Nights shooting, judge airs concerns about DA and police

This story has been updated with additional comment from the judge.

A judge ordered a mistrial Wednesday, July 22, for a 40-year-old Portland man charged with attempted murder in connection with a December 2024 shooting at City Nights club in Eugene.

Desmond Boris Washington was arrested Jan. 17, 2025, according to jail records, in connection with a shooting just after 2 a.m., Dec. 8, 2024, that Eugene police said injured two people inside the club.

Wednesday, Lane County Circuit Judge Jay McAlpin cited a “discovery violation” in his order for a mistrial after attorneys filed opposing motions about evidence provided to defense counsel after Washington’s trial began July 16.

Willow Hillman, a defense attorney for Washington, filed a motion for dismissal of charges, citing how a murder trial earlier this month also ended in a mistrial July 10 after evidence was provided to defense attorneys after the start of the trial.

“It is apparent at this point that the Lane County district attorney’s office has a pattern and practice of not complying with their discovery obligations,” she wrote in a court filing.

Hillman stated that the “sheer volume” of evidence provided late “is clear evidence they are not meeting their obligations and until the Lane County Bench requires them to do so by actually sanctioning them for this pattern and practice, nothing will change.”

Deputy District Attorney Matthew Wojcik wrote that while Hillman listed “a significant number of items” not provided in a timely manner, “[m]ost of these materials contain information which was available to the defense in other formats.”

In addition to attempted murder, Washington has been indicted on charges of first-degree assault, third-degree assault, unlawful use of a weapon and being a felon in possession of a firearm.

Court documents filed on behalf of Washington, state that the shooting took place in self-defense.

Day after mistrial

In a brief hearing Thursday to consider whether Washington might be released from jail pending a new trial, Hillman said she “just learned” of a U.S. Marshals Service “hold” for Washington, meaning federal authorities are seeking to keep him in custody. 

Neither Hillman nor Wojcik said the reason for the “hold,” but The Oregonian reported at the time of Washington’s arrest he remained under federal supervision following a conviction on a weapons charge.

McAlpin denied the motion seeking his release.

Also Thursday, McAlpin, in a written order, denied the motion to dismiss charges against Washington.

But he had strong words for Eugene police and the Lane County District Attorney’s office about discovery, a legal term describing the exchange of information about evidence.

“This is, at least, the third major case in 2026 in which discovery, provided after trial started, has resulted in a mistrial,” McAlpin wrote in a nine-page order. In addition to the July 10 murder mistrial, the other mistrial was in a child sexual abuse case in which a jury in a later trial found Isaias Ruiz-Gonzales guilty of first-degree sexual abuse and first-degree sodomy.

McAlpin said, “discovery violations have resulted in numerous continuances, mistrials and, in at least one case, dismissal, over the last five years.”

“Each of these examples represents unnecessary delay in achieving a just result.  And incalculable inconvenience and expense to witnesses, experts, attorneys, jurors, parties and taxpayers,” McAlpin wrote.

In his order, he said the law “requires that the State meet its discovery obligations ‘as soon as practicable'” after someone has been charged with a crime.

“Items that must be discovered to the defense include: names and recorded statements of witnesses the State intends to call as witnesses, recorded statements of the defendant, reports or statements of experts, tangible items the state intends to offer into evidence,” McAlpin wrote.

State law explicitly refers to the district attorney having to disclose information about evidence to the defense, and the defense also having an obligation to share information with the district attorney.

Reasons for delay in disclosure

McAlpin stated “there is no reason to believe that Mr. Wojcik or the Eugene Police Department were hiding or intentionally delaying disclosure” of evidence.

He wrote that it is known why evidence wasn’t handed over on time, as “the state’s (specifically the Lane County District Attorney and the Eugene Police Department) internal system for complying with the state’s compulsory discovery obligation is inadequate or improperly utilized.”

Five reports from Eugene police officers and 43 Portland Police Bureau body camera videos were among evidence not disclosed to defense attorneys until five days after Washington’s trial started, according to McAlpin’s order. Portland police officers helped serve a search warrant in the case, McAlpin wrote.

“Any video or reports of the Portland Police Bureau were prepared on an EPD case, for the purpose of assisting EPD, were known to EPD and was, therefore, legally within the control of the State and should have been disclosed,” McAlpin said in the order.

McAlpin ordered new dates relating to discovery, including that any additional evidence be provided to Washington’s defense no later than 30 calendar days before a new trial.

He also ordered “diligent, good faith efforts to ascertain the existence” of any additional “material” or “information” tied to the case.

“This is a shared obligation between the Lane County District Attorney’s Office and the Eugene Police Department,” McAlpin wrote. “The District Attorney and the Chief of the Eugene Police Department must be provided with a copy of this opinion and order.”

Lane County District Attorney Christopher Parosa was not available for comment Thursday.

But Spencer Gwartney, a senior prosecutor with the district attorney’s office, in a statement said there was an “unintentional” discovery violation in the City Nights shooting case.

“Prosecutors are presumed under the law to have all evidence in the State’s possession but that is not always the case in reality,” Gwartney said. “Law enforcement agencies occasionally (and inadvertently) do not send our office everything they have. That can be the case despite diligent and good faith efforts on the part of individual police officers, staff, and prosecutors.”

Gwartney added that at times a report or video “gets accidentally associated to the wrong case in a computer system.”

“The prosecutor in this case was unaware that certain items existed but had not been shared with our office,” Gwartney said, calling the mistrial “frustrating for everyone.”

“It has delayed justice and wasted precious time and resources. We are constantly working collaboratively with our law enforcement partners to address these kinds of issues and improve our systems,” Gwartney said.