Prosecutor: DNA, ballistic links and flight create reasonable inference of accomplice liability

At oral argument, the prosecutor emphasized forensic and circumstantial evidence tying Xavier Randall to the vehicle and ammunition used in a drive‑by shooting.

Mister Roberts told the court the record includes DNA recovered from a box of ammunition found in a Dodge Neon associated with the defendant, DNA on a firearm found near the defendant’s flight path, and shell cases partially matched to the Smith & Wesson recovered near the scene. He said video and officer dash‑cam footage placed the vehicles at the scene and that the defendant’s flight from officers showed consciousness of guilt. “The DNA was recovered from the grip and the muzzle,” Roberts said, and stressed that circumstantial evidence “is not to be considered less reliable than direct evidence.”

Roberts also pointed to clerk’s paper 7, which he said contained the jury instruction on accomplice liability. He urged the court to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and to defer to the jury’s choice among competing inferences: “the jury is not barred from rejecting alternative theories if it finds it unreasonable,” he said, arguing that the jury here could reasonably conclude the defendant aided the crime.

The prosecutor acknowledged some forensic descriptions are circumstantial rather than conclusive and that not every ballistic match was complete, but argued the cumulative effect of the evidence supported the jury’s verdict.

The bench asked for clarification about the ballistic links, the timing of flight and how possession of ammunition inside the vehicle relates to participation in the shooting; Roberts tied those elements together as the state’s theory of accomplice liability.