Judge David D. Wolfe takes under advisement Abdul Powell’s renewed motion for a new trial

Lede Stewart County Circuit Court Judge David D. Wolfe on a post‑verdict hearing said he would take under advisement a second amended motion for a new trial filed on behalf of Abdul Powell and left several evidentiary and procedural questions for written ruling, after hearing argument from Powell’s attorney and the state and brief testimony from the defendant’s father.

Nut graf The motion challenges convictions entered after a jury verdict on Dec. 2, 2022, in case 2017‑CR‑155, principally arguing insufficiency of evidence, alleged improper admission of a forensic DNA analysis, alleged improper rebuttal cell‑tower testimony and claimed prejudice from the prosecutor’s closing argument and the court’s denial of a midtrial request to replace counsel. The court allowed defense counsel to make an offer of proof and to lodge photographs as exhibits, but said the remaining issues would be addressed in a written order.

Body William Silver, identified in court as counsel for Mr. Powell, opened the defense argument by telling the court that the defendant’s second amended motion for new trial (filed Feb. 28, 2025) largely incorporated earlier grounds and added a more specific claim about admission of a forensic analysis on a scarf recovered in a related burglary. Silver argued the evidence was insufficient to support convictions on counts 2–4 of the superseding indictment (first‑degree felony murder and related felony counts), saying, “the evidence presented was not sufficient to support the convictions.”

Silver summarized several lines of attack: absence of physical evidence placing Powell inside the Cooksey residence (no fingerprints or DNA tying Powell to that home), lack of proof of non‑consensual entry required for burglary under the Tennessee burglary statute, the need to scrutinize accomplice testimony from codefendants, and concerns about a computer‑assisted DNA analysis performed by a private firm the defense called “Cybergenetics.” He described the scarf DNA as “touch” or transfer DNA that can be easily transferred and argued the jury could be misled about the probative value of that analysis.

The court allowed Silver to incorporate the issues raised in Powell’s initial motion for new trial into today’s hearing and to rely on the written memorandum already filed. Silver also asked to make an offer of proof about a midtrial request Powell made to replace his attorney and offered to call Abdul Malik Rasheed—Powell’s father—to testify…