XXXTentacion’s Killer Calls Out Drake in Appeal Brief
Case Background
On June 18, 2018, rapper Jahseh “XXXTentacion” Onfroy was fatally shot during a robbery in Deerfield Beach, Florida. Three men—Michael Boatwright, Dedrick Williams, and Trayvon Newsome—were convicted in March 2023 of first-degree murder and armed robbery. A fourth, Robert Allen, pleaded guilty and testified for the prosecution. All three received life sentences in April 2023
The New Appeal: Introducing Drake
On November 29, 2024, Dedrick Williams’ attorney, Mauricio Padilla, filed an appeal brief claiming that Williams was unfairly denied the opportunity to introduce evidence related to XXXTentacion’s prior feud with Drake. Padilla argued this feud represented a plausible “alternative shooter” theory and should have been considered to establish reasonable doubt
In court filings, Padilla referenced a now-deleted Instagram post from the late rapper stating, “If anybody kills me, it was Champagne Papi [Drake], I’m snitching RN.” Although the quote is paraphrased, defense asserts the feud and that post were never investigated or mentioned during the trial
Legal Strategy: Reasonable Doubt, Not Accusation
Padilla emphasized that the appeal is not accusing Drake of the killing. Rather, it argues the prosecution’s refusal to allow evidence about the feud and potential Drake connection deprived Williams of a full defense—amounting to trial error. “A defendant has every right to… fully investigate and articulate … an alternate shooter defense,” Padilla stated in court
Supporters of this approach point to the jury’s need to hear all possible leads, and whether excluding even speculative evidence was justified.
Precedent: Drake’s Deposition Denied
During the 2023 trial, the defense attempted to subpoena Drake for a deposition, citing the same Instagram reference. Drake’s legal team successfully blocked it, arguing there was no evidence linking him to the crime or showing he had relevant information
Padilla contends that this prior denial amplified the procedural error: Drake-related evidence was already deemed fair game during trial, and sidelining it further reinforces the need for appellate review.
Public Reaction and Industry Insight
The appeal has reignited longstanding conspiracy theories—and social media chatter—about Drake’s supposed link to the murder. Reddit discussions noted:
“Drake did himself no favors in this one. Dude was subpoenaed for a reason.”
Hip-hop community commentators, such as on VladTV, remain skeptical. One commentator remarked: “No apparent motive… this lead raised eyebrows by boldly invoking Drake’s name in court matters.”
What’s Next: Appellate Court Decision
As of today, the Florida appellate court has not scheduled oral arguments nor issued a ruling. The central legal question is whether excluding the Drake-feud evidence constituted a reversible error significant enough to grant Williams a new trial.
Legal experts note that defendants are entitled to pursue any theory that could create reasonable doubt—but proving that omission was unjust legal interference is a higher bar.
Conclusion
While the appeal does not accuse Drake of involvement, its central claim challenges the fairness of Williams’ trial. It raises wider questions about how much speculative yet potentially relevant evidence must be included in high-stakes cases. The appellate court’s forthcoming ruling may redefine how attorneys can explore alternate suspect theories in criminal proceedings.
