Petition to Revoke DC Fish Carryout’s ABC License

Home Forums Public Safety Petition to Revoke DC Fish Carryout’s ABC License

Topic: Petition to Revoke DC Fish Carryout’s ABC License

Public Safety May 7, 2012 at 12:36 pm

Petition to Revoke DC Fish Carryout’s ABC License

Neighbors and Friends,

As many of you know, based on strong investigative leads, DC’s Metropolitan Police Department executed a search warrant at the DC Fish Carryout, at 3475 14th Street NW. MPD found large quantities of crack cocaine on the premises.  The defendants were Suk “Bruce” In Hyun, 54, the owner of the DC Fish Carryout who holds a DC license to sell tobacco and alcoholic beverages. The other two defendants, Craig McKoy, 43 and Timothy Diablo Hill Jr, 24, have extensive criminal records. All three are being prosecuted by the US Attorney’s Office, and felony convictions are expected in all three cases.

A group of concerned citizens discussed this matter at a recent public meeting. As a result, I have created a petition: Washington DC Alcoholic Beverage Control Board: Revoke the ABC License of the DC Fish Carryout, because we care deeply about this very important issue.
We’re trying to collect at least 500 signatures, and we could really use your help. If you live or work in the vicinity of the DC Fish Carryout, particularly ANC 1A, please sign the petition.  It’ll just take a minute!
Why is drug dealing so prevalent in our neighborhood, but not in other parts of DC? It’s partly our own fault. When we don’t scream “NO WAY,” we whisper “okay.” Let’s send a clear message to the ABC Chairman that OUR children’s futures matter just as much as anyone’s, and we won’t stand around and allow businesses that support the crack trade to prosper through the privilege of a city liquor license.
Once you’re done, please ask your friends to sign the petition as well. Grassroots movements succeed because people like you are willing to spread the word!

4 Replies Add Reply

There are now 149 signatures on the petition. Please add your voice, if you live, work, play, worship, or own property in Columbia Heights (particularly ANC 1A: and you agree that “business-as-usual” should not go on. We hope to get to 500 signatures soon!

ABC License Revocation is not a criminal proceeding. It is a matter related to business operations, outside of criminal guilt or innocence. It’s enough for many of us that MPD seized a large quantity of crack cocaine from the DC Fish Carryout’s premises during a February search warrant. In order for MPD to receive authorization to carry out a search warrant, substantial investigative findings were documented. Sufficient probable cause was found to charge the three defendants with felony drug distribution. There are high legal standards for such serious charges. According to the court dockets, plea bargains are expected in all three cases, meaning that the defendants were caught dead-to-rights, and will admit their guilt. See for yourself:  

Timothy Diablo Hill may not be convicted at all. He didn’t show up to court on 4/20, and his whereabouts are unknown to those in law enforcement. He’s essentially “in-the-wind,” getting away with it, unless he gets picked up. Meanwhile, the store owner was released on personal recognizance and as far as I know, is operating and earning as usual.

A liquor license is a privilege granted by our city government who stand for the people of our city. An ABC license allows a business like the DC Fish Carryout greater earning potential. By harboring the sale of drugs from the DC Fish Carryout, Suk In Hyun has violated the public trust (allegedly for now; once he pleads guilty, in fact). The Office of the Attorney General has already prepared a case file, and the ABC Board will review it soon. The ABC Board does not require a criminal conviction to revoke the liquor license, but I’m sure they will assess all the facts in evidence fairly. The petition and letter-writing campaign were pursued by concerned community members based on the advice we received from an official involved in the case at a recent community meeting. He said that petitions and letters are accepted and appropriate means of protest.

There are now over 250 signatures on the petition and many signers also wrote heart-felt comments about keeping their neighborhood safe for their families. Tax-paying citizens have every right to have our “say” about who should hold a license to sell liquor and tobacco at nearby businesses.


Sorry. Not going to sign this. Please consider the following before you decide to sign or not. The guy (Bruce) may very well be guilty, but that’s why we have a legal system.  Innocent until proven guilty seems pretty reasonable even in this instance.  A few thoughts for context:
 – He may have been coerced into participation through threats, protection, whatever.
 – He may not even be involved.  Perhaps the other guys were in the store and stashed their crack when the cops busted the place.
 – If he is guilty, he’s going to jail and certainly won’t be selling anything out of his store anymore. What’s the point of taking away the beer/wine/tobacco license and diminishing the possibility of a legitimate owner taking over the same functions?
 I am very concerned about crime/drugs/safety in our neighborhood. If the guy is found guilty, I fully support sending a strong message and putting him away for a long time. I appreciate efforts to clean up the neighborhood and welcome the changes we’ve seen since moving in (closure of two prostitution rings at 14th and Parkwood, fewer drunks on the end of the block, greater police presence, just to name a few) but in this instance my sense is that the outrage (towards the drug dealers and those potentially involved) is being misdirected to the detriment of our legal system.

There are now 468 petition signatures, just 32 shy of the goal, 500. Please sign, if you haven’t yet:
Update: The first of the 3 defendants has pleaded guilty to felony distribution of crack cocaine as charged, and is scheduled to be sentenced on October 15, 2012. While he was in bench warrant status, he picked up two new felony charges, contempt-of-court and possession of a firearm in a vehicle. The contempt charge was dismissed as part of the plea deal, but he will also face sentencing in the firearm charge.

Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)


Reply to this topic

You must be logged in to reply to this discussion. or