### Shooter Tied to Deadly Drive-By by Fingerprints and Guns
Pennsylvania’s Superior Court upheld Quentin Maurice Primus’s life sentence without parole for first-degree murder and a barrage of gun crimes stemming from a July 2022 Pittsburgh drive-by shooting. The panel rejected his claims that evidence was insufficient and that prior shooting testimony unfairly tainted the trial. Primus, convicted by jury and bench, now faces life plus 43-86 years after riddling a Pontiac G6 with 16 bullets from a gray Ford Fusion.
The nightmare unfolded in Hazelwood around 12:41 a.m. on July 1, 2022. Victims Darrian Davis, Jalen Yates, and D’Andre Wells sat in the Pontiac when the Fusion—missing a passenger mirror and sporting a thin antenna—circled three times. On the final pass, the front passenger leaned out and unleashed hell: Davis died from neck and chest wounds; Yates survived neck and chest shots; Wells took one in the hand. Ballistics linked three bullets from Davis and the Pontiac to one 9mm gun; casings at the scene came from 9mm and .45 calibers. Surveillance captured the Fusion fleeing, but not the shooter’s face.
Cops tracked the Fusion via license plate readers to LPD5962. A quick traffic stop nabbed Primus behind the wheel, packed with his mail, learner’s permit, recent pay stub, and two cell phones. He admitted to detectives he alone controlled the car that night. GPS from the infotainment system placed it circling the kill zone right on time, post-shooting jaunts through Pittsburgh. Primus’s fingerprints smeared the passenger window—positioned as if leaning out to fire across his body—plus his palm on a rear door. His phones pinged active in the Fusion pre- and post-shooting: calls to mom and girlfriend, texts boasting from Hazelwood, even asking a pal for a ride in their car. One phone linked directly to the car’s system until minutes before shots rang out.
Primus’s appeal screamed insufficient evidence, leaning on a claim his phones were a block away during the 12:41 blast. But the court, viewing facts favorably to prosecutors, called the circumstantial web ironclad: exclusive car access, prints screaming “shooter position,” ballistics, GPS, and phone trails proving identity beyond doubt—even if he drove as accomplice. No eyewitness needed; Pennsylvania law greenlights circumstantial convictions if they crush reasonable doubt.
He also blasted admission of a Munhall shooting four days prior, where the same 9mm spat casings and the Fusion took bullet damage—Primus was driving hours later, and he texted about “my gun jam problem” after seeing video. The court ruled it fair rebuttal: defense counsel cracked the door on cross-exam by noting the gun’s “multiple incidents,” so prosecutors countered to tie it to Primus. Judges praised cautionary jury instructions barring “prior bad act” inferences, finding no abuse of discretion.
The three-judge panel—Olson, Stabile, King—filed the non-precedential affirmance December 8, 2025, slamming the door on Primus’s shot at freedom.