D4vd Loses Private Legal Team as Murder Case Moves Toward Trial

D4vd’s murder case has taken another unexpected turn after his high-profile private legal team withdrew from representing him, leaving the singer to continue with a court-appointed public defender.

Attorneys Blair Berk, Marilyn Bednarski and Regina Peter were allowed to step away from the case on August 31. The court then determined that D4vd, whose legal name is David Anthony Burke, qualified for appointed counsel because he was unable to afford continued private representation. He is now being represented by the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office.  

Berk, Bednarski and Peter tell TMZ … “This morning the court granted our request to withdraw as counsel and appointed the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office, after it was determined David qualified for appointed counsel.”
The lawyers go on … “We continue to support David and his defense against these serious charges. We are grateful that the Los Angeles County Public Defender’s Office has taken over the representation and that David has a highly capable and committed team of attorneys and investigators behind him.”

TMZ

The change came as D4vd pleaded not guilty to the charges against him and prepared for his next court appearance on October 19. His former lawyers did not publicly explain why they could no longer continue, although they confirmed that the court found him eligible for publicly funded representation.  

The development has raised new questions about the financial pressure surrounding a case that is already expected to become one of the most closely watched celebrity trials of the year. Prosecutors have not yet decided whether to seek the death penalty, while D4vd remains in custody without bail as the case moves toward trial.  

The Evidence Prosecutors Say D4vd’s Defence Must Overcome

From everything prosecutors have put into the public record so far, I think D4vd’s defence faces an enormous uphill battle. He has pleaded not guilty, and legally he remains presumed innocent unless prosecutors prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt. But this is not a case built around one suspicious circumstance. At the preliminary hearing, prosecutors presented several different pieces of evidence that they say connect David Anthony Burke to Celeste Rivas Hernandez’s death. A judge ultimately found enough evidence to send the case to trial.

Perhaps the most damaging evidence is what investigators say they found inside Burke’s Hollywood Hills garage. An LAPD DNA analyst testified that blood recovered from several items in the garage matched Celeste’s DNA profile. Investigators found blood on or around a rubber floor mat, rowing machine, tarp, cleaning materials and Tesla charger.

Then there are the purchases. Prosecutors say Celeste arrived at Burke’s home on April 23, 2025, and no one saw her alive again. They allege that someone using the name “Travion Davis” later ordered three chainsaws, a body bag, an inflatable blue pool and a shovel to the property. Investigators later found two of the chainsaws in the garage but detected no blood on them. They never recovered the third chainsaw.

The Physical Evidence, Messages and Alleged Motive at the Centre of the Case

The blue pool may be particularly difficult for the defence to explain. Investigators testified that it had cuts and missing pieces, while small fragments of blue plastic recovered from Celeste’s remains physically matched the damaged pool found in Burke’s garage.

Her remains were also discovered months later inside the front trunk of a Tesla registered to Burke. That fact alone does not establish who killed her, but combined with the evidence prosecutors say they recovered from his home, it becomes part of a much larger circumstantial case.

Prosecutors have also presented hundreds of messages between Burke and Celeste. Those messages document an intimate relationship and, according to testimony, show that Celeste became pregnant at 13 and later had an abortion. Investigators also recovered sexually explicit material involving the pair from Burke’s phone. Prosecutors say law enforcement had already told Burke that Celeste was underage.

The state also says it has evidence pointing to motive. Prosecutors presented messages sent shortly before Celeste disappeared in which she threatened to expose Burke and damage his career. They argue that he feared revelations about their relationship could destroy a music career that was rapidly taking off.

Final Thoughts

None of this means the defence has nothing to challenge. There are weaknesses they can attack. Authorities have not produced a murder weapon, no eyewitness has testified to seeing Burke kill Celeste, and decomposition made it difficult for the medical examiner to determine certain details about exactly how and when she died. His previous attorneys also challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of the autopsy and other evidence.

But that is exactly why I think the defence faces such a difficult task. They do not merely have to create doubt around one piece of evidence. They have to persuade a jury that the blood evidence, the purchases, the damaged pool, the plastic fragments, the Tesla, the messages, the alleged motive and the timeline still fail to prove Burke committed the murder.

D4vd legal team are also defending a man whom prosecutors accuse of having a sexual relationship with a 13-year-old girl, an allegation supported, according to the state, by hundreds of messages and material recovered from his phone.

That is a very different challenge from attacking a case built around one witness or one questionable forensic result. The prosecution has already laid out a substantial circumstantial case, and a judge found it strong enough to require a trial. A jury must ultimately decide whether prosecutors have proved Burke’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, but the evidence already presented in court gives the defence a significant amount to challenge.