Authorities said the March 2024 blast followed months of threats before a jury convicted Keyonna Waddell.
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. — Months before a blast severed a Long Island man’s hand, prosecutors said his girlfriend had threatened him with dynamite several times.
That alleged history became a key frame for the case against Keyonna Waddell, 35, of Deer Park, who was convicted April 24 in Suffolk County. Jurors found her guilty of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the first degree. Prosecutors said the March 22, 2024, explosion was the violent outcome of a domestic conflict that had already included repeated threats involving the same type of weapon. Waddell faces up to 25 years in prison at sentencing May 27.
Before the explosion, prosecutors said, Waddell and her boyfriend argued inside his apartment. The victim told her to leave. Both left the home after the dispute. Later, the victim returned and did not see Waddell in the apartment, so he went to sleep. The district attorney’s office said an explosive device resembling a stick of dynamite was then thrown into his bedroom. The public account does not say whether a door or window was used, how much time passed between the argument and the attack or whether any surveillance video captured movement near the apartment.
A hissing sound woke the victim, prosecutors said. He saw a flame on the bedroom floor and discovered the burning object. Suffolk County District Attorney Raymond A. Tierney said the man first tried to extinguish it. When that failed, he picked it up and tried to throw it away from him. The device detonated while it was still in his hand. Tierney said the victim felt searing pain and realized that his hand was gone. The man then ran from the apartment to the driveway, where prosecutors said he saw Waddell fleeing on foot.
Hospital treatment confirmed the lasting damage. Surgeons removed the rest of the victim’s mangled hand and part of his arm, prosecutors said. The district attorney’s office did not identify the victim, and it did not issue a detailed medical update beyond the amputation. The injury made the case more than a weapons possession prosecution. It placed serious physical harm at the center of the trial. The permanent loss of part of an arm also gave prosecutors a clear measure of the alleged assault’s impact when they presented the case to jurors.
Investigators arrested Waddell one day after the blast. As the inquiry continued, prosecutors said they learned that Waddell had previously threatened the victim with dynamite multiple times in the months leading up to the attack. The office did not release the exact number of threats, the locations where they were made or whether they were written, spoken or delivered another way. Still, the information allowed prosecutors to describe the explosion as part of a broader pattern. Tierney said after the verdict that the case was a reminder that domestic violence can escalate to deadly levels.
Evidence about the device itself remains limited in the public record. Prosecutors described the object as resembling a stick of dynamite and said it exploded after the victim tried to move it. They did not publicly say whether it was recovered in fragments, tested by explosives specialists or traced to a particular source. They also did not say whether Waddell had access to other explosive materials. Those gaps do not change the verdict, but they mark the boundary between what prosecutors have released and what may have been developed through trial testimony, police reports and forensic review.
The criminal counts reflect the two main parts of the prosecution theory. Assault in the first degree addressed the injuries suffered by the victim. Criminal possession of a weapon in the first degree addressed the explosive device. The jury’s decision means it found the state proved both charges beyond a reasonable doubt. Waddell’s maximum exposure, according to prosecutors, is 25 years in prison. Sentencing will shift the courtroom focus from what happened and who did it to what punishment should follow the conviction.
Tierney thanked prosecutors and the Suffolk County Police Department after the jury returned its decision. “Thanks to the outstanding work of our prosecutors and the Suffolk County Police Department, a dangerous individual has been held accountable,” he said. The district attorney’s statement did not include comments from Waddell’s defense. It also did not say whether she testified at trial, whether any plea talks occurred before the verdict or whether her lawyer plans to file post-trial motions. Those issues may remain within the court record rather than the public announcement.
The location of the attack, an apartment where the victim had gone to sleep, gave the case a private setting but public consequences. The explosion brought police, medical care and later a criminal trial. The case also drew wider attention because the weapon described by prosecutors is rarely linked to domestic assault prosecutions. Instead of a fight ending with bruises or cuts, prosecutors said this dispute involved an explosive device, a burning fuse and an amputation. The unusual facts made the prior threats especially important in explaining how authorities understood the attack.
Court proceedings are scheduled to resume May 27 in Suffolk County. Until then, the verdict stands as the controlling court action. Prosecutors have stated the maximum prison exposure, but the judge has not yet imposed a term. The next hearing will decide how the court weighs the prior threats, the bedroom blast and the victim’s permanent injury.
Author note: Last updated May 19, 2026.