Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Published on: May 11, 2021

Smell of Marijuana Not Enough to Justify Frisk

Possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana has not been a crime in Maryland for more than 5 years, but the full impact of decriminalization is still a work in progress. When simple possession of marijuana became a civil offense, it did far more than simply end thousands of criminal prosecutions. For decades the odor of marijuana has been a powerful tool for law enforcement officers to initiate investigations of individuals out in public. The smell of marijuana has justified thousands of searches of people, cars and even homes, and the fruits of these searches have resulted in criminal prosecutions for weapons, narcotics, stolen property and other contraband. While State’s Attorneys have not been able to prosecute simple marijuana possession since the fall of 2014, police officers did not simply stop using the smell of pot to justify searches. And frankly, at the time they had no reason to do so, as the law offered no guidance on how to police in the decriminalization age. As is typically the case, the Courts had to fill the gaping holes left by lawmakers, though this took a few years and is still an on-going process.

Separation of powers dictates that the Courts cannot simply step in and establish policy; defendants have to be arrested and their lawyers have to file suppression motions. Then the trial courts have to deny these motions and appellate lawyers have to file briefs and make arguments in Annapolis. The whole process from arrest to an appellate decision that clarifies a law typically takes 2-3 years or more in some cases if the case goes past the intermediate appellate court. With respect to decriminalization of marijuana, the first major ruling came in 2019 when the Court of Appeals held that police are not permitted to search a vehicle occupant based on the odor of marijuana in State v. Pacheco. However, due to the automobile exception and the fact that marijuana is not technically a legal substance (decriminalized does not mean legalized) cops are still permitted for now to search a vehicle based on the smell of marijuana. One year later the State’s highest court again clarified the bounds of decriminalization by ruling in State v. Lewis that police officers do not have probable cause to arrest and then search a person based on the odor of marijuana. The court did not address whether a police officer would have reasonable suspicion to briefly detain and pat down a person for weapons based on the odor of pot because Lewis was placed in handcuffs and effectively arrested. A stop and frisk detention is less intrusive than an arrest, and only requires police be able to identify a specific suspicion of criminal activity.

It took another year after the Lewis case for a stop and frisk based on the smell of marijuana to reach the appeals court, but we now have an answer to that issue as well. As of two weeks ago it is officially impermissible for a police officer to briefly detain and frisk an individual based on the smell of marijuana. The ruling is hardly a surprise, but nonetheless was another hole in the Maryland marijuana policy that needed to be filled. The case involved a juvenile in Prince George’s County who was detained and frisked on the steps of an apartment complex after a call came in to police that individuals were smoking pot and hanging out. The responding officer ordered 4 juveniles to sit on the steps after smelling marijuana, and found a handgun on one of the individuals after conducting a pat-down search. This juvenile was then arrested and charged with illegal possession of firearm by a person under 21 and wear transport carry of a firearm. His motion to suppress was denied and then he was found involved (similar to guilty in an adult case) of the crime and sentenced to probation. As a result of the ruling the case will be vacated and the juvenile will have his record cleared.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 29, 2021

What are the Repeat Offender Laws for DUI in Maryland?

By Benjamin Herbst

Impaired driving laws are constantly evolving in almost every state, and Maryland is no exception. It seems that each year the legislature makes a firm commitment to steadily increase the potential punishments for drunk driving. While many of these initiatives do not end up becoming law, they do garner a degree of attention from the media. This in turn gets the message out to the public and provides a layer of deterrence, which is one of the main goals of lawmakers and anti DUI lobbyists. In order to keep up, we feel it is important to provide our readers with an overview of the state drunk driving laws every couple of years.

The potential punishments for a first offense DUI and DWI have changed little in recent time. In Maryland a person who is arrested for impaired driving will almost always be charged with both DUI and DWI. While it is rarely brought up in court unless the case goes to jury trial, DWI is considered a lesser offense and as a result has a lower maximum penalty of 60 days in jail, a $500 fine and 8 points if there is a conviction. Defendants who are charged with drunk driving and are seeking a plea deal should always inquire about the possibility of pleading to DWI in exchange for a dismissal of the DUI counts. A defendant who submits to a breath test and is over the legal limit will likely not have this option, but it still does not hurt to try. The maximum penalty for DUI and DUI per se is 1 year in jail, a $1,000 fine and 12 points upon conviction. The per se count is charged as a result of a breath test that is over the legal limit of .08.

A defendant who is charged as a repeat offender faces far stricter penalties, as the maximum jail sentence for DUI with one prior conviction is 2 years, and for DWI is 1 year in jail. The fines and license suspension times also increase and there is also the possibility of mandatory jail time if the prior offense occurred within 5 years of the current offense. The punishments for a second offense have not changed in the past few years, but the legislature has addressed punishing those who have two or more prior convictions for DUI, DWI or other impaired driving offense in a different state. Anyone with two prior convictions faces up to 5 years in prison upon being charged with either DWI or DUI. Probation before judgment or PBJ does not count as a conviction under this provision. A defendant with 3 prior convictions for drunk or impaired driving faces up to 10 years in prison upon being charged with a 4^th DUI or DWI. The 10-year maximum penalty also applies to anyone with a criminal conviction for homicide by vehicle or vessel while impaired or under the influence. A defendant who has been convicted of causing life-threatening injury by motor vehicle or vessel while impaired or under the influence also faces up to 10 years in prison if subsequently charged with DUI or DWI.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 19, 2021

Ocean City Considers Criminalizing Excessive Boardwalk Noise

By Benjamin Herbst

The Town of Ocean City, Maryland’s only incorporated beach town, is considering strict noise ordinances that would potentially criminalize loud behavior on the popular boardwalk. The regionally famous boardwalk is home to dozens of businesses including restaurants and hotels, and many have expressed frustration over the unpoliced noise. The same boisterous activity that attracts the crowds to the southern end of town may also be pushing tourists from actually doing business on the boardwalk. Families and other visitors still love coming to visit the boardwalk, but many are inclined to sleep or have a sit-down meal elsewhere due to the noise and commotion.

Last summer the town retained noise consultants to establish baseline decibel levels for certain parts of the boardwalk, and then worked from there to propose potential limits. These limits would be based on the specific location and time of day, with enforcement being conducted in a standardized method. The city has already established that daytime activities run from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays and 7 a.m. to midnight on weekends. If the ordinance becomes effective this summer there would likely be an influx to town police officers hitting the boardwalk with handheld decibel meters when the clock strikes 12. Anyone convicted of the new noise violations would likely face up to 90 days in jail and a $500 fine if the ordinance classifies the offense as a misdemeanor. Ocean City already has some of the strictest local ordinances in the state, and various acts that would otherwise be punishable as a civil infraction are criminalized in in OCMD.

Alcohol violations are typically charged as civil infractions under Maryland law, and violators are ticketed and told to appear in court. Their cases are classified as CZs rather than CRs and are not punishable by the possibility of incarceration. On the other hand, in Ocean City these same violations carry the potential for up to 90 days in the Worcester County jail. Thankfully, three months in the county lockup is an unrealistic punishment for walking down Coastal Highway with a White Claw, but the bigger issue is that any offense punishable by jail time gives the police the authority to arrest. Not only does an arrest trigger irreversible consequences such as a permanent FBI record, but it also allows the police to search a person and his or her belongings. Search incident to arrest is a powerful evidence gathering tool for police, and often the secondary offenses based on items recovered in searches are greater than the initial reason for the arrest.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 7, 2021

Man Pleads Guilty to Arson Offense in Pasadena Bar Fire

By Benjamin Herbst

It has been almost four years since a popular neighborhood bar in Pasadena burned down and was permanently shuttered, and now an end to the criminal case that followed is in sight. A 36-year-old man from the same Anne Arundel County neighborhood as the bar recently pled guilty to a federal arson charge after being indicted back in September of 2019. He now faces a minimum of 5 years in prison and a maximum of 20 years for his actions, and will learn his fate in July when the case is set for sentencing at the Baltimore federal courthouse.

Law enforcement officers likely made the initial determination that the fire was incendiary or set deliberately while the wood building was still smoking, though the bizarre details surrounding the fire unfolded in the weeks that followed. Investigators from the ATF and the Anne Arundel County Fire and Explosives Investigation Unit confirmed their suspicions about an intentional fire by locating charred remains of homemade explosive devices and traces of gasoline, which is a common accelerant in arson cases. Law enforcement officers were also able to view surveillance footage that captured several flashes of light preceding areas of the building catching fire that were likely the incendiary devices making contact with the building. A police K9 unit was also able to locate the presence of gasoline on the other side of a fence that surrounded the bar, which was determined to be the area where the makeshift explosive devices or Molotov cocktails were ignited and thrown. Finally, law enforcement recovered a glove that contained both traces of an accelerant and the defendant’s DNA.

The case against the defendant quickly became open and shut, but the motivation for his actions is what made this case bizarre. According to the plea agreement and Maryland public case search records, the defendant was charged with a domestic second-degree assault and a petty theft for an incident that occurred outside of the bar about a week before the fire. This assault was captured on the bar’s surveillance cameras, which the defendant attempted to destroy by setting fire to the whole building. The irony in this situation is twofold, as a police officer actually witnessed the assault, thus making the surveillance cameras a bonus rather than an essential part of the assault case. In addition, the surveillance system not only survived the fire, but recorded the defendant’s actions on the night of the fire. The defendant ended up pleading guilty to the assault in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County in Annapolis, and was given a 3-year suspended sentence.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 1, 2021

Marijuana Legalization Bills Fail

By Benjamin Herbst

The legalization of marijuana for recreational use will not become a reality in Maryland this year, as state politicians have conceded that their efforts will have to wait until 2022. The work of several lawmakers in Annapolis sparked interest across party lines over the possibility of regulating marijuana for recreational use. Lawmakers and lobbyists were excited by the opportunity to end needless criminal prosecution over a substance that Maryland residents want to access, while also generating millions of dollars in tax revenue for the state. Both the House and the Senate debated bills that would have established a licensing process for recreational marijuana sales, along with a tax structure to generate revenue. The bills were wordy and complex, but produced several interesting snippets that appeared in news headlines across the state’s media outlets.

The House and Senate bills aimed to establish a lawful possession threshold of 4 ounces of flower cannabis, which is roughly ten times the amount that currently separates a civil infraction from criminal possession of marijuana. Many lawmakers have taken issue with the current marijuana possession law due to the arbitrary assignment of 10 grams as the amount that triggers criminal prosecution. There has never been any logical explanation why the legislature settled on 10 grams other than it being a nice round number. Marijuana is not typically sold in increments of 10 grams either legally or on the street, and it is entirely reasonable for regular marijuana users to purchase more than 10 grams at a time for their own personal use. In addition to drastically increasing the amount of pot that could be lawfully possessed, lawmakers likely would have allowed Maryland residents to grow their own marijuana plants. There were provisions in both bills that would have mandated personal cultivation to be out of public view and carried out in a manner that would not provide access to minors. Lawmakers could have agreed on these issues in time for a unified bill to be presented to the governor. What they could not agree upon however were more complex issues such as the potential tax rates and the amount of licenses that would be issued.

It has always been our position that a cap on the number of licenses is unfair and encourages a corrupt application process, where those with connections seem to come out on top. There is no logical reason to place a limit on the number of recreational licenses, just as there is no reason to limit medical grow and dispense licenses. The state could easily develop a strict and well-funded regulatory arm for recreational marijuana, and all qualified applicants should be permitted to engage in the marijuana business provided they could adhere to the regulations. Arguments that without license caps recreational marijuana stores could then line the streets of every neighborhood are naïve and unfounded. It is a great expense and a time-consuming endeavor to open a dispensary, and no investor would make this commitment only to fail due to an overly saturated market.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 23, 2021

State Allows Full Capacity for Casinos- Revenue Still Down

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland governor recently announced that state casinos will no longer be prohibited from operating at full capacity under state law, but some local restrictions are still in place and revenues remain lower at all gaming establishments. State orders had previously limited capacity to 50 percent at each of the six casinos around the state, a number that had been in place since December. The state’s largest casino, MGM National Harbor in Prince George’s County, and the Horseshoe in Baltimore City are still operating at limited capacity per local government orders. These two casinos had been operating at 25% percent capacity, and will continue with some restrictions for the foreseeable future. In total, the state’s casinos produced over $120 million in gross gaming revenue last month, but this number was down over 16% from February of 2020.

While profits are down across the state, the revenue numbers tell us a different story about social behavior in the COVID-19 era. Despite capacity limits of 50% the gaming profits are down less than 17%. This means the public have not proven hesitant to return to the casinos to spend their hard-earned dollars. And since this is a criminal law blog, it also means criminal cases taking place on casino property are likely returning to pre-covid levels. The most common cases that we have seen from the casinos are trespass and disorderly conduct citations. Casino trespass cases usually begin one of two ways, with perhaps the most common cause being violations of the state’s voluntary exclusion program. A person who has placed themselves on the VEP list for two years or for life will be prohibited from returning to the grounds of the casino (not just the casino floor) indefinitely until they follow the steps required to be taken off the list. Voluntary exclusion violations will result in criminal trespass citation being issued that comes with a mandatory court appearance. Upon conviction a defendant faces up to 60 days in jail, a $500 and the possibility of a permanent criminal record. The large majority (if any) of these cases do not result in jail time, but the consequences can still be severe for a person with a clean record who may have a security clearance, professional license and/or immigration issues. Casino trespass cases are also quite common for those individuals that have received a no-trespass warning by a member of the casino staff. Upon violation of these warnings and individual can be cited and removed from the property. In addition, a person who is cited for casino trespass would forfeit all of their earnings, even if they have a strong argument that the warning was insufficient.

Disorderly conduct and other petit offenses are also relatively common at casinos due to the heightened emotions of gambling and perhaps the heavy flow of alcohol, but for the most part the facilities maintain a relatively safe environment. The casinos are equipped with sophisticated security systems and even facial recognition technology, and security does not hesitate to use these systems to initiate charges against a person. The Blog will continue to follow the revenue numbers and incidents of crime at casino facilities across the state, and will post a follow-up article in the future. Legalized sports gambling is around the corner in Maryland, and this will undoubtedly pump up the revenue as well as the crowds in all the casinos. More people equals the potential for more trespass, theft, assault, theft and disorderly conduct violations, and we will be there for anyone who needs assistance.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 11, 2021

Poll Shows Strong Support for Marijuana Legalization

By Benjamin Herbst

The week Goucher College released the results of several polls including those related to concerns over the state government’s handling of COVID-19 and the general attitude toward the vaccine. The Towson based liberal arts college also conducted a poll on the attitude toward marijuana legalization, and the results may come as a surprise to some. Support for the legalization of recreational marijuana is as high as ever in Maryland, with two-thirds of the state population saying the time is now to make pot legal. This is by far the highest level of support that legalized recreation marijuana has seen since polling on the issue began in 2013. For comparison, two years ago support for legalization was roughly ten percent lower at 57 percent. A closer look into the polling data reveals that even republicans are starting to come around to the idea of legalizing marijuana. For the first time ever more than half of Maryland republicans are onboard with legalization. While the number sits right at 50 percent in favor, only 47 percent of republicans oppose legal pot. More than three quarters of democrats support legalization and only 18 percent are opposed. The poll was released smack dab in the middle of multiple legalization bills being debated by lawmakers in Annapolis, and may swing some voters who are undecided.

In addition to the polling data lawmakers should take into consideration that neighboring Virginia recently passed a bill to legalize marijuana (though the current law will not be in effect until 2024), and the Governor of New Jersey just signed a law legalizing recreational marijuana use after it easily passed in a November vote. The current legalization proposals in Maryland would end civil and criminal prosecution of personal use marijuana possession. Possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana is still illegal, but many times individuals arrested for other offenses are not even charged with civil marijuana violations. Possession of more than 10 grams of marijuana is still punishable by up to 6 months in jail, which is absurd considering the overall climate in the state and the country as a whole. Regardless of whether marijuana is legalized this year, a 6-month penalty for simple possession has to be addressed.

As of now the two main provisions of the marijuana legalization bills currently up for debate are changing the definition of personal use to 4 ounces or less, and allowing for the limited growing of personal use marijuana plants. If the bill passes as currently written there would be a drastic reduction of criminal marijuana possession charges. Presumably a person could be charged with possession for having more than 4 ounces, but many of these defendants would likely be charged with possession with intent to distribute if the amount was considerably more. At least in the beginning stages of legalization it would be hard to imagine a Maryland police officer charging a person with possession if he or she is found with a half-pound or more. One solution to this issue would be to completely do away with the crime of possession of marijuana, and modify the PWID law to require clear and convincing evidence of the intent to distribute. As criminal defense lawyers, we are too used to the police assuming that anyone in possession of more than a small baggie is a dealer. This is a completely unjust practice, and while we have successfully argued for the dismissal of numerous possession with intent to distribute cases, these clients never should have been arrested in the first place. Hopefully state lawmakers and prosecutors will send a firm message that they do not intend for anyone to be arrested for a marijuana related charge unless it is clear they are unlawfully dealing.

Continue reading →

Published on: March 3, 2021

PG County Man Guilty of Manufacturing Counterfeit Currency

By Benjamin Herbst

This week at the Greenbelt Federal Courthouse a 32-year-old man from Prince George’s County pleaded guilty to manufacturing and passing counterfeit currency. Sentencing is currently set for early June, and the defendant faces up to 5 years in prison for conspiracy to pass counterfeit currency and up to 20 years in prison for manufacturing counterfeit currency. As part of the plea agreement the PG County man from Capital Heights admitted to conspiring with two other individuals to print and use fake $100 and $20 bills. The printing took place at the defendant’s home, and then he would either sell the fake money at a discount or buy merchandise with it at local retailers. At some point law enforcement officers caught wind of the conspiracy and applied for a search warrant, which was executed in March of 2018. Agents recovered cell phones, three counterfeit $100 bills, linen copy paper, a printer, a .38 caliber revolver and shell casing, and a scale and baggies. The U.S. Secret Service took over the investigation and determined that the ink contained in the seized printer’s ink cartridge was indistinguishable from numerous counterfeit bills that were later recovered.

The defendant and his co-conspirators were not arrested by federal agents after the search warrant was executed, and unbeknownst to them the investigation continued. Federal law enforcement agencies are known for their patience in gathering as much evidence as possible before charges are formally filed, and this case is a perfect example. In the summer and fall of 2019 federal law enforcement continued to monitor the suspects and documented numerous transactions where counterfeit currency was used. In July of 2019 law enforcement conducted a traffic stop on the defendant’s vehicle and found 18 counterfeit $100 bills after a brief chase where the defendant attempted to run away. A few months later in October of 2019 the defendant’s vehicle was again stopped, and again he attempted to flee. During his brief flight the defendant discarded counterfeit currency in a trashcan, which was recovered by law enforcement. Police also recovered uncut sheets of counterfeit $20 bills. All told the defendant admitted to passing between $95,000 and $150,000 in counterfeit bills. The defendant agreed to pay at least $95,000 in restitution joint and severally with the other co-conspirators. It is reasonable to question whether the victims would have been defrauded out of this much money if the suspects had been prosecuted in 2018, rather than more than a year later.

It does not seem like the defendant has a lengthy criminal history, which should help his cause at sentencing. On the other hand, the government will certainly emphasize the fact that the defendant continued to engage in criminal activity despite the execution of multiple searches and seizures upon his home, car and person. The defendant also ran from police twice, and showed no signs of abandoning the criminal conspiracy on his own. The defendant was even charged with felony theft and possessing forged currency in Maryland state court in the District Court for Montgomery County in Rockville, but these charges were dismissed likely in anticipation of a federal indictment. The defendant had ample opportunity to see that law enforcement was on to him.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 22, 2021

Lawmakers Debate Ghost Gun Regulations

By Benjamin Herbst

Over the last couple of years law enforcement has seen a dramatic uptick in the presence of build-at-home firearms commonly known as ghost guns. Ghost guns are typically ordered online and delivered to a person in a kit with several unfinished parts. These parts require some degree of machining, with tools such as a drill press, in order to be transformed into a fully functional firearm. The fact that the gun parts come unfinished is what enables manufacturers to be able to sell them without abiding by strict state and federal regulations that traditionally apply to gun manufacturers. In addition, the customers who buy and build the gun parts can also skirt certain state and federal requirements pertaining to registration and identification. For example, under Maryland law it is a crime to possess a firearm that lacks or has an obliterated serial number. But ghost guns are not required to be registered or labeled with a serial number. The problem for law enforcement is two fold; ghost guns are easier to obtain for those who traditionally would be prohibited from purchasing a firearm, and the guns that are seized are impossible to trace back to other potential crimes. Law enforcement’s concerns over ghost guns has recently become a priority for Maryland lawmakers in Annapolis, and we will likely see tighter regulations of these weapons beginning in 2022.

Under Senate Bill 624 lawmakers are seeking to require ghost gun manufacturers and owners to adhere to similar requirements as regular firearms dealers and manufacturers. In Maryland this would require buyers to produce a valid Handgun Qualification License in order to lawfully purchase a ghost gun. Additionally, once the bill becomes law current owners of ghost guns would have to take measures to stamp their weapon with a serial number, and identify the make and model of the weapon. The build-at-home guns would also have to be labeled with the lawful owner’s full legal name. Anyone in possession of an unmarked ghost gun after the bill becomes a law could face prosecution if they do not follow the labeling requirements, but a first offense would not be considered a criminal violation. Rather, a first would be classified as a civil violation punishable by a minimum $1,000 fine upon conviction. It is unclear whether there would be a mandatory court appearance for this civil violation, or if the defendant could prepay. Either way, it would behoove any defendant to show up to court and fight the case or request a probation before judgment to avoid the mandatory fine and a finding of guilt.

Under the current bill a second offense for possession of an unlabeled ghost gun would be prosecuted in criminal court and punishable by up to 2 years in prison and a $5,000 fine. The judge would be permitted to make certain findings that could end up in a dismissal if the violation is not deemed serious and the defendant has not been previously convicted. There will likely be numerous modifications to the bill before it becomes law, but chances are that some sort of ghost gun legislation will pass this year. Baltimore Police recovered 126 ghost guns in 2020 compared to 29 in 2019, and the numbers are bound to continue to increase absent government intervention.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 12, 2021

Marijuana Legalization Bills Set for Debate

By Benjamin Herbst

Two marijuana legalization bills are scheduled to be debated by lawmakers in Annapolis in the coming weeks, and there is an outside chance we could see legalization at least a year sooner than once thought. The bill we will discuss in the article is currently scheduled for debate in the Senate during the first week in March. Senate Bill 708 is a lengthy one, with tons of provisions that would only apply to government agencies and those who may become involved in the marijuana business. The wordy bill boils down to a few major points for actual consumers and all other concerned citizens in the state of Maryland. First off, the bill would decriminalize the personal use of marijuana. You can’t start selling it to consumers if it’s still illegal, so the lawmakers in this bill have selected 4 ounces of flower cannabis, 15 grams of concentrates and 6 plants as their arbitrary cut off number. These limits are more generous than previous attempts at legalization, but still maintain an aura of control. It’s almost as if the government is still in our ears saying “alright that’s enough, take it down a notch”. A person would be able to walk around with a quarter pound of pot, but anymore would be a no no.

There are other provisions in the bill as well that would apply to the average Marylander, including easy access to expunge prior marijuana cases and strict measures to assure that individuals who are under the age of 21 are not being provided marijuana. Homeowners and renters would also be permitted to grow their own marijuana provided there are certain safety measures in place to assure the grow operation is both private and secure. Without a doubt the most compelling parts of the wordy bill are the provisions that discuss the retail sale of marijuana. The bill does not simply come out and say marijuana will be legalized, but rather inconspicuously creates the existence of marijuana retailers. These “retailers” are defined as an entity licensed to purchase cannabis from a grower and sell it to a consumer. Consumers are not patients, so this is an entirely different animal than medical cannabis. This is the legalized sale of marijuana for recreational use, and it’s coming sooner rather than later.

After the bombshell about establishing marijuana retailers, the bill goes on and on about the tax provisions and the social equity policies designed to promote and support small business owners. The tax issue is always a back and forth debate, but in the end the tax number will likely keep the price of retail marijuana just under the price on the street. After all, it makes no sense to price retailers out of the market, especially when a widely stated goal of legalization is to end the illicit sale of pot. Anyone who is interested in entering the market may be wise to read the bill, but all others should probably wait until the bill progresses further down the legislative process. There are bound to be more changes on the horizon. The Blog will continue to follow marijuana legalization efforts in Maryland and Florida, and will post a follow up article as more news comes out of Annapolis. If you have been charged with a drug offense such as possession not marijuana, possession with intent to distribute, manufacturing or any other offense contact criminal defense lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in drug charges, gun charges, domestic violence defense, theft, robbery and DUI, and is available anytime at 410-207-2598. Benjamin is also an experienced South Florida criminal defense lawyer who represents clients in criminal and personal injury cases such as weapons crimes, drug offenses and car accident cases in all state jurisdictions from Miami to Port St. Lucie. Contact Benjamin at 954-543-0305 for a free consultation about your Florida case.

Continue reading →