Articles Posted in Uncategorized

Published on:

bmw-1045050__480-300x225The 2024 legislative session is about halfway through, and Maryland lawmakers are currently debating dozens of criminal and traffic bills that would become law as early as June 1.   One bill gaining a decent amount of attention is a measure introduced in both houses to criminalize exhibition driving throughout the state.  Exhibition driving is defined as operating a vehicle in a crowd or large gathering in a manner that includes abrupt acceleration or deceleration, skidding, squealing or smoking tires, or swerving a vehicle from side to side.  Those familiar with the Blog are well aware that Ocean City has enforced exhibition driving laws in so called “special event zones” in Worcester County for the last two years.  Officials say the law, which carries up to 1 year in jail, has reduced the number of exhibition driving incidents.  While serving a year in jail for exhibition driving is not a realistic punishment save for the most egregious cases, the simple threat of being arrested has proven to be a major deterrent for Ocean City visitors looking to show off their driving skills on Coastal Highway.

Lawmakers are hoping for the same deterrent effect from Senate Bill 442 and its companion House Bill 601.  If enacted the law would add points and criminal penalties for exhibition driving under 16-402 and 21-1116 of the Maryland Transportation Code.  A conviction for exhibition driving would add 8 points to a person’s license and 12 if there was an injury.  Criminal penalties would include a jail sentence up to 60 days if no injuries, and up to 1 year if there was a serious bodily injury.  This bill would effectively end the special event zone requirement and would become state law in all jurisdictions.

Lawmakers are also attempting to strengthen Maryland child pornography laws by adding provisions that would make possession of more than 100 images or videos a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.  Additionally, possession of any child pornography that depicts a person under 13 years old would be a felony regardless of the number of images.  Possession of child pornography is currently a misdemeanor offense in Maryland, though this modification would result in a large number of possession cases being filed as felonies.

Published on:

hammer-620011_640-300x225Anne Arundel County Police recently charged one of their own, as a former employee of the department now faces multiple counts of theft related to misuse of a county E-Z Pass transponder.  The defendant, a 58-year-old man who hails from Odenton, was not a sworn police officer, but rather a civilian employee of the fifth largest police department in Maryland.  He is accused of using a county issued transponder on over 70 personal trips, which included drives to and from Delaware, Virginia and even New Jersey and began as early as 2020.  The former employee drove a county vehicle for work purposes with the department, but apparently removed the transponder and affixed it to his personal vehicle for trips.  The total amount of the theft was under $1,500, meaning the defendant appeared to have avoided any felony charges.  He was however charged with seven counts of theft less than $100 and one count of theft scheme from $100 to $1,500.  Police picked up on the suspected unlawful pass use back in September and initiated an investigation.  The State’s Attorney’s Office made the decision to pursue the case after being presented with the findings from investigators.

In lieu of being arrested by his former colleagues, an officer of the Anne Arundel County Police Criminal Investigations Division requested that the defendant be summoned for court.  The District Court of Maryland in Annapolis issued a summons for the defendant on January 3, and he will have to appear for trial in the coming months.  Theft cases in Maryland are typically charged by summons or criminal citation provided the defendant has a verifiable address and the police or the commissioner is satisfied that he or she would appear in court as directed.  Large scale felony theft cases are routinely initiated through the issuance of an arrest warrant, though we have seen felony thefts charged via summons. Additionally, larger scale thefts by county or state employees also frequently accompanied by other serious charges such as misconduct in office.  Misconduct in office is a common law misdemeanor that carries a real possibility of jail time even for first time offenders.  This charge has no set maximum penalty and should be handled by with the help of an experienced criminal defense lawyer.

While the defendant in this case avoided felony theft and misconduct in office charges, he will still have to answer for his alleged public trust violations.  The fact that the defendant is accused of unlawfully using the transponder dozens of times will not help his cause, though if the case is handled properly there is an excellent chance that he will avoid jail time and a permanent conviction.  The top charge of theft scheme $100 to $1,500 carries a maximum penalty of 6 months in jail and a $500 fine under Maryland criminal law section 7-104.  Subsequent offenders face up to 1 year in jail for this same offense provided the State issues notice to the defendant at least 15 days before trial.  Based on this maximum penalty the defendant could elect to have a jury trial at the Circuit Court in downtown Annapolis, though it is too early to tell whether this would be an appropriate strategy.  The seven remaining counts for theft less than $100 carry a maximum penalty of 90 days in jail.  This charge is often associated with shoplifting or theft of services.

Published on:

gun-728958_1280-300x169According to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland a 19-year-old man from Greenbelt recently received an 8-year prison sentence in a multi count federal indictment.  Following completion of the prison sentence, which is not parole eligible, the young defendant will be on three years of supervised release. Supervised release is the federal terminology for probation, and violation of supervised release can lead to an additional jail sentence.  The case resolved by way of a guilty plea to illegal possession of a machinegun, possession with intent to distribute oxycodone and fentanyl and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.  Despite his young age, the defendant was already on probation in an unrelated Prince George’s County state court case and had been arrested and released on other state charges before being indicted in federal court. The press release from the USAO MD does not indicate whether the defendant had a juvenile criminal record, and at least some of the alleged criminal acts in the indictment occurred when he was just 18.

According to the facts recited by the government at the plea hearing the Prince George’s County Police began investigating the defendant back in the spring of 2022 for suspected firearm and drug trafficking offenses.  The defendant allegedly advertised the sale of guns and narcotics through social media posts, which ultimately lead to the execution of a search warrant of his apartment.  In preparation for the execution of the search warrant officers observed the defendant conduct a hand-to-hand transaction with an unidentified individual outside of the apartment.  The defendant allegedly reached into a designer bag and handed the contents to the suspected customer.  A short time later the defendant left his apartment with the same designer bag.  Prince George’s County officers followed the suspect as he left in a rideshare vehicle, and conducted a traffic stop a short time later.  After ordering the suspect out of the vehicle police observed a .40 caliber handgun with an obliterated serial number on the floor where he was sitting.  Cops also recovered close to 300 counterfeit oxycodone pills containing fentanyl and $790 in cash.  Despite these facts the defendant was released 12 days later at a bail review. Rather than stay on the straight and narrow, the defendant admitted in the plea that he continued to sell drugs and possess firearms.

Less than two months after the first arrest, and shortly after his 19th birthday a PG County police officer in District Heights observed the defendant smoking marijuana on a sidewalk.  The officer then observed the defendant discard an item behind a car and begin to walk away.  This action obviously peaked the officer’s interest, and he exited his unmarked patrol car to have a closer look.  The defendant then fled on foot but was apprehended a short time later.  A search in the area revealed an AR-15 style ghost gun with a loaded 30 round magazine and a round in the chamber.  Police also found two pill bottles that contained 5mg oxycodone pills and counterfeit oxy pills with a fentanyl mixture.  The defendant was arrested and charged in Prince George’s County state court, but the charges were announced nolle prosequi in lieu of the federal indictment.

Published on:

technology-2500010__480-300x200The Juvenile Interrogation Act, which prevents police from questioning juveniles without first providing an attorney has its critics, but it is not the only element of juvenile justice reform to come under fire recently.  Other provisions of the recent reforms include the abolishment of criminal charges for children under the age of 13 in non-violent offenses.  This seems like a policy everyone could get behind, and in reality, juveniles under the age of 13 who are charged will almost always have their cases resolved at the intake phase.  State’s Attorney’s Offices do not make a habit of filing juvenile petitions against 11 and 12-year-olds unless the allegations are particularly shocking and/or violent.  So, if the State will rarely, if ever, prosecute a child under 13 in a non-violent offense, then why would there be any critics of a law that bars arresting and charging them in the first place?  The answer appears to be the skyrocketing number of motor vehicle thefts.

Motor vehicle thefts have been on the rise in most Maryland jurisdictions, though in Baltimore County the numbers have truly taken off.  The county police reported a 175% increase in motor vehicle thefts over the past year, which means the number of victims has almost tripled.  In Baltimore City there were almost 1,000 motor vehicle thefts in the month of May alone.  This number is about triple the number of thefts in May of 2022, which is in line with the county numbers.  Many of these offenses are committed by juveniles, but now the police are starting to see children as young as 11 being the culprits.  Not only do the young children know there will be no consequences if they are caught, older juveniles are taking notice as well.  Police have described incidents where older juveniles entice the younger ones to commit the thefts and drive the stolen vehicles so that neither will face retribution.   County police allegedly linked the same 11-year-old to as many as 17 different auto thefts in the area around Dundalk and Essex, but have been unable to do anything about it due to the new laws protecting minors.

The argument against the juvenile reform is that there will be no intervention with teeth for these young children, and that they will learn at a young age that there are no consequences for committing crime.  On the other hand, the department of juvenile services and the court system will still be able to intervene starting at age 13 in non-violent offenses such as theft.  It is debatable whether the law barring children under 13 from being charged has done more harm than good.  In reality there are logical arguments to be made on both sides and the right answer is somewhere in the middle.  Still, it would not surprise us if both sides of the spectrum continue to cry foul to the legislature, and some sort of modification to juvenile justice reform passes next spring.

Published on:

police-780322_640-300x200Each year in Maryland thousands of warrants are issued for defendants in criminal and traffic cases.  To say it’s an uneasy feeling to have a warrant is an understatement, as sooner or later most of us will have some sort of interaction with a police officer.  The majority of these interactions come during traffic stops, but even those who don’t drive can find themselves in a conversation with law enforcement.  A good deal of individuals first discover they have a warrant from a police officer when it’s already too late to do something about it.  The exception would be for a person who is out of state and police discovery a non-extraditable misdemeanor warrant.  In these cases, the warrant can still be addressed while the defendant is out on the street, as local police will not arrest a person they know will not be picked up by Maryland.  Anyone with a Maryland warrant who comes in contact with an officer in the state will be arrested and taken before a judge or a commissioner.  At this time the only thing to do would be to hire a criminal defense lawyer to handle the bail review and/or the initial appearance.  A defendant is entitled to representation during his or her initial appearance with a commissioner, and it definitely helps to have a lawyer.  An experienced lawyer may be the difference between securing release on bond or on recognizance, which will save a person from spending the night in jail.

For those who learn about a warrant before coming in contact with police there are a few steps to take.  Unless a defendant is prepared to go to jail right away, it always makes sense to at least try to address the warrant beforehand.  Writing a letter to a judge may get the job done, but having a lawyer file a motion to quash or recall the warrant will have a much higher success rate.  Lawyers will look into the case to see why exactly the warrant was issued, and then tailor a motion to best address any issues the judge may have.  A lawyer first needs to determine what type of warrant was issued.

There are two types of warrants in Maryland, but both instruct a police officer to arrest the defendant and bring him or her before a judge or commissioner.  Bench warrants are the most common type of warrants, and typically are issued in traffic and misdemeanor cases.  They are called bench warrants because they are issued by a judge (from the bench where they sit in court).  The two most common bench warrants are failure to appear bench warrants and violation of probation warrants.  Anyone who fails to appear in court for trial, motions or even for their initial appearance could have a bench warrant issued.  Bench warrants typically instruct the police to take the defendant before a district court commissioner, who will then determine whether to release the defendant.  A warrant like this will say “to be set by commissioner”.  In some cases, a judge may issue a no bail bench warrant where the defendant would have to see a judge in order to be released.  Defendants may fail to appear for a variety of reasons, so having an attorney explain the situation to the judge is always advantageous.  A defendant may have moved and not received the court notice, or in some cases due to health issues may not have been able to attend court or probation, and the judge should understand all of the issues surround the FTA or probation violation.

Published on:

handcuffs-2102488__480-300x169Each year in Maryland thousands of warrants are issued for defendants in criminal and traffic cases.  To say it’s an uneasy feeling to have a warrant is an understatement, as sooner or later most of us will have some sort of interaction with a police officer.  The majority of these interactions come during traffic stops, but even those who don’t drive can find themselves in a conversation with law enforcement.  A good deal of individuals first discover they have a warrant from a police officer when it’s already too late to do something about it.  The exception would be for a person who is out of state and police discovery a non-extraditable misdemeanor warrant.  In these cases, the warrant can still be addressed while the defendant is out on the street, as local police will not arrest a person they know will not be picked up by Maryland.  Anyone with a Maryland warrant who comes in contact with an officer in the state will be arrested and taken before a judge or a commissioner.  At this time the only thing to do would be to hire a criminal defense lawyer to handle the bail review and/or the initial appearance.  A defendant is entitled to representation during his or her initial appearance with a commissioner, and it definitely helps to have a lawyer.  An experienced lawyer may be the difference between securing release on bond or on recognizance, which will save a person from spending the night in jail.

For those who learn about a warrant before coming in contact with police there are a few steps to take.  Unless a defendant is prepared to go to jail right away, it always makes sense to at least try to address the warrant beforehand.  Even if a defendant has no intention of coming back to Maryland, a warrant can prevent a person from renewing his or her driver’s license anywhere in the county, and can show up on background checks for decades.  Writing a letter to a judge will likely not get the job done, but hiring a lawyer or applying for the public defender and having them file a motion to recall the warrant will have a much higher success rate.  A lawyer will look into the case to see why exactly the warrant was issued, and then tailor a motion to best address any issues the judge may have.  The lawyer first needs to determine what type of warrant was issued.

There are two types of warrants in Maryland, but both instruct a police officer to arrest the defendant and bring him or her before a judge or commissioner.  Bench warrants are the most common type of warrants, and typically are issued in traffic and misdemeanor cases.  They are called bench warrants because they are issued by a judge (from the bench where they sit in court).  The two most common bench warrants are failure to appear bench warrants and violation of probation warrants.  Anyone who fails to appear in court for trial, motions or even for their initial appearance could have a bench warrant issued.  Bench warrants typically instruct the police to take the defendant before a district court commissioner, who will then determine whether to release the defendant.  A warrant like this will say “to be set by commissioner”.  In some cases, a judge may issue a no bail bench warrant where the defendant would have to see a judge in order to be released.

Published on:

squad-car-1209719_960_720-300x162The proximity of Maryland to our nation’s capital results in an increased federal law enforcement presence.  Most people are aware that the numerous military bases such as Fort Meade, Andrews and Aberdeen Proving Ground are patrolled by federally sanctioned police forces.  What most people don’t realize though, is that several major highways in Maryland are actually located on national park land that is maintained and policed by the federal government.  The largest and most travelled of these highways is the Baltimore Washington Parkway, also known as 295.  The BW Parkway links the cities of Baltimore and Washington D.C., but is also a common thoroughfare for those traveling to and from Prince George’s County, Howard County and Anne Arundel County.  In addition, 295 is the major access point of a variety of federal facilities such as Goddard and the NSA.  Needless to say, it’s a busy highway at all hours of the day, which translates to a large number of accidents, traffic stops and arrests.

When an accident or traffic stop occurs on a Maryland parkway such as 295 or the Clara Barton, the U.S. Park Police will likely be the law enforcement agency that arrives on scene.  Any driver who is cited for an infraction such as speeding will be issued a citation and given the option to pre-pay a fine.  Drivers charged with more serious offenses such as DUI, driving without a license, leaving the scene of an accident, and open container will be issued a citation with a mandatory appearance noted on the bottom left of the ticket.  Failure to maintain control of a motor vehicle may also result in a mandatory court appearance, which is not the case for state citations related to causing an accident.  Drivers cited for must appear offenses will eventually receive a court date from the Central Violations Bureau or CVB.  The CVB could take months to process the case, and during COVID we even saw cases set more than 2 years after the alleged violation (federal cases have a 5-year statute of limitations).

Lately it appears the cases are set within a few months, so anyone charged should expect a court notice in the mail within 90 days of being issued the citation.  Federal traffic citations are first set for an initial appearance where the judge will advise the defendant of the charges and potential consequences.  A lawyer may be able to waive the initial appearance in the Baltimore federal court, but the defendant will likely have to appear for initial appearance if the case is at the Greenbelt federal court.  The maximum punishment for a federal traffic violation is typically 6 months in jail and fines that could be several thousand dollars, but an officer has the ability to charge a defendant with a violation of a Maryland state law.  In the case of DUI or leaving the scene of an accident the maximum penalty would then be up to one year under the Maryland Transportation Article.  If the citation says MTA next to the statute number, then the driver has been charged under Maryland law and could potentially receive a stay of judgment, which is similar to probation before judgment (PBJ).  Citations that contain a statue under 36 CFR are federal, and a stay of judgment is not a possibility.  Unlike state cases, a person who is convicted of a federal traffic citation will not typically receive points on his or her driver’s license.

Published on:

police-850054_960_720-300x212New data from the Ocean City Police Department supports the contention that crime is steadily decreasing since all-time highs during the summer of 2021.  According to reports recently presented to the city’s Police Commission, 487 individuals were arrested this past June compared to 519 in 2022 and 773 in 2021.  Both drug and weapons arrests were down significantly to start this summer compared to the last two years, with just 59 people being arrested on weapons charges such as wear, transport or carry of a firearm and possession of a dangerous weapon.  Almost double the number of defendants were arrested and charged in 2021, with 111 in June of that year.  79 people were arrested on weapons charges in 2022, which further supports the steady decline.  As for drug charges, only 28 individuals were arrested for such crimes as possession not marijuana and possession with intent to distribute in Ocean City this past June compared to 78 in June of 2021.

Part of the decline could be attributed to the change in the Maryland marijuana laws, which in June of this year only permitted police to make a marijuana possession arrest if the suspect had more than 1.5 ounces.  Still, there were only 15 marijuana citations issued this past June compared to 142 in 2022 and 152 in 2021.  This shows that OC cops are largely ignoring simple possession of marijuana, and will now be forced to do so since legalization went into effect on July 1.  Police are still permitted to issue citations for smoking in public, but only 57 were issued last month compared to 352 last year.  It seems the police have been less inclined to enforce smoking in public laws due to the verbal and occasional physical disputes these citations can cause between law enforcement and the public.

Drinking in public and open container violations still carry jail time under local Ocean City law, but these cases have also gone down.  The department reported issuing 299 alcohol citations this past June compared to 406 and 648 issued in the past two Junes respectively.  Total local ordinance violations this June came in at 839 comparted to about 1,500 over the past two Junes.  Finally, calls for domestic assaults were down to 59 last month compared to 78 and 118 the past two Junes.  During a press conference at the town’s Public Safety Building next to the District Court on 65th Street, the police chief emphasized that his officers were not decreasing enforcement, but rather the public was increasing compliance.  There is no quantifiable way to test the voracity of this statement, and it certainly sounds better than the former.

Published on:

packs-163497_1280-300x200This past week Anne Arundel County Police were called to a gas station in Linthicum Heights for a bizarre attempted robbery that ended with the suspect fleeing the scene empty handed.  According to police a man approached a gas station clerk just before midnight on the eve of July 4th and requested cigarettes.  After requesting the smokes, the man then allegedly placed a cup on the store counter and demanded that the clerk put all the money in said cup.  There was no indication that the man ever brandished or possessed an actual weapon, but the clerk apparently told police the suspect implied that he had a weapon.  The brief standoff ended when another customer walked into the store, which apparently spooked the attempted robber.  Reports described the suspect as being slim, of average height and sporting a blonde beard.  He was wearing a hood and a camouflage hat and fled in a silver Honda with another individual.

While this attempted robbery was hardly the crime of the holiday weekend, it does raise a few relevant issues regarding the definition of robbery and armed robbery.  Under Maryland law there is no separate statutory crime for attempted robbery or attempted theft as a defendant faces the full punishment even if the crime is unsuccessful.  In fact, murder is one of the only charges that provides a separate statutory crime for attempt.  Robbery requires the State to prove the defendant intentionally took something of value from another person through the use of force or the threat of force.  A defendant does not have to take a tangible object to be charged, as obtaining services through the use of force is also considered robbery.  Maryland has specific laws for six different types of robbery.  The most common is standard robbery, which is a felony that carries a maximum penalty of 15 years in prison.  Robbery is considered a level 4 offense according to the Maryland sentencing guidelines, which means a person with no prior record who is found guilty could still certainly avoid serving any time in jail.

Armed robbery is actually called robbery with a dangerous weapon in Maryland, and it carries a 20-year maximum penalty.  Robbery with a dangerous weapon is considered a level 3 offense, which scores significantly higher on the sentencing guidelines.  Juveniles 16 and over who are charged with robbery with a dangerous weapon must be charged as adults, which is not the case with standard robbery.  Carjacking is also technically part of the robbery statute, and it carries a harsh 30-year maximum penalty.  Armed carjacking carries the same 30-year maximum, but is considered a level 2 offense.  Finally, the least common of the six is robbery by display of a written instrument claiming to be in possession of a dangerous weapon.  This offense is treated like robbery with a dangerous weapon regardless of whether a weapon was recovered by police.  It has a 20-year maximum penalty, and is typically seen in bank robbery cases.  A defendant in any type of robbery case could also be charged with conspiracy if there was another person involved.  Conspiracy makes the offense a misdemeanor, but does not change the maximum penalty.
Published on:

1164850_law_badge-272x300Anne Arundel County Police recently arrested a 64-year-old man from Annapolis after he was allegedly wandering around Jennifer Road sporting an FBI hat and a gold-colored badge around his neck.  Police responded to the scene to make contact with the man, where he allegedly informed officers that he was an ATF agent.  To make matters worse the man also reportedly exposed himself and urinated in the road.  Police were eventually able to arrest the man, and later charged him with impersonating an officer, indecent exposure, disorderly conduct and a violation of the alcohol and beverage code for disorderly intoxication.  The man was ultimately released on his own recognizance for the impersonation charge, but he remains locked up at the detention center due to a separate case involving possession of a loaded handgun and intoxicated endangerment.

Just one day after the defendant was released on the impersonating charge, he allegedly showed up at the Anne Arundel Medical Center and threatened to kill a patient.  The threat was made to third party and not directly to the patient.  The man was escorted outside the hospital by security, and when police showed up, he was found to be in possession of two firearms.  He was arrested and charged with two counts of firearm possession and intoxicated endangerment for his behavior toward the hospital staff.  Responding officers initially recommended charges of first-degree assault, but since the threat to kill was made to a third party, the law does not support a charge for assault.  The defendant also did not brandish or point his firearms at anyone, and thus there was no evidence to support assault with a firearm.  After being arrested and booked the defendant was held without bail and committed to the hospital for further evaluation.  At the station he took a preliminary breath test, which revealed an alcohol content of almost three times the legal limit to drive.

During the time between the male defendant’s two arrests, another individual was arrested for impersonating an officer in Anne Arundel County.  Just 5 hours after the man was initially arrested on Jennifer Road, a 32-year-old Glen Burnie woman was arrested under similar circumstances.  Around 10 p.m. Anne Arundel County Police responded to a gas station for a call about a woman asking to buy drugs from patrons.  Police made contact with the woman as she was seated in her vehicle and noticed her sitting with her head slumped over, and suspect cocaine and a straw in the center console.  The responding officer also noticed signs of impairment when talking to woman.  According to the charging document the woman told the officer she was an undercover police officer herself, but could not provide any further proof.  Based on these observations the officer ordered the woman out of the vehicle to investigate further, but she refused to comply.  After a struggle that lasted more than 5 minutes the officer was eventually able to detain the woman.  She was ultimately charged with DUI, impersonating an officer, possession of CDS, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, obstructing and hindering and disorderly intoxication.  Under Maryland law a person can be charged with DUI even if they were not actually driving.  The law only requires the State to prove a person intended to drive.  Intent can be proven with evidence a person was in physical control of a motor vehicle, which typically means they are in the driver’s seat with the keys accessible.  This defendant was held without bail by a judge at the Glen Burnie District Court the following day, and remains in custody.

Contact Information