Gun Crimes

Published on: June 14, 2021

Ocean City Police Arrest Three on Gun Charges

Summer is almost in full swing, and with COVID-19 numbers sharply on the decline thousands of tourists have already started to flock to Ocean City to enjoy the surf and sand. Tourist season in Maryland’s only beachfront town supports hundreds of businesses and creates thousands of jobs, but it also brings a dramatic increase in crime. Most of the offenses are non-violent in nature and occur in the overnight hours when family vacationers are back in their hotels, but the crime does not go unnoticed. Year after year the local, county and even state government has made a point to address rising crime in Ocean City, and recently have developed special event zones to combat street crimes. But increased boardwalk patrols and the threat of arrest can only do so much to deter criminal activity. Last week was a perfect example of this, as three teenaged defendants were arrested on gun charges after police attempted to break up a large disorderly crowd in downtown Ocean City. Fortunately, the disturbance did not escalate to an especially violent incident, but based on the police officer’s alleged observations it appears escalation was only narrowly avoided.

According to the Ocean City Police Department, a bike patrol officer that responded to the disturbance observed a 19-year-old Baltimore man in the back of a vehicle actively loading a semi-automatic handgun. As officers were in the process of detaining the passenger and arresting him for multiple firearm charges, another teenaged male approached and allegedly became hostile toward the police and tried to interfere with the arrest. This young man turned out to also be 19 but hails from Pennsylvania. These two young men were both arrested and taken to the Ocean City jail for processing along with an 18-year-old female that was the driver of the vehicle in question.

The defendant from Baltimore was charged with loaded handgun on person, handgun in vehicle and possession of a firearm by a person under 21. The Pennsylvania defendant was charged with handgun in vehicle and several additional charges for his alleged interference with the police including obstructing and hindering, resisting/interfering with arrest, assault second-degree of a law enforcement officer, disorderly conduct and reckless endangerment. Both male defendants were initially held without bail by the District Court Commissioner and then released on $50,000 bail when seen by a judge the next day. The female. defendant was released on her own recognizance by the commissioner. All three co-defendants have a trial date on August 3, 2021 in the Ocean City District Court.

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: January 7, 2021

Baltimore Man Guilty of Discharging Firearm in Drug Trafficking Crime

By Benjamin Herbst

The United State Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland recently announced that a Baltimore man pleaded guilty to one count of discharging a firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime. The incident occurred in northwest Baltimore City in the area of Park Heights Avenue and Cold Spring Lane, where according to facts recited in the plea, the defendant and codefendant regularly sold marijuana. Specifically, the defendant admitted to selling marijuana in the area for several months from the end of 2018 to early 2019 when the incident occurred. On February 22, 2019 the defendant admitted that he was selling marijuana while armed with a handgun. The defendant then observed a suspicious vehicle that appeared to be watching him and his co-conspirators. The suspicious vehicle parked close by and the defendant called the driver over to speak with him. The defendant then observed that the driver was armed and a struggle to disarm the man ensued. The driver broke free and began to run away, along with two other occupants of the vehicle. The three men were chased by the defendant and his co-conspirator, and multiple shots were fired in their direction. One of the vehicle occupants was shot multiple times and died from his injuries.

The defendant was originally charged with first-degree murder, second-degree murder, first and second-degree assault, firearm use in a crime of violence and handgun possession in the District Court of Maryland on Wabash Avenue. The only charges that made it to the Circuit Court were first-degree murder, firearm use in a crime of violence, firearm possession by a convicted felon, and handgun on person. The case was nolle prossed. in August of 2019 and then filed in Federal Court. The federal government and the defendant have agreed to a plea that includes a jail sentence of 20 to 25 years in prison. Under 18 U.S.C § 924 discharging a firearm in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime carries a 10-year mandatory penalty. If the judge accepts the guilty plea at the March sentencing hearing plea the sentence will be within the range of 20-25 years, and likely followed by supervised release. This case is another example of the federal government agreeing to prosecute a case that would otherwise be handled in state court. As we have stated over the last several years, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland is eager to prosecute gun cases in Baltimore City that involve convicted felons, drug trafficking and crimes of violence.

It appears that the defense worked out a favorable plea deal, although 20-25 in federal prison is certainly a heavy sentence. The defendant avoided a murder conviction and a potential life sentence, which even in state court would likely end up being more than 20-25 years. Unlike the federal system that did away with parole, Maryland still paroles almost all of its prison inmates at some point. Parole for a life sentence though is still not a foregone conclusion. The Blog will continue to follow this case and other state cases that are picked up and prosecuted by the feds. As long as the gun violence in Baltimore City remains at critical levels the feds will continue to intervene with prosecutions. Benjamin Herbst is a Maryland criminal defense attorney who specializes in gun crimes and federal weapons crimes such as handgun possession by a convicted felon, use of a firearm in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, improper exhibition of a firearm, assault, carrying a concealed firearm, murder and attempted murder. He is also licensed to practice criminal defense in Florida, where he has won numerous jury trials for the most serious of gun offenses. Contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598 or 954-543-0305 in Florida.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 14, 2020

Baltimore County Drug Offender Sentenced in Federal Court

By Benjamin Herbst

Federal law enforcement has made fentanyl a major priority, and last week a 26-year old Baltimore County man was sentenced to a decade in prison for possession with intent to distribute the deadly narcotic. According to the statement of facts in the guilty plea, a Woodlawn man fled from Baltimore County Police after they tried to initiate a traffic stop. During the pursuit officers allegedly observed the suspect throwing objects out of his car window as he fled. Eventually police caught up with the suspect and search incident to arrest produced a digital scale and a baggie with 40 grams of fentanyl. Had law enforcement stopped there the man would likely have been prosecuted in state court, but a search of his home pursuant to a warrant produced far more incriminating evidence. Police ultimately discovered 3 kilograms of fentanyl and a loaded .380 caliber handgun. The U.S. Attorney’s Office stated in its press release that this amount of fentanyl would be enough to kill 1.5 million people. The suspect was also prohibited from possessing firearms based on a previous drug conviction in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. He also had an earlier drug possession conviction in Baltimore City and a probation before judgement for driving on a suspended license.

The facts of the case were not especially unique and from what we can see the defendant was not alleged to have been an interstate drug trafficker, but the federal government still elected to prosecute this case. For the last several years the feds have picked up gun and drug cases arising from Baltimore City, but with the sheer amount of fentanyl plus a gun being involved it is no surprise this Baltimore County case went federal. Most of the time a defendant would much rather be prosecuted in Maryland state court, as the sentencing guidelines are typically lower and there is parole. However, under these circumstances the defendant likely would have received a similar sentence in state court, as he would have been subject to three Maryland mandatory sentence provisions. Anyone who is found to be in possession of more than five grams of fentanyl faces a mandatory 5 years in prison. Additionally, the possession of a firearm in a drug trafficking crime carries a 5-year minimum prison sentence under state law. The Woodlawn man may have also been subject to charges for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon/ person with a drug conviction under 5-601. This offense also carries a 5-year mandatory sentence that cannot be suspended unless the prior offense had been closed for more than 5 years. Closed means probation and parole must have been completed.

The Blog will continue to follow cases traditionally prosecuted in state court that are picked up by federal law enforcement. A general rule is that any convicted felon who is arrested with a gun in Baltimore City could face federal prosecution, but now it is clear the feds are branching out to the County and other Maryland jurisdictions. Based on this press release it is also clear that federal law enforcement agencies are actively pursuing anyone involved in fentanyl distribution. If you have been charged with a gun or drug crime anywhere in Maryland or Florida call criminal defense lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime at 410-207-2598. Benjamin specializes in charges for drug possession, drug distribution, possession with intent to distribute and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon or disqualified person. He offers free consultations and is available to defend clients from the Eastern Shore to Western Maryland.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 1, 2020

State Police Announces Multiple Arrests

By Benjamin Herbst

Tens of thousands of people travel along Route 50 from Annapolis to Ocean City each summer, and few complete their journey without seeing a Maryland State Trooper parked in the median, or actively writing a traffic citation on the shoulder. The state police have a highly visible presence on all major highways and interstates in Maryland, but it is a common misconception that troopers operate exclusively in a highway patrol capacity. Highway patrol is a major function of the Maryland State Police; nearly 75 percent of all troopers are assigned to the Field Operations Bureau that patrols the state’s highways, but that still leaves a few hundred troopers who are assigned to other divisions of the agency. The Criminal Investigative Bureau or CIB is another major branch of the MSP, and is responsible for investigating violent crimes and large-scale drug violations that occur across the state. The CIB works in cooperation with county and local law enforcement from all corners of the state, and in this past week assisted in arresting suspects from Ocean City to Allegany County.

State police troopers from the CIB began last week by arresting a 36-year old mand from Frostburg on charges of second-degree assault and animal cruelty. The Western Maryland man was released by a district court commissioner on a $2,500 unsecured personal bond, which he will only have to pay if he fails to appear in court. The next day the Firearms Enforcement Unit of the CIB arrested a 27-year old Baltimore man on gun charges that included possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Another day passed and troopers from the CIB arrested a in Baltimore County man for possession of a firearm by a disqualified individual. The state police used information from the Ocean City Police Department to make this arrest. Troopers went on the arrest two more individuals on various charges this same day. The first was arrested on an open arrest warrant in Baltimore City for making a false statement to an officer, and the second suspect was arrested in Cumberland on an arrest warrant for electronic harassment.

While none of these arrests will generate major news headlines on the traditional media outlets, they do serve as a reminder that state police troopers are actively investigating and pursuing suspects across Maryland. Regular readers of the Blog are already aware that the governor has made state police resources available to fight violent crime and gun crime in Baltimore City, but gun crimes are a major priority for the MSP no matter where they occur. Maryland has some of the toughest gun laws in the region, and law enforcement officers are not sympathetic to those who are unaware of just how strict the laws are. State troopers, like all county and local police officers, will arrest any person who is illegally carrying or transporting a firearm without a concealed carry permit. These permits are extremely difficult to obtain, and out-of-state permits are not valid in Maryland. Anyone who owns a firearm should be extremely careful about taking their firearm outside of their home, and should regularly keep updated on all the applicable state gun laws.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 26, 2020

Governor and Lawmakers Spar Over Crime Bills

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland governor has not been shy about his strong desire to do whatever is necessary to curb gun violence in Baltimore City, and he recently called out state lawmakers for dragging their feet on enacting stricter gun legislation. Since the 2020 legislative session began in January there have been over 100 shootings in Baltimore City, and each incident is a constant reminder that efforts to reverse the alarming crime rate have been largely ineffective. In response to the violence, three new criminal justice bills were introduced with the unwavering support from the governor himself. The first bill, entitled The Violent Firearms Offenders Act, was designed to increase punishments for certain firearms offenses, and includes brand new mandatory prison sentences for certain crimes. The next bill, The Judicial Transparency Act, was introduced as a measure to hold Circuit Court judges accountable for their sentences in certain violent offenses such as robbery, carjacking, sexual assault, kidnapping, arson and first-degree assault by establishing a database for all sentences handed down in theses cases. The third bill, The Witness Intimidation Prevention Act, was introduced to increase penalties for witness tampering and witness intimidation. All three of these bills allegedly have received overwhelming support from the Baltimore City residents and Maryland residents alike, but all three appear to be going nowhere in Annapolis.

The governor recently expressed his displeasure with the legislature for not jumping at the opportunity to push these bills toward his desk for a signature, but he should understand that not all bills designed to punish criminals are beneficial. It is easy for the public to stand behind a bill that increases punishment for gun offenders, but when minimum mandatory sentences are involved the cost can outweigh the benefit. The Violent Firearms Offenders Act increases the penalty for using a firearm in a crime of violence and adds possession of a firearm as a non-technical probation violation. Both of these provisions seem reasonable, and are not likely causing the legislature to second guess the bill. In our opinion the holdup appears to be related to the establishment of new mandatory sentences for theft of a firearm and for transferring a firearm to a prohibited individual. The bill seeks to add a 2-year mandatory sentence for theft of a firearm and unlawful transfer of a firearm for all defendants, including first-time offenders. These mandatory sentences will not allow the judge to consider all factors such as the defendant’s background, lack of intent to commit a violent crime and age. In essence the mandatory penalty groups all defendants and their cases together, which does not promote a just sentence.

The Judicial Transparency Act takes a degree of autonomy away from judges, and flies in the face of separation of powers. Judges should not have to worry about how their particular sentence would look in a database. They are entrusted with the responsibility to hand down a just sentence based on the facts of the case and the characteristics of the defendant. A database, especially one that will become highly political, will undermine the autonomy of the bench and should not be established. As for the Witness Intimidation Act, we believe this bill will be eventually approved by the General Assembly, though its effectiveness as a deterrent is arguable. The current witness intimidation laws already provide strict punishments.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 18, 2020

Second Baltimore Robbery Defendant Sentenced

By Benjamin Herbst

The second of two defendants who committed a 2018 armed robbery in Baltimore City was sentenced last week to 9 years in federal prison. The 29-year old defendant was originally charged in state court with, but about 7 months after the robbery the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office entered the charges nolle prosequi, which meant they declined to prosecute the case. While a nolle pros. is usually a cause for celebration, in this case it was the opposite, as the case was dismissed in state court after federal prosecutors decided to take over.

As detailed in guilty plea, in February of 2018 the defendant and another Baltimore City man walked into a restaurant brandishing a firearm and demanded money from the cash register. In addition to taking cash from the register and the tip jar, the defendants also took personal belongings at gunpoint from patrons at the restaurant. After the defendants left the restaurant a 911 call to the Baltimore Police was placed and officers arrived on scene shortly thereafter. One officer was canvassing the area of the robbery, and located two suspects in an alley counting cash up against a brick wall. The suspects matched the description in the 911 call, and the counting money in an alleyway was certainly another cause for concern. Both suspects were detained and searched, and police found $272 in cash, a bag of change, two masks, two bandannas, two cell phones that belonged to victims and a receipt from the restaurant. Police also found a loaded handgun in the vicinity that matched the description a victim gave of the gun used in the robbery.

There was little question that police had detained and arrested the right suspects, and a show-up identification by the victims confirmed what police already knew. The only questions remaining were who would prosecute the case, and how much time the defendants would receive. Initially the case began as a Baltimore City District Court case, and a month after the incident the State filed a 25-count indictment in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, which included charges for first and second degree assault, armed robbery, robbery, use of a firearm in a crime of violence and firearm possession by a convicted felon. The charges regarding firearm use in a violent crime and possession by a convicted felon both carry 5-year mandatory minimum sentences upon conviction. Either way the defendants were likely going to serve at least 5 years, but ultimately the feds decided they would prosecute the case.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 28, 2020

Violent Firearms Offender Act Introduced

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland Senate and the House of Delegates recently cross-filled the Violent Firearms Offenders Act, and it is almost certain that a large portion of the bill will become law in October. The bill aims to toughen penalties for certain firearms offenses that were seen as too lenient in light of escalating gun violence in Baltimore City and across Maryland. The bill is part of a package of violence prevention initiatives that the governor announced at a press conference last month in Baltimore, which also includes increased penalties for witness intimidation and measures to track the sentencing records of judges in violent offenses.

The Violent Firearms Offenders Act begins by introducing a provision that adds possession or use of a firearm to the list of non-technical probation violations. Normally a person who is on probation would be charged with a crime for possession or use of a firearm, and thus a rule 4 violation, so the issue would be moot. But this provision gives the state an easier path to prove a non-technical violation if criminal charges are not filed, dismissed or placed on STET. If the state shows the defendant possessed a firearm at any point while on probation the defendant could be found in violation and face the full backup time. The bill also includes a section that reclassifies the crime of using a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence from a misdemeanor to a felony. Once again, this is usually not a major issue because the underlying charge will undoubtedly be a felony. On the other hand, it never made sense for an offense with a five-year minimum mandatory penalty like use of a firearm in violent crime to be classified as a misdemeanor, so there is no major argument against the change. This section also adds a ten-year mandatory penalty for anyone convicted of using a firearm in a crime of violence for a second or subsequent time, which shall run consecutive to the sentence for the underlying crime. Mandatory minimum sentences may not be suspended, and the defendant is never eligible for parole.

Perhaps the most impactful change in the Violent Offender Firearm Act is the new provision that adds a mandatory minimum jail sentence for the crime of theft of a firearm. Theft of a firearm is currently part of the general theft laws, and the penalty is dependent on the value of the firearm. Since most guns have a value of less than $1,500, theft of a firearm is usually treated as a misdemeanor with an 18-month maximum penalty. If this bill passes, and we believe it will, come October anyone who is convicted of stealing a firearm (including an antique firearm or replica), faces a felony conviction with a 2-year minimum mandatory penalty. This two-year minimum mandatory penalty is a new sentencing provision in Maryland, and is not applicable to other criminal statutes. The law does specify that any defendant convicted faces the mandatory two-year sentence, so the issue of whether a defendant is eligible or probation before judgment may have to be addressed at some point. Currently there is a 30-day minimum mandatory penalty for wear, carry or transportation of a handgun in Maryland, but it can be avoided if the lawyer argues for, and the judge grants PBJ. The same is true for the 60-day minimum sentence for carrying a loaded handgun. Lawmakers may choose to exclude theft of a handgun from 6-220, which governs when a judge can grant probation before judgment. In Maryland a defendant who is sentenced to a mandatory term of incarceration may serve the time on house arrest, though house arrest sentences rarely extend beyond one year. It will be interesting to see if 2-year house arrests sentences start becoming the norm, as theft of a firearm is not a violent offense and many defendants will be first time offenders. Judges should hesitate sending a first-time non-violent offender to prison for two years.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 3, 2019

Convicted Robber Sentenced To 33 Years

By Benjamin Herbst

Over the summer a federal jury convicted two Washington D.C. men of multiple felonies after they were charged with committing two separate armed robberies in Prince George’s County. This week at the United States District Court in Greenbelt one of the men was sentenced to 33 years in prison followed by 5 years of probation on charges including conspiracy to commit commercial robbery, discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, being a felon in possession of a firearm and interstate transport of a stole vehicle. At least two of these counts carry mandatory minimum sentences of up to 10 years in prison. Since parole has been abolished in the federal justice system the 46-year old defendant will likely be behind bars for close to 30 years. He may be eligible for time off his sentence for good behavior, but it is safe to say that he will not be released until his seventies.

The facts that came to light during the week long trial were about as bad as an armed robbery could get without someone actually being murdered. Assistant U.S. Attorneys proved the man and his co-conspirators entered an auto repair shop brandishing handguns and then bound and gagged one employee and shot the other when he resisted. The employee who was shot suffered life-threatening injuries, and is now paralyzed. Just four days later the men robbed a barbershop in Prince George’s County in the same manner, but this time they were caught after a brief chase that ended in Washington D.C. To make matters worse, the defendant was also recorded on jailhouse phone calls attempting to persuade several different acquaintances to go to the barbershop and pressure witnesses not to testify at trial or before the grand jury. These phone calls were played in court, and resulted in a witness tampering conviction that was almost certainly factored into sentencing.

As we discussed in our previous post about this incident the driver of the stolen getaway vehicle used in the barbershop robbery was not a co-defendant in the trial, which could indicate that he was a cooperating witness. The names of cooperating witnesses will eventually be revealed if they are called to testify at trial, though it is typical for the prosecutors to leave this information out of official press releases. Cooperating witnesses are an essential law enforcement tool, and though they can’t be hidden forever, police and prosecutors will still try to protect them to some degree. The exact terms of cooperation agreements are never announced in open court, though the agreements may be used by defense lawyers during cross examination. Cooperation agreements with the federal government typically contain some sort of sealed supplement that is part of the plea agreement, and when the sealed supplement is read in court only the judge, court staff, law enforcement officers and lawyers are permitted in the courtroom.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 3, 2019

Which Charges Disqualify You From Gun Possession?

By Benjamin Herbst

Maryland has some of the toughest gun laws in the country, and a large number of these laws are designed to punish people for illegal possession of handguns, rifles and shotguns. There are numerous different provisions in the state code that address gun possession, and there are a few that are somewhat obscure. Most people know that being convicted of a felony prohibits a person from ever possessing a gun, but this is far from the only restriction placed on a former defendant in a criminal case. The public safety code actually lists more of the impactful gun laws in the state than the criminal law code, and thus it can be hard for layperson to even find the Maryland gun laws. Remember that not being aware of the laws will not buy you any sympathy in court, as the classic saying of ignorance of the law is not an excuse comes to mind. If you cannot find the gun laws that may apply to you then reach out to an attorney just to be sure. The following is a brief overview of some of the Maryland gun laws that may apply to normal everyday people.

As of a couple years ago anyone who wants to purchase a handgun in Maryland has to apply for and be granted a license or HQL. The HQL laws do not apply to rifles and shotguns, so you can walk into any sporting goods store or gun shop, fill out a form and leave with a powerful firearm. Clearly, the state legislature as singled out and targeted handguns, but this doesn’t mean the laws are relaxed when it comes to rifles and shotguns. Many people believe that the strict Maryland gun laws only apply to handguns due to the notoriety of the HQL and all that it entails, but this could not be further from the truth. If you are prohibited from possessing a handgun you are undoubtedly also prohibited from possessing a rifle, shotgun or any other type of firearm. This includes muzzle loaders or even antiques that are in a case or mounted on a wall. If it fires a bullet then it’s a firearm. It may be easier to buy a hunting rifle but it definitely is not safer to possess one if you’ve been convicted of a criminal charge.

Without a doubt the most common reason a person would be prohibited from possessing a firearm is if they have been convicted of a disqualifying crime. Under Maryland law a disqualifying crime means any felony and any misdemeanor that carries more than a two-year maximum penalty. If you pled guilty to any offense, no matter how long ago it occurred you should check the exact statute to make sure you can legally possess a gun. Even if you never travel with a gun it is not advisable to have one in your home if you have been convicted of a crime. You never know when a police officer could enter your home, as we have seen cases where police show up on an unrelated matter and find guns. Probation before judgment or PBJ is not considered a conviction for gun possession purposes unless the PBJ was granted in a domestically related second degree assault charge. Anyone who has faced a domestic violence charge should contact a lawyer before deciding to possess a firearm in Maryland. In addition all individuals who have an active peace order or protective order are not allowed to possess any type of firearm until the order expires are is withdrawn by a judge.

Continue reading →