Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
A Baltimore County 8th grade boy was arrested last week and now faces assault charges for allegedly kissing a female classmate. Police officers responded to Pikesville Middle School on Wednesday after school administrators reported that the 13-year-old boy grabbed a 14-year-old female by the shirt, and then kissed her on the mouth without her permission. The female was also an 8th grade student at Pikesville Middle. The boy stated to officials that he kissed the girl in response to a dare from fellow classmates, and now the incident has sparked national debate whether the incident should have been handled differently. School officials could have handled the incident internally under the student code of conduct, but instead opted to involve county police. The officers who responded to the scene acted under state law in charging the boy with misdemeanor second degree assault. This offense carries a maximum penalty of ten years in jail, but because this incident will be filed as a juvenile case the statutory maximum penalties do not apply. A juvenile filing also means that all information about the case will be under seal and off limits to the public. If the state’s attorney’s office decides to prosecute the case it will be heard in the circuit court in Towson.
Unlike other jurisdictions, Maryland classifies the crimes of assault and battery under the same statute. Under the traditional common law assault is generally defined as a threat to do harm combined with the apparent ability to carry out the threat, while a battery is defined as an intentional and unwanted physical touching. In other states this incident would have likely been classified as a simple battery case, but here it falls under the umbrella category of assault. Injury is never a required element of a simple battery, and the same applies for the second degree assault law used in our state courts today. The girl involved in the kissing incident was not injured, but she did not consent or welcome the kiss. Clearly the act was intentional, which means the two basic elements of a crime were satisfied. But whether a crime on paper actually happened, and whether the criminal justice system should be involved are two separate issues.
There are compelling arguments for both sides of the controversial kissing arrest. On one hand you have to maintain the message that any type of unwanted physical touching will not be tolerated, with our society demanding even more emphasis placed on unwanted sexual contact. If the potential punishment is not severe enough there will be minimal deterrent for this type of behavior in the future, which has the potential to escalate to other more serious violations than a kiss on the mouth. On the other hand, you have to take into account that the accused is a 13-year-old boy who lacks the ability to completely understand and evaluate his actions. This is not to say that punishment and accountability are inappropriate in this particular incident, but subjecting a 13-year-old to an arrest and criminal prosecution is undoubtedly a traumatizing experience that may not be warranted under these facts. Ultimately it will be up to the state’s attorney’s office whether to pursue this case in criminal court, and they will likely involve the victim and her parents in the decision. The Blog will follow this case and may post a follow-up, with the caveat that a sealed status could limit information that is available to the public.
State lawmakers have officially closed the books on the 2015 legislative session, and there will be a host of new criminal and traffic bills reaching the governor’s desk in the next few weeks. Some have progressed through both chambers with little fanfare, and others have attracted media attention from the first reading onward. The decriminalization of marijuana paraphernalia was a hot topic even before lawmakers convened in January, so naturally this bill received a great deal of attention throughout the legislative process. Numerous amendments were proposed and rejected, but the final bill is concise and pointed, and only modifies two existing controlled dangerous substance laws. These are section 5-601, which deals with possession, and 5-619, which deals with paraphernalia. The drug possession law is simply modified to include a section that makes smoking marijuana in public a civil offense punishable by a $500 fine, while the paraphernalia law is modified with one small paragraph stating that criminal punishments do not apply to paraphernalia involving the use or possession of marijuana. Thus, come October pot paraphernalia will no longer be a crime in Maryland.
Marijuana infused foods, also known simply as edibles, are becoming increasingly popular for pot users of all ages. These products have been in existence for decades, but for the most part were only available in concert parking lots or as a rare party favor. Edibles were never considered a mainstream way to ingest marijuana, but this changed with the dramatic rise of medical marijuana and new patients it attracted. With the opening of state regulated medical marijuana dispensaries came an increased demand for edibles. Medical marijuana patients with an aversion or even a physical inability to smoke needed a way to ingest the beneficial drug without subjecting themselves to the unwanted smoke. The answer was edibles, and now the demand has created an entire industry for edible marijuana.
Just a couple months after a near unanimous vote by the city council, one of the strictest youth curfews is now officially the law of Baltimore City. Starting last Friday, all children under the age of 14 are required to be indoors at 9 p.m. every night of the week, unless accompanied by an adult. Juveniles between the ages of 14-16 must also be indoors by 10 p.m. on school nights, and at 11 p.m. on other nights. Any child caught violating the curfew will be taken to a youth connection center, where the parents or legal guardians will be notified. If the parents cannot be located then the department of social services and child protective services will become involved. Amidst national criticism, the mayor has strongly defended the curfew, stating numerous times that the intent of the law is to protect the children of Baltimore, and not to fight crime by enhancing police power. It’s hard to argue with the goal of protecting the city’s children, as nine children were killed this past year in Baltimore, a number that has more than doubled from last year. But still, there are those who believe the curfew is the wrong way to solve a serious problem.
The Baltimore City Council recently voted 11-2 to impose a strict nightly curfew on children and young teens throughout the city limits. The mayor has already said she will approve the new bill, and it could end up becoming law by the middle of this summer. Bills signed by the mayor typically become law 30 days thereafter. The city currently has a curfew in place, which prohibits anyone under the age of 17 to be out on the streets past 11 at night on weekdays and midnight on weekends. But the proposed curfew is considerably more restrictive, and specifically targets various age groups. Upon becoming law, children and teens under the age of 14 will be required to be off the streets and indoors by 9 p.m. each day of the year. Teenagers between the ages of 14 and 16 will be permitted to stay out until 10 p.m. on school nights, and until 11 p.m. on all other nights. The new city legislation also increases the penalty for the parents of children that are found to be in violation. Where the old penalty carried a fine of up to $300, the new law will authorize a fine of up to $500. There is a provision that allows the fine to be waived if the parent attends counseling sessions with their child.