Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Published on: December 23, 2020

Two Arrested, Drugs Seized after Eight Search Warrants Executed

This week law enforcement officers from numerous agencies executed eight search warrants in Frederick County and Washington County, which yielded various drugs, cash and multiple firearms. The warrants were executed at about 4 a.m., which means they were likely of the ‘no knock’ variety that in theory prevents the destruction of evidence and the possibility of suspects preparing for a confrontation with police. Only two individuals were arrested as a direct result of the warrants, but more arrests will likely follow as police comb through the seized evidence. A 48-year old man and a 40-year old woman from Washington County are both being held without bail on charges of possession with intent to distribute narcotics and possession with intent to distribute PCP. The man is also charged with illegal possession of a firearm under Maryland statute 5-622. This offense is a separate felony that carries a five-year maximum penalty, but unlike Maryland statute 5-621, possession of a firearm in a drug trafficking crime, it does not require a mandatory minimum sentence upon conviction. The defendant may face additional charges as the case progresses to circuit court, which could include those that carry mandatory sentences.

The law enforcement agencies involved in the execution of the search warrants included the Maryland State Police, the Frederick and Washington County Sheriff’s Offices, the Frederick Police and the Montgomery County Police. In total, law enforcement seized over $23,000 in cash, over 2.5 pounds of cocaine, four handguns and large amounts of crack, PCP and methadone. The amount of cocaine seized would clearly be enough to trigger drug trafficking charges, but there is no indication that the cocaine could all be attributed to one individual suspect. Maryland statute 5-612 targets volume dealers, and provides a 5-year mandatory sentence for anyone convicted of possessing more than 448 grams of cocaine or crack, which is roughly equivalent to one pound. The threshold is much lower for heroin (28 grams) and even lower for fentanyl (5 grams). Marijuana, PCP and LSD are also included in the statute, which also carries a potential $100,000 fine upon conviction.

Going back to this specific case, the execution of 8 simultaneous search warrants indicates that this investigation was ongoing for months and likely included hours of surveillance and possibly confidential informants conducting numerous controlled buys. A controlled buy is a common law enforcement tactic where police observe an informant engage in a drug transaction for the purpose of gathering evidence to use to obtain a warrant. This is in contrast to a buy-bust, where police immediately move in to make an arrest after a drug deal has concluded. Buy-busts are rare due to the obvious consequences of burning the CI and also creating a potentially dangerous and unpredictable situation.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 11, 2020

Non-Violent Marijuana Trafficker Released after Serving 31 Years

By Benjamin Herbst

In 1989 a Florida man was sentenced to 90 years in prison after being found guilty of trafficking in cannabis, racketeering and conspiracy. While the man had a prior marijuana related drug trafficking offense from a few years prior, the Florida sentencing guidelines called for him to serve between 12-17 years for his crime. There was no violence alleged and there was no evidence that the defendant ever used or was found with a firearm or other weapon. Nonetheless, the Polk County judge made the extraordinarily harsh and irrational decision to sentence the man to three consecutive 30-year sentences. While RICO and conspiracy are typically reserved for federal criminal cases, this particular case was prosecuted in state court. Much like the federal system, Florida abolished parole in the early 1980’s the 40-year old defendant was basically sentenced to life in prison for a non-violent marijuana charge. The presiding judge apparently justified his decision to drastically depart upward of the sentencing guidelines by stating that the defendant was the ringleader of the conspiracy, and that he had allegedly bragged about his profitability in the marijuana smuggling business. Fortunately, for the defendant, his family and for the sake of reason and compassion, the man was released this week at age 71. It is widely believed that he had been serving the longest term of incarceration for any non-violent offense in the country.

While there is reason to celebrate the man’s release after serving three decades behind bars, the news is a solemn reminder of how unjust our criminal law policies are when it comes to drug offenses. This is especially true for marijuana cases in Florida, where it is still a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison to possess more than 20 grams of pot. Possession of any amount of marijuana, including a trace amount or a burnt joint, is punishable by a potential jail sentence and the possibility of a permanent criminal conviction. Each year more states choose to legalize marijuana for recreational use, and the House of U.S. Representatives passed a bill to decriminalize marijuana under federal law by removing it from the controlled substances list. While the measure is likely to die in the Senate, the bill even received support from two Republican representatives from Florida. Marijuana legalization is coming without a doubt, and it is still a shame that prosecutors and judges choose to pursue jail sentences for defendants whose pot cases have no violent or weapon allegations. We recently posted about the Maryland legislature potentially debating the legalization of marijuana for recreational use in 2021, and Florida may go down the same path in a couple of years. Once marijuana is decriminalized the states will likely develop a user-friendly procedure to expunge past cases, as the feds cannot be counted on to do the same.

Benjamin Herbst is a criminal lawyer who continues to fight for all defendants facing drug charges in the state and federal courts in Maryland and Florida. He has extensive experience defending clients charged with manufacturing marijuana, drug trafficking, possession with intent to distribute and all other criminal offenses. Benjamin also specializes in weapons and firearms cases, and has won numerous jury trials and motions to suppress evidence. Call Benjamin anytime at 410-207-2598 or at 954-543-0305 in Florida for a free consultation about the defenses that may be available in your case.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 4, 2020

Lawmakers to Debate Marijuana Legalization in 2021

By Benjamin Herbst

It’s not a question of if, but when marijuana will be legalized for recreational use in Maryland. With the 2021 legislative session set to begin on January 13, the real question is whether this is the year it finally gets done. Marijuana legalization has been debated for a decade, but this coming year presents the first realistic chance for it to pass. Medical cannabis is firmly entrenched in Maryland and is helping thousands of state residents with medical issues, in addition to generating tens of millions of dollars for the state. The detractors who were worried about increased criminal activity around state licensed dispensaries and grow facilities have been silenced by a lack of reported incidents, and concerns about increased DUI and DWI cases have been largely unfounded. Access to marijuana by minors is always a concern, but there is has been no evidence that the medical cannabis program has led to increased marijuana use among teenagers.

The success of the medical cannabis program is only one of the factors that lawmakers will consider when making a decision to legalize. Lawmakers will also consider whether the issue is better suited for a public vote in the form of a referendum similar to the recent sports gambling vote. The details about licenses and where the proceeds will be directed are also issues that must be debated, but the Maryland Cannabis Commission has already been down that road, and should be better prepared to tackle the issue again. There are still lawmakers that will never admit that marijuana legalization is long overdue, and these lawmakers should consider the simple question of whether the state should continue to support the illegal sale of marijuana or whether it should join the rest of the contemporary states and begin to legalize, tax and regulate recreational marijuana. Citizens that want to use marijuana will get it one way or another, and the illegal buying and selling of pot only promotes more criminal activity.

There are other collateral issues that must be considered when marijuana legalization is either put to a vote in the legislature or for the citizens. We are asked all the time whether citizens are able to grow their own marijuana plants, and the answer is still no in Maryland. Many states allow their residents to grow a limited amount of marijuana plants in their home, but Maryland has not given up strict control of marijuana production to anyone who is not licensed as a grower with the MMCC. Anyone who is caught growing even one marijuana plant faces a felony charge for manufacturing marijuana. This charge carries a maximum penalty of up to 5 years in prison in Maryland and Florida, and is virtually the same charge as possession with intent to distribute marijuana. While most first-time offenders do not receive lengthy jail sentences for growing a small amount of marijuana, most if not all will likely be arrested and booked. After an arrest, a person will always have an FBI arrest record regardless of what happens with the case. Benjamin Herbst is a Maryland and Florida criminal defense lawyer who specializes in marijuana cases including distribution, possession, manufacturing, and possession with intent to distribute. If you have been charged with any drug offense in state or federal court contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598. Benjamin has successfully defended hundreds of drug cases including drug trafficking, large amount drug kingpin cases, and possession of a firearm in a drug trafficking crime. He offers flexible payment plans and is always available to give updates on the progress of the case.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 25, 2020

PG County Man Sentenced for Bank Robbery

By Benjamin Herbst

This week at the Greenbelt federal courthouse, a Prince George’s County man was sentenced 4 years in prison for a bank robbery that occurred back in 2019. According to the guilty plea the defendant entered a bank in Oxon Hill, Maryland during normal business hours and demanded his money. When the bank teller told the defendant that he would need to provide his identification and debit card in order to withdraw money, the man apparently became upset. He then demanded money again from the teller, but this time he explained he was committing a robbery and that he would shoot everyone in the bank. The bank teller was obviously shaken, but followed her training and complied with the man’s request. She handed over $202 in cash and the man fled the scene. Unbeknownst to the defendant, the stack of cash contained a GPS tracking device that was likely activated automatically upon being removed from the drawer.

Law enforcement followed the GPS signal and located the defendant a short time later at a fast food restaurant in the same shopping center as the bank. The defendant was arrested and police recovered the $202 in cash on his person. Police also reviewed surveillance footage from inside the restaurant that showed the man discarding an object in a trash can. This object turned out to be the GPS tracking device, which police recovered and entered into evidence. The robbery did not occur on federal property, and the Prince George’s County Police was likely the agency that apprehended the defendant, but nonetheless he was charged under the federal bank robbery statute. 18 U.S. Code §2113 was established to give the federal government jurisdiction to prosecute robbery from any bank, credit union or savings and loan association in the United States that operates under U.S. law, is a member of the Federal Reserve or is insured by the FDIC. This basically includes any bank, whether foreign or domestic, that operates in the U.S. The federal bank robbery statute also covers theft of anything over $1,000, and burglary or other felony committed against the bank. Bank robbery is a felony with a 20-year maximum penalty, which becomes 25 years if the defendant commits an assault or uses a dangerous weapon or device. Theft of more than $1,000 in currency or other items from a bank carries a 10-year maximum penalty.

Typically, when we think of bank robbery we think of a masked person pointing a gun at the teller, but a large number of bank robberies are committed without weapons. Simply relaying a verbal threat to a teller or even passing a threatening note with a demand for money is enough of a show of force to trigger robbery charges. This is the same under both federal law and the laws of Maryland. The government is never required to prove the defendant was able to carry out any of the threats in a robbery case. All that is required is for the defendant to place a victim in fear of his or her safety. If a weapon is brandished or used the defendant will face a significantly higher punishment under the sentencing guidelines, and if a firearm is present mandatory minimum sentences will be in play under federal law and Maryland state law.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 20, 2020

Two Suspects Arrested for Theft in Bel Air

By Benjamin Herbst

Bel Air Police have arrested two suspects in connection with a series of retail thefts spanning multiple states, and one remains in custody at the Harford County Detention Center. The incident occurred last week at a Dick’s Sporting Goods location in Harford County where the two suspects allegedly took several items from the store and fled the scene in a silver Ford Fusion. Police were called to investigate and then canvassed the area looking for the suspected vehicle. During their search for the suspects, police came across a car matching the description in the Harford Mall parking lot, and waited to see if anyone appeared. While police maintained surveillance on the Ford Fusion, other officers apprehended one of the suspects walking in the area. The second suspect was then arrested as she headed toward the vehicle, and officers later determined that both were involved in another retail theft inside of the mall. Police sought and received a search warrant for the Ford Fusion, and upon execution of that warrant discovered over $2,000 worth of stolen apparel from various retail stores.

The two suspects were arrested and charged with misdemeanor theft and theft scheme, and taken before the District Court Commissioner for a determination of their release conditions. One of the defendants, a 24-year old female from Baltimore City, was released on an unsecured personal bond. This means the defendant will not have to put any money up unless she fails to show up for her trial date, which has not been scheduled as of this time. The other defendant, a 25-year old female from Odenton in Anne Arundel County was originally granted release on a $5,000 bail, but then held without bail by a District Court Judge the next day. Normally, and especially during COVID-19, defendants are not held without bail for theft charges, but this defendant apparently had an active arrest warrant out of Virginia for theft. The judge was likely concerned that either she was a flight risk or that she would not be returned to court in time for her December 8, 2020 trial date if she was sent to Virginia. Defendants who are incarcerated are generally scheduled for District Court trial within 30-45 days, while defendants who are on the street are scheduled much further out from the date of their arrest.

We will continue to follow this case, and may post a follow-up article if anything interesting occurs in the either trial. The incarcerated defendant may end up taking a plea in December, as postponing the case or requesting a jury trial could result in a major delay, and continued incarceration. Unlike employee theft cases, misdemeanor retail theft cases of this magnitude generally do not result in a jail sentence unless the defendant has a criminal record. In this case the incarcerated defendant has a relatively lengthy criminal history, including prior convictions for theft out of Baltimore County and malicious destruction of property out of Anne Arundel County. These prior convictions combined with the active warrant out of Virginia could result in a much harsher sentence should she be found guilty. The District Court for Harford County has been known over the years to hand out harsher sentences than neighboring jurisdictions such as Baltimore County, but every case has its own story and every defendant a unique background. Benjamin Herbst is a Maryland and Florida criminal defense lawyer who specializes in theft and theft scheme cases in all jurisdictions including Harford County. Benjamin has successfully defended hundreds of clients charged with employee theft, retail theft, embezzlement, fraud and other white-collar crimes. He also handles probation violations and drug, gun and violent criminal cases such as robbery, attempted murder and aggravated assault. Call his Maryland office at 410-207-2598 or his Florida office at 954-543-0305.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 11, 2020

Baltimore Man Pleads Guilty to Federal Drug Conspiracy

By Benjamin Herbst

A 41-year old Baltimore man recently pled guilty to participating in a drug distribution conspiracy, and he now faces more than a decade in federal prison for his actions. Based on a recent press release from the U.S. Attorney’s Office the defendant is looking at 12.5 years after the government and the defense agreed that a 150-month sentence would be appropriate. The presiding judge in the Baltimore City federal courthouse will have final say over the sentence, but typically when both sides are in agreement the judge will go along as well. It is unclear whether the parties entered into a binding agreement under Rule 11(c), but either way the judge would maintain discretion to approve or reject the plea based upon a final calculation of the sentencing guidelines and a review of the presentence report.

According to facts laid out in the plea agreement the defendant participated in a drug trafficking organization or DTO from at least September of 2018 until June of 2019 in Baltimore City. The defendant also admitted to maintaining a stash house in Baltimore where heroin and crack cocaine were processed and stored. Law enforcement agencies including the ATF, FBI and the Baltimore Police all participated in the investigation, which ultimately yielded a search warrant for the stash house. The Anne Arundel County Police also participated to some degree in the case due to the cross proximity of the stash house to Anne Arundel County. Police seized over 200 grams of crack cocaine from the house, but it does not appear that any money or firearms were seized. It is also not clear whether there were other individuals that were charged along with this defendant, but there had to have been other suspects in order for the government to establish sufficient evidence of a conspiracy. Conspiracy charges are common in federal court, as it is often easier for the government to prove that a defendant planned and prepared to commit an illegal act as opposed to catching him or her in the act. Under Maryland state law conspiracy is not a separate enumerated crime, but rather a common law misdemeanor that may be charged in almost any criminal case.

It certainly appears that an agreed upon sentence of 12.5 years for a non-violent drug offense involving far less than 1 kilogram of cocaine and no firearms or weapons would be excessive. The agreement is a little easier to comprehend when factoring in the defendant’s prior record though. According to Maryland casesearch, the defendant was convicted of first-degree murder back in 1999 and then narcotics distribution and possession of a firearm in a drug trafficking crime in 2011. He received 12 years in each of these cases. The first-degree murder case was resolved by a plea agreement to 12 years in prison, though he also received 12 years for handgun use in a crime in the same case. These counts could have been run consecutive for a total of 24 years though it is not completely clear. Either way the defendant has spent most of his adult life in prison, and now will spend another decade behind bars. Regardless of his prior record, a 12 plus year sentence for mid-level drug trafficking seems unjust, and we can only hope that lawmakers continue to engage in criminal justice reform that reduces a defendant’s exposure in non-violent cases.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 3, 2020

Salisbury Man Allegedly Steals Truck and 32 Keys from Dealership

By Benjamin Herbst

A 26-year old Salisbury man is in custody after being arrested for burglary and motor vehicle theft last week. The defendant was denied bail after seeing a district court judge, and will likely have to wait until his preliminary hearing in two weeks or his first appearance in the circuit court before having another opportunity to request a reasonable bail. Wicomico County Sheriff’s Deputies were originally called to a local car dealership to investigate a burglary, but later learned that a vehicle had gone missing after reviewing surveillance footage of the dealership. The man apparently entered the dealership through an unlocked door used by a cleaning service, and then appeared to drive several vehicles around and off the dealership lot. The man then settled on a Ford pickup truck and left the premises.

The sheriff’s office put out a BOLO or be on the lookout for the stolen pickup, and deputies spotted it a short time later on North Salisbury Blvd. near Naylor Mill Road. Police performed a traffic stop and took the man into custody whereupon they recovered keys to 32 other vehicles. All stolen property appears to have been recovered by police. The man was booked for burglary in the second degree, unlawful taking of a motor vehicle and theft from $1,500 to $25,000, which are all felonies charges. While the district court has jurisdiction to handle the two theft charges, the burglary felony burglary charge must either be dismissed or forwarded to the circuit court by way of indictment or criminal information.

Under Maryland law, second-degree burglary is defined as breaking into a place of business with the intent to commit a theft, crime of violence or arson. It has a maximum penalty of up to 15 years in prison or up to 20 years if the state can prove the defendant stole or attempted to steal a firearm. While the statute prohibits breaking and entering of the business, a defendant does not actually have to break something in the literal sense in order to be charged. Breaking can also mean crossing some sort of threshold like a fence (regardless of size) or an opened door. Simply walking on to an open area of a business would without crossing any type of boundary would likely only be sufficient to support charges for fourth-degree burglary. Burglary in the fourth degree is the only type of misdemeanor burglary in Maryland, and has a maximum penalty of 3 years in prison. First and third-degree burglaries are both reserved for the breaking and entering of dwellings, and are generally treated more harshly in court than the other varieties.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 28, 2020

Harford County Man Refuses to Wear Mask, Arrested

By Benjamin Herbst

A Harford County man was recently arrested at a polling place in Jarrettsville for refusing to wear a mask while attempting to cast his ballot in the upcoming presidential election. The 52-year old from Fallston was not taken into custody right away, but rather was allegedly asked to leave or put on a mask several times before police were called. Even after deputies from the Harford County Sheriff’s Office arrived, an arrest was not performed immediately. Deputies spoke to the man for nearly 30 minutes, and reportedly arrested him as a last resort. He was taken to the detention center and then was released on his own recognizance after meeting with the commissioner. Officers charged the man with two offenses including trespass under criminal law 6.403 and failure to comply with a health emergency under section 14.3A.08 of the public safety code. According to reports there was another man who refused to wear a mask, but willingly left the polling site after police arrived.

There are a few interesting legal issues related to this incident, but let’s start of by saying it is a true sign of the times that the headline to this post is not the least bit shocking. Just think how you would have felt one year ago if you had read that a person was arrested for not wearing a mask at a polling place. Regardless, the legal issues we will discuss involve the two charges. The first issue is whether the man was charged with the appropriate trespass statute. Under Maryland law, trespassing on private property carries a maximum sentence of 90-days in jail. This charge is common in cases involving casino trespass related to the Maryland voluntary exclusion program, and other cases involving bars, stores and private homes where the individual has been told to leave or not to enter in the first place. This particular incident occurred at a volunteer fire department, so the appropriate statute may have been for refusal or failure to leave a public building or grounds under 6-409. Trespass on public or government property carries a higher 6-month maximum penalty, which means there is a right to trial by jury in the circuit court.

We know from previous posts about parties and gatherings that police will make arrests for violations of the Governor’s long-standing health emergency order. The Governor has a wide range of powers during emergencies, but typically when we think of a state of emergency we think of riots, hurricanes or widespread power outages. The health emergency provision is seldom used, but it does unequivocally grant certain powers to the Governor and the Court of Appeals that include requiring certain individuals to quarantine or isolate. The language of the statute also reads that “If necessary and reasonable to save lives or prevent exposure to a deadly agent, the Governor may order individuals to remain indoors or refrain from congregating.” The statute does not specifically address the ability of the Governor’s power to require masks, but does broadly allow for appropriate actions to be taken to protect the public. It should be noted that a violation of the public safety code related to so called normal states of emergency carries a maximum penalty of 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine, while a violation for failing to comply with a health emergency order is 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 23, 2020

When Can Police Search a Car and an Occupant

By Benjamin Herbst

Over the last several years the marijuana policy has greatly evolved in Maryland, and more changes are on the horizon. From the decriminalization of small amounts of pot to medical cannabis, and even the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office ending prosecution for marijuana possession, the progress has been undeniable. On the other hand, marijuana continues to be the root of hundreds of criminal prosecutions each year in the state of Maryland, and the majority of these cases begin out on the roads and highways. There is no easier way for police to make contact with the general public than through traffic stops, and this contact can quickly lead to a criminal investigation based on the smell of marijuana. With all the changes going on it is important to take a minute to understand what police officers are legally allowed to do on the road, and what they will often do regardless of legality.

Through various rulings in 2019 and 2020 Maryland’s highest court has made it clear that police cannot search a driver or passenger of a vehicle based on the smell of marijuana. The odor of marijuana or the presence of a small amount of marijuana is not evidence of a crime, and police cannot make a lawful arrest without more incriminating evidence. Police also are not able to search a person based on the smell or presence of marijuana and then say they were concerned about the presence of a weapon to justify a search. A search of person requires probable cause to believe that the person is armed or in possession of evidence of a crime. In addition, police are not permitted to perform the lesser intrusion of a frisk or pat down for weapons unless they have reasonable suspicion that the person is armed. Reasonable suspicion is a lower level of suspicion than probable cause, but still requires specific facts to indicate the presence of a weapon.

While police now have a far more limited ability to perform frisks and searches of people, they still have the power to perform automobile searches. Since marijuana is still considered illegal contraband, the odor of marijuana or the presence of a small amount still gives police the authority to search a car under the automobile exception. Contraband refers to goods that are illegal to possess regardless of whether possession of the goods is a crime. When lawmakers made possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana a civil infraction, they essentially preserved a police officer’s right to search a car based on the smell of marijuana. Nine out of ten times when police decide to search a car, they are not doing it solely to find a small amount of pot, and this is why marijuana is such a common cause of roadside arrests. Searching a car requires time and multiple police units, as an officer cannot search a car and watch its occupants at the same time. No officer is going to call for backup if he or she believes that the search will only yield a baggie of pot. To the contrary, police are generally looking for other controlled substances, large amounts of marijuana combined with currency and other evidence of distribution such as scales and empty bags, and finally firearms. We see dozens of handgun cases each year that begin as simple probable cause searches based on the odor of marijuana, and until marijuana is legalized this law enforcement tactic will continue. Transporting marijuana of any quantity or smoking in the car essentially give police a free look into a vehicle after any type of lawful traffic stop. Whether it’s a broken taillight or failing to signal, police do not need more than a primary moving violation or equipment violation to make contact with a potential suspect.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 15, 2020

Baltimore Police Officer Arrested for DUI, Gun Goes Missing

By Benjamin Herbst

A Baltimore City Police officer was recently arrested and charged with drunk driving after he was found sleeping on the street outside of a convenience store. According to the incident report the officer was found lying in a pool of his own vomit outside of his vehicle on Eastern Ave in Baltimore. To make matters worse the defendant, who was off-duty at the time, told responding officers that his personal firearm was missing from the scene. Police searched the vehicle and the area around the vehicle, but were unable to locate the missing handgun. The officer now faces charges for driving while impaired and driving under the influence of alcohol, and has a trial date set in the North Avenue District Court in February. It remains to be seen whether the officer will resolve his case at the District Court level, or request a jury trial that would transfer the case downtown to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. DUI carries a maximum penalty of 1 year in jail, which means the defendant has an absolute right to request a jury trial under Maryland law. DWI carries a maximum penalty of 60 days incarceration, and thus is not an offense that affords a jury trial right.

Regardless of where the case is heard, the judge will not be pleased to find out that the officer had previously been charged with DUI back in 2018. According to an incident report the officer, who was again off-duty, was pulled over after police responded to a call regarding individuals brandishing firearms at a club. Police detected signs of impairment and the officer was administered a breathalyzer test at the station, which resulted in a reading of .10. While this is clearly enough evidence to prosecute for DUI per se under Maryland law, the case ended up being dismissed by prosecutors in court. The officer was also never identified as one of the individuals who allegedly brandished a gun, but two of his off-duty colleagues were identified and disciplined as a result of their involvement. The officer, who currently lives in Howard County, avoided any major disciplinary consequences back in 2018, but he may not be so lucky in the present case. If he enters a plea or is found guilty at trial the fact that he was so intoxicated that his handgun was lost or taken without his knowledge will certainly be a factor that the judge will consider at sentencing. It is likely that a sentencing judge would consider this behavior even more reckless than a typical DUI, as it resulted in another illegal firearm being circulated on the streets of Baltimore.

The 28-year old city police officer has been placed on paid leave during the course of an internal investigation that will not be made public. The results of the case will be public though, and it will be interesting to see how the state and the judge handle the case. The public will certainly be watching, and so will the Blog. We will post a follow-up article when the case is resolved, and comment on the outcome. Benjamin Herbst is a Maryland criminal defense lawyer who specializes in DUI defense and other traffic charges such as leaving the scene of an accident, fleeing and eluding police, driving on a suspended license, reckless driving, driving without a license and federal traffic citations received on Maryland parkways or on federal property. Benjamin also handles all criminal charges including wear, transport or carry of a handgun, and illegal possession of a firearm. He is available 7-days a week for a free consultation and is licensed in Florida for those who have criminal or traffic cases in Miami-Dade, Broward or Palm Beach County. Call Benjamin today at 410-207-2598 or 954-543-0305 to discuss your case and which defenses may be available to you.

Continue reading →