Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog
Published on:

By

copblock-police-corruption-300x200A Maryland State Trooper with more than 10 years of service has been charged with several federal felonies for attempting to tip off a drug dealer about ongoing investigations in exchange for cash.  The trooper was arrest by the FBI and now faces charges including bribery, conspiracy to distribute controlled dangerous substances, using a communications facility to commit a drug felony and aiding and abetting in the distribution of controlled dangerous substances.  The affidavit used to charge the trooper was heavily redacted due to the ongoing nature of the investigation and other considerations, but the public recently became aware of the general nature of the trooper’s alleged unfortunate course of conduct.  What we do know is that the trooper was assigned to the Criminal Enforcement Division Western Region Narcotics, which works closely with federal law enforcement agencies such as the DEA and FBI.  Western Maryland counties including Washington County and Frederick County have been identified by the feds as drug trafficking hot spots, and therefore receive federal funding for ramped up law enforcement activity.  The Narcotics Task Force in Washington County is another example of a state law enforcement agency (Washington County Sheriff’s Office and Hagerstown Police Department) that works closely with the feds.  This particular trooper attended high school in Frederick County and achieved the rank of Corporal before being placed on administrative leave due to the investigation.  The accused was also a recipient of a trooper of the year award for the Salisbury Barrack in 2013.

At some point during an investigation into a Drug Trafficking Organization or DTO that was operating in the Hagerstown area, the trooper reached out to a suspect looking to profit off of law enforcement information.  The trooper relayed that he had information about GPS tracking devices being placed on cars, future search warrants and later a potential wire-tap.  It turns out that the wire-tap information was fabricated by the government in an attempt to weed out the leak from within the law enforcement team working the case.  The government’s theory based on the affidavit in support of the criminal complaint seems to be that the trooper was in severe debt, with credit card payments and loans exceeding $67,000, and was desperate for cash.  His desperation caused him to strike a cash for information deal with a drug dealer who was under federal investigation.  The dealer was likely a cooperating witness for the government, but at this point there is no information to rule out that he/she was an undercover law enforcement officer.

After a well-documented back and forth that was memorialized on Facebook messenger, the trooper agreed to provide sensitive information to the alleged dealer for $1,800 cash.  The cash was marked and then placed behind a Hagerstown motel dumpster by undercover FBI agents.  The FBI continued to monitor the location of the marked cash, and appeared to witness the trooper picking up the money.  There was nothing in the affidavit that stated they specifically identified the trooper as the one who picked up the money, but they did ping his cellphone as being at the location of the dumpster at the time of the pickup.  The trooper and the drug dealer then had a conversation again on Facebook that confirmed he received the money.  Additionally, the drug dealer requested that the trooper run one of his alleged friends through NCIC to see if there was an outstanding warrant, which the trooper agreed to do.  This was probably another attempt to induce the trooper into more unlawful behavior, as misuse of law enforcement databases can be prosecuted.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

weed4-300x194As of midnight on January 1, possession of more than 10 grams of marijuana is no longer a crime in Maryland, and more changes to the state’s pot laws are in store for the rest of 2023.  Back in 2014 when Marijuana possession was first decriminalized there was much debate of the threshold amount.  Some lawmakers argued for an ounce or more, while others fought for lower limits as a compromise for any decriminalization in the first place.  As compromises typically go, many lawmakers left Annapolis wishing the decriminalization limit was different, but satisfied they got somewhere.  There was never any real logic to the arbitrary limit of 10 grams, and despite repeated efforts to change the number, it stuck for more than 6 years.  The 10-gram limit was always a placeholder, as recreational marijuana was a foregone conclusion.  It seemed as if lawmakers put off raising the 10-gram limit because they knew its days were numbered by the implementation of a much larger policy change.  Well, now that change is upon us, and it will soon be perfectly legal for an adult over the age of 21 to walk around with a bag of pot.  But until that day arrives on July 1 when the trees are in full bloom and the sun is hot, adults without medical cards will still have to think twice about transporting their stash.

Marijuana possession for adults over the age of 21 was virtually erased from the books as a criminal offense in Maryland when the ball dropped this past Saturday.  We say virtually because possession of more than 2.5 ounces is still a misdemeanor offense punishable by up to 6 months in jail.  On the other hand, most people caught with more than 2.5 ounces will likely be charged with possession with intent to distribute or PWID as commonly called in the courts.  PWID marijuana now a misdemeanor punishable by up to 3 years in prison and a $5,000 fine.  Maryland law 5-602(b) states that “possession of the civil use amount of cannabis or the personal use amount of cannabis without other evidence of an intent to distribute or dispense does not constitute a violation [of the possession with intent to distribute law]”.  This is part of the reason why the legislature decided on the 2.5-ounce threshold, and why the 10-gram threshold was mostly illogical.  While there are some exceptions, lawful marijuana users typically to do not carry around more than 2.5 ounces of marijuana, an amount roughly the most a typical sandwich bag can hold.  Lawmakers finally agreed to not subject marijuana users to criminal punishment, which was certainly not the case with the 10-gram limit.  Recreational pot smokers routinely carry more than 10 grams of marijuana, as it is commonly purchased in half ounces or ounces (13 and 26 grams respectively).  We applaud the legislature for raising the possession limits, though it still came a few years too late for some.  Fortunately, there is now hope for all of those individuals charged and convicted with past possession of marijuana offenses in state court.

Another component of the new law that went into effect on January 1 is a provision entitling anyone with a marijuana possession conviction to have that conviction expunged.  In addition, all marijuana possession convictions must be removed from public record by 2024.  Gone are the days when a pot conviction will cost someone a job or admission into a school or program.  The specific components of the temporary possession law state that a person who possesses up to 1.5 ounces of marijuana could face a civil fine of up to $100.  Anyone caught with more than 1.5 ounces but less than 2.5 ounces faces a $200 civil fine, and as mentioned before, possession over 2.5 ounces is a crime punishable by up to 6 months in jail and a $1,000 fine.  It is still a crime for young adults and juveniles to possess marijuana in Maryland, so if your child has been charged it is important to fight the case and to contact a lawyer.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

drink-driving-808790_960_720-300x200A 28-year-old Anne Arundel County man has been charged with multiple criminal violations in addition to being issued four traffic citations for allegedly causing a head-on collision in Lothian earlier this week.  The accident left three family members injured, including 15 and 9-year-old children.  According to Anne Arundel County Police all three of the occupants were treated for life-threatening injuries, while the defendant was uninjured in the crash.  Police investigation revealed that the defendant crossed the center line, which caused his Rav4 to strike a smaller Nissan Versa head on.  Another vehicle then crashed into the Nissan from the rear as a result of the sudden collision.  Police responded to the scene and began a criminal investigation after bystanders informed officers that the driver appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol.  The driver then allegedly failed field sobriety tests and was placed under arrest for DUI.  He then agreed to submit to a blood alcohol concentration test at the station in lieu of submitting to a mandatory blood draw. The result of the breath test was .18, which is more than twice the legal limit.

In a normal Maryland DUI or DWI case the defendant is usually charged via citation and released to a friend or family member a short time later.  While police do have the authority to book a defendant into the jail for drunk driving, going to jail for a DUI charge in Maryland is rare outside of Baltimore City.  This case was far from normal due to the severity of the victim’s injuries, and the overall egregious nature of the defendant’s alleged actions.  Most people are aware that causing a death in a traffic accident or boat accident while under the influence can result in criminal charges for homicide by vehicle or vessel or manslaughter.  But the legislature also chose to criminalize causing a serious injury accident while under the influence.  Based on the totality of the circumstances, the defendant was booked and charged with this fairly new criminal violation under §3-211 of the Maryland Criminal Code.  This law makes it a criminal violation to cause life threatening injuries by a motor vehicle or vessel while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.  A first offense for this violation carries up to 3 years in prison for DUI and up to 2 years for DWI.  If a defendant has a prior conviction for impaired driving in Maryland or any other state, the maximum penalty would become 5 years in prison.  The defendant in this case was charged with 3 counts, though he can only be lawfully sentenced on one of the counts.  He was held without bail by the court commissioner and by a District Court judge the next day at bail review.  He is now being held at the Jennifer Road detention center awaiting his trial in March of next year.

Almost all drivers who are charged with drunk driving in Maryland are issued multiple citations, which can be confusing and stressful for someone with no experience dealing with this situation.  In reality, the officers are taught to issue multiple citations, typically for DUI, DWI and DUI pe se (if the defendant tested over the limit), because they do not know which of the counts the State’s Attorney will be able to prove at trial.  Regardless of the number of citations a driver receives in a drunk driving arrest, most will eventually be dismissed by the State at trial or pursuant to a plea.  If a plea agreement is reached, the defendant typically admits to one of the citations and maybe two if the driving pattern is especially alarming to the State.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

jaguar-1366978_960_720-300x169Four Baltimore teenagers and a 12-year-old were recently arrested in Ocean City for an armed carjacking that resulted in the victim being taken to the hospital.  In addition to being charged with multiple felonies including carjacking, armed robbery and motor vehicle theft, the 19-year-old defendant was also charged with 13 traffic infractions including attempting to elude a uniformed officer by fleeing on foot and reckless driving.  The criminal and traffic infractions were scheduled for preliminary hearing today in the Ocean City District Court, but the hearing was waived.  The State will now decide which charges to file in the Circuit Court for Worcester County in Snow Hill.  According to reports, police responded to the scene of the robbery where a 73-year-old victim advised he had been approached by three young men in Downtown Ocean City.  One of the men brandished a handgun and pointed it at the victim while demanding items.  The male with the handgun then hit the victim in the back of the head with the gun and drove off with the vehicle.

Officers in the area spotted the stolen vehicle at a convenience store a few blocks away and attempted to initiate a traffic stop, but the driver took off.  Two other stolen vehicles fled the scene as well, and all were tracked by law enforcement.  One of the stolen vehicles attempted to flee town using the Route 50 bridge, but police were able to disable the vehicle using stop sticks in West Ocean City.  This 19-year-old suspect then attempted to run from police but was apprehended by Worcester County Sheriff’s Deputies before being handed back over to the OCPD.  The carjacked vehicle was located a short time later in Wicomico County, and its 15-year-old driver was arrested and charged as a juvenile.  The third stolen vehicle made it the furthest before crashing in Dorchester County and then catching fire.  Three juvenile defendants were arrested after attempting to flee on foot.  One of the juvenile defendants in the third vehicle was in possession of a stolen handgun.  This defendant was 17 and charged as an adult in Dorchester County with similar charges as the 19-year-old defendant, but with additional charges for possession of a firearm by a minor, possession of ammunition and possession of a stolen firearm.  The juvenile court does not have original jurisdiction over violent crimes and gun offense when the defendant is 16 or 17.  Rather, these cases will be sent directly to adult court and would only be transferred back to juvenile court if a judge grants what is known as a reverse waiver.  The two youngest defendants, ages 12 and 14, were charged and released to their parents by police.  Further investigation revealed that numerous vehicles had been broken into that evening in Downtown Ocean City, and a handgun was stolen out of one of them.

The Blog will continue to follow the adult defendant’s case, and may post a follow up article when there is a resolution in the Circuit Court.  All juvenile cases are sealed from public view, so we will not be able to follow up on the three youngest defendants.  Although the 17-year-old defendant was charged as an adult, his case is also shielded from public view due to the fact that he is a juvenile.  Shielding adult cases is a new policy in Maryland, which assures that the privacy of juvenile defendants is protected.  This is especially important due to the high percentage of cases that are waived back down to juvenile court, where a defendant or respondent receives the benefit of privacy from the beginning.  If you or a loved one has been charged with a crime, contact Maryland juvenile criminal defense lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation.  Benjamin has successfully defended dozens of juveniles charged with some of the most serious offenses including carjacking, armed robbery, motor vehicle theft, and firearm possession.  He specializes in gun crimes in Maryland Eastern Shore locations such as Worcester County, Wicomico County and Dorchester County, and also handles drug and DUI charges in Ocean City.  Call Benjamin anytime at 410-207-2598 for a free consultation about your case.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

pistol-1350484_1280-300x200Anne Arundel County Police recently arrested two teenagers ages 14 and 16 for attempting to steal firearms from a Glen Burnie gun store.  Just before 4 a.m. in the morning police observed a white Ford van that crashed into the gun shop, and soon thereafter located two juvenile suspects in the process of stealing firearms from the store’s gun cases.  The juveniles were arrested without further incident and charged with multiple criminal offenses, and could be facing more charges according to media reports.  Police learned that the van in question was also involved in an attempted burglary in Pasadena earlier in the night.  Two other gun stores, including one in Anne Arundel County and one in Montgomery County, were also recently burglarized over the last couple of weeks and suspects had not been apprehended and charged at the time of this latest incident.  The Montgomery County burglary occurred on the night of Thanksgiving, just after midnight.  According to police this incident involved five or six individuals who rammed a stolen black sedan into the front of the gun shop, and then fled the scene with multiple firearms.  The same store was unsuccessfully targeted just one week prior.

The ATF is investigating all of these burglaries to see if there is any connection, and federal charges would likely follow if any of the thieves turn out to be adults.  Juveniles can be prosecuted at the federal level, but state prosecutions are far more common even in crimes that could be charged federally.  Theft of a gun from the premises of a licensed firearms dealer is punishable under 18 U.S.C. section 842(h), and a violation of this law carries up to 10 years in prison.  The logic behind making this a federal crime is that all firearms dealers must have a FFL or Federal Firearms License that is issued by the ATF.  The feds must approve anyone who chooses to sell, import or manufacture guns, so stealing from one of these licensees was established as a federal crime.  This is akin to bank robbery being a federal crime due to almost all banks being insured by the FDIC.

The exact charges in the Anne Arundel County case have not been announced publicly, as all juvenile cases and adult charges involving juvenile defendants are sealed from public view and inspection.  This was not always the case, as until recently juveniles that were charged as adults had their cases entered on Maryland judiciary case search, which is easily accessible to the public.  This has been a source of contention for the criminal defense community, as many of these charges ended up being dismissed or transferred to juvenile court after the damage of public knowledge was already done.  Thankfully, changes occurred that now protect juvenile defendants.  In addition, recent case law from the Maryland’s highest court has moved the needle in favor of transfer if there is any possibility of the juvenile benefiting from programs or services provided by DJS.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Gun-evidence-box-300x225One Baltimore man was sentenced and another recently pleaded guilty to the federal charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone.  Both cases were prosecuted at the Baltimore City federal courthouse, and both defendants were originally chaeged in state court before the feds took over.  The first defendant, a 22-year-old man, was arrested back in March of 2021 for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and firearm charges.  Law enforcement including the DEA recovered multiple firearms and upwards of 6 kilograms of fentanyl from a Pikesville stash house that was tied to the defendant.  The defendant’s case was transferred from the District Court to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, but then was dismissed after the feds decided to prosecute.  There is rarely one specific reason why the feds choose to pick up a state case, but when a defendant is arrested in the city with a combination of fentanyl and firearms its certainly going to attract their attention.  Federal prosecutors have been focusing on fentanyl cases in the Baltimore and D.C. metro areas over the last couple of years, and had already been heavily involved in prosecuting illegal firearm possession.  Any time both are present there is a good chance the case will be picked up by the U.S. Attorney’s Office.  In this particular case the young man received a 9-year federal prison sentence for illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone and possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, which means he will likely serve close to 8 years behind bars. There is no parole in the federal criminal justice system, so early release can only be granted based on the defendant’s conduct and the availability of re-entry programs.

Shortly after the first defendant was sentenced, another Baltimore man pleaded guilty to the sole charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone.  This defendant, a 31-year-old man, was apparently riding around the city on his bicycle with a construction hat, orange safety vest and a loaded .40 caliber handgun sticking out of his waistband.  A call for a potentially armed man was made to Baltimore Police, who were able to locate the suspect on city watch CCTV cameras a short time later.  Officers then stopped the suspect for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk, which is violates a city ordinance.  The man then allegedly tried to flee but was found a short time later knocking on the door of a random house.  Upon detaining the suspect, police located the .40 handgun, which had an obliterated serial number and 15 rounds of ammunition.  The suspect then uttered several spontaneous statements claiming ownership of the firearm.  This case could easily have been prosecuted by the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office, but the feds likely picked up the case due to the defendant’s proximity to a school upon his arrest.  The Gun Fee School Zones Act of 1990 made it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school, and despite being modified several times over the last few decades, the law is still very much intact.  Violation of this provision is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison, which is significantly harsher than the 3-year penalty for wear, transport or carry a firearm under Maryland law.  The defendant in this case negotiated a plea deal to serve two years in prison, so he is likely not a convicted felon or otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm.

The Blog will continue to follow all noteworthy drug and gun cases in Maryland, and will post on federal prosecution of traditional state charges.  If you or a loved one is facing adult or juvenile criminal charges contact Maryland gun lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598.  Benjamin specializes in charges involving possession with intent to distribute CDS such as heroin, fentanyl, cocaine and marijuana.  He also has extensive experience defending clients facing probation violations and gun charges such as possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of a firearm in a federal facility.  Contact Benjamin today to learn what defenses may be available in your state or federal case.  Benjamin is also licensed to practice in Florida, where he has successfully defended clients in numerous offenses such as drug trafficking, carrying a concealed firearm and aggravated assault.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

marijuana-1281540_1280-300x225Ten years ago marijuana first became legal in parts of the United States after voters in Washington and Colorado approved recreational cannabis.  Over the last decade an additional 17 states and the District of Columbia all followed suit and voted to legalize marijuana use for adults.  Maryland lawmakers have been tracking these trends for years, but had been remained hesitant to make any drastic changes to cannabis policy.  Rather, lawmakers have steadily been taking small bites at the apple including lowering the maximum punishment for marijuana possession, creating a medical marijuana program, and then eventually decriminalizing possession of small amounts of cannabis.  This past year lawmakers in Annapolis finally proved ready to take the big plunge, though they decided to leave it up to the voters to legalize pot once and for all.  Passage of the ballot measure was never really in doubt, as previous polls had revealed approximately 60 percent of Maryland voters favored marijuana legalization.  A 60/40 split may not seem like a large margin, but in the election world it’s actually fairly wide.  The margin however turned out to be even wider in the real vote, as the measure passed with a 65.6 percent approval.  Close to 1 million voters said yes to the question of whether citizens 21 and older should be able legally use cannabis Maryland, while just over 500,000 voted no.  This signaled a borderline landslide victory for the good guys.

Now that the ballot measure passed there are a few important things to remember, as it is definitely not legal so spark up a joint on the street or fire up the basement hydroponic grow room just yet.  First off, cannabis will not be legalized for recreational use until July 1 of 2023.  Starting July 1, 2023 possession of up to 1.5 ounces of pot will be fully legal for adults over the age of 21 while possession of 1.5 to 2.5 ounces will constitute a civil infraction.  Possession of over 2.5 ounces will be a misdemeanor punishable by 6 months in jail.  On January 1, 2023 possession of up to 1.5 ounces will be decriminalized though still illegal (much like possession under 10 grams is currently).  On July 1, adults will be able to grow up to two cannabis plants on their property as long as the plants are away from public view and protected from access by minors.  Unlawful distribution of marijuana and possession with intent to distribute will no longer be a felony starting on July 1, but will still retain a harsh sentence of up to 3 years in jail.  Mandatory expungements for past pot offenses that are no longer crimes will begin next year as well, but there is not definite timetable when recreational sales will begin.  Finally, smoking in public will remain illegal, and will be punishable by a civil fine of up to $250.  It is unclear whether municipalities such as Ocean City may try to enact harsher punishments as they do with open containers of alcohol.

The Blog will continue to follow Maryland marijuana policy with a close eye, and will also monitor other states and potential federal policy changes.  On election day five other states provided voters with the ability to determine whether recreational cannabis would be legal, though only Maryland and Missouri voters approved the measures.  Voters in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota all declined to legalize marijuana.  South Dakota voters had previously passed legalization in 2020, but the vote was declared invalid by the state’s highest court.  If you have a question about the new marijuana laws or a past CDS case feel free to call Maryland drug crime lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime at 410-207-2598.  Benjamin specializes in manufacturing, possession with intent to distribute and drug trafficking charges such as large amount and importation.  He also has extensive experience representing those charged with conspiracy and participation in a criminal gangs.  Contact Benjamin to find out which defenses may be available in your state or federal drug case anytime, 7 days a week.

Published on:

By

fire-1030751_1280-300x199A Charles County grand jury recently found probable cause to indict a 21-year-old woman from Upper Marlboro for two separate fire-bombing incidents that occurred just over one year ago.  The first incident took place in Waldorf, where the Prince George’s County woman allegedly threw a Molotov cocktail or firebomb in a homeowner’s front yard.  The fire bomb in this incident apparently did not properly ignite, and no damage was reported.  However, the next night in St. Mary’s County, police were called to investigate another incident where three fire bombs were ignited and thrown just feet from a residence.  The homeowner in this case reportedly heard noises outside, and upon opening the front door encountered a burning Molotov cocktail.  The homeowner was able to extinguish the burning destructive device without anything catching fire, though he also found two more devices that had already burned out.

Local police from Charles County and St. Mary’s County, as well as the State Fire Marshal investigated the scene but were unable to develop suspects for several months.  After about five months the Marshals honed in on the defendant after reviewing phone records and social media posts, and an arrest warrant was issued in March.  The defendant was eventually arrested in May, and after being denied bail by the commissioner, was released by a Charles County District Court Judge on private home detention.  The case then stayed in the District Court for several months before being indicted, which is not the norm for cases in Maryland.  A defendant is typically indicted within 6 weeks of his or her arrest in a District Court case, though this defendant was indicted five months after her arrest.

The 21-year-old Prince George’s County woman is now facing five criminal charges in the Circuit Court for Charles County, including attempted arson in the first degree, malicious destruction of property and possession or manufacture of a destructive device for the first incident in Charles County.  She is facing attempted arson in the second degree and destructive device charges for the second incident in St. Mary’s County, though both are charged in the same indictment.  First degree arson is a serious felony offense that carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison.  While the defendant was charged with misdemeanor attempted arson in the first degree, she would theoretically face the same 30-year maximum penalty upon conviction.  In Maryland charges for attempt and conspiracy are both considered misdemeanor common law offenses, though the maximum penalties are the same as the underlying crime.  First degree arson is charged for burning or attempting to burn a dwelling or an occupied structure, while second degree arson is charged for burning or attempting to burn a structure in general.  Second degree arson still carries a harsh 20-year maximum penalty, though it scores significantly lower on the Maryland sentencing guidelines than arson 1.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

hammer-719066_960_720-300x225On October 1 a host of new laws took effect in Maryland, though most of these laws do not modify existing criminal laws or procedure.  There are however two laws that will impact on our state’s criminal justice system.  The first new law prohibits a spouse from invoking the marital privilege in a domestic violence case such as second-degree assault if the marriage took place after the alleged incident.  While there may have been a few cases showing up from time to time where a defendant and a victim married in advance of a criminal case, this new law will not likely impact a large number of cases.  A victim who is willing to marry for the sole purpose of invoking the privilege is likely to not be cooperative with the state, and with good representation those cases will typically resolve favorably to the defendant.

There is one new law however that will certainly have a major impact on the criminal justice system.  This law was met with a great deal of resistance and even survived a veto by the Governor.  The law is titled the Youth Interrogation Act, and as of this month effectively prohibits Maryland police officers from interrogating juvenile suspects until the child has consulted with an attorney and the police have made reasonable efforts to contact the parents of the juvenile.  The attorney can be retained by the parents of the detained juvenile or provided by the state, and the consultation must be confidential and conducted in accordance with the Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct.  This requirement cannot be waived by the parents but it appears that a properly advised juvenile can still elect to speak without the presence of a lawyer.  In order for a statement to be deemed admissible the State must prove by clear and convincing evidence that it was made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily because there is a rebuttable presumption that the statements are inadmissible.  For the purposes of this law, it does not matter whether the detained minor is being charged as an adult or a juvenile, which means all detained minors under the age of 18 may not be interrogated without first being provided the opportunity to speak with a lawyer.  The interrogations must be recorded as long as it is practicable, and the juvenile must be informed of the recording.

There is one major exception to this law, which was included after the bill was met with a great deal of resistance from police and State’s Attorney lobbyists.  Law enforcement may conduct an interrogation of a detained juvenile without the presence of counsel if the law enforcement officer reasonably believes that the information sought is necessary to protect against a threat to public safety, and the questions posed to the child by law enforcement are limited to those questions reasonably necessary to obtain the information necessary to protect against the threat of public safety.  Obviously, any questioning elicited without the presence of a lawyer would come under intense scrutiny from the defense, and any inculpatory statements would likely be suppressed if the police deviated from the permissible line of questioning.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

handcuffs-2102488__480-300x169In October of 1971 an off-duty Montgomery County Police Captain was shot while working as a security guard.  Law enforcement arrived at the scene shortly after the shooting, but the officer succumbed to his injuries three days after being shot.  Numerous suspects were interviewed, but no arrests were made and the case had remained cold for decades.  Last October marked the 50th anniversary of the homicide, and police detectives decided to take a fresh look at the case in hopes that a new set of eyes could finally bring justice to the family of the fallen officer.  After reviewing the voluminous files and hours of recordings, the detectives honed in on a then 19-year-old witness who had given a statement to police shortly after the shooting, but had never been labeled as a suspect.  A recording of this witness’ interview with police was sent to the FBI where technicians were able to convert the old tape into a digital format.  The digital recording was clear enough for detectives to determine that the witness knew more about the incident than was possible- unless he was involved in the shooting.  This witness also had a criminal record, lived near the scene of the crime and subsequently changed his name.  Detectives then spent weeks trying to track the witness down, and finally located him living and allegedly quiet life in Upstate New York.

Montgomery County homicide detectives traveled to New York to attempt to interview the witness, and left with a confession to the 51-year-old shooting.  The witness turned defendant, who is now 70 years old, apparently admitted to detectives that he was committing a burglary in the area, when the off-duty police captain intervened as he was attempting to flee in a getaway vehicle.  The defendant claimed the shooting was accidental, but nonetheless detectives immediately applied for an arrest warrant for first-degree murder.  An arrest warrant was issued that same day, and the defendant was taken into custody in New York.  He was officially served with the warrant upon arrival at the Montgomery County Detention Center one week later.  He was denied bail by a District Court Commissioner at his initial appearance, and again by a District Court Judge at his bail review.  A preliminary hearing is set for this Friday, but the defendant will almost certainly be charged in the Circuit Court.

This case brings up a host of interesting legal issues.  One involves the statute of limitations, which under Maryland law varies greatly depending on the crime.  Almost all felonies including murder, first-degree assault and robbery have no statute of limitations, and the state could prosecute at any time.  Many misdemeanors have a 1-year statute of limitations, but there is no limit if the crime is punishable by a prison sentence.  In Maryland a prison sentence is a year and a day or more, so any crime with a maximum penalty of 18 months or higher can be charged at any time.  This means common misdemeanor crimes such as second-degree assault and fourth degree burglary have no statute of limitations in Maryland.  There are several crimes that carry two and three-year limitations such as manslaughter by vehicle, tax offenses, election law violations and Medicaid fraud that carry a 3-year limit.  Crimes charged under the Natural Resources Article and fraudulent driver’s license crimes carry a 2-year limitation.

Continue reading →
Contact Information
Baltimore Office
400 E Pratt St 8th Floor
Baltimore, MD 21202
Phone: (410) 207-2598

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2015 – 2024, Benjamin Herbst, Esq.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design