Maryland Criminal Attorney Blog

Of all of the cases that Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorneys/Lawyers are called upon to handle, some of the most difficult are cases involving repeat offenders in drug distribution cases. In Maryland, if a person who has been previously convicted of a either possession with the intent to distribute a narcotic such as heroin, cocaine or prescription controlled dangerous substances, is again charged, he will likely face a mandatory jail sentence that must be served without the possibility of parole. Some jurisdiction such as Baltimore County, pursue these mandatory sentences in virtually every case. Other jurisdictions such as Baltimore City more often than not use the threat of invoking the mandatory sentence to pressure defendants into plea bargain on terms that prosecutors view as favorable.

In Maryland, in cases where a person is charged with distribution of or possession with intent to distribute narcotics such as cocaine, heroin or prescription drugs, a second offender will be subject to 10 years in prison without the possibility of parole. A third offender is subject to a mandatory 25 year sentence without parole and a person with 4 or more convictions faces 40 years. However, in cases involving second offenders, a defendant who is convicted may be eligible for a modification of that sentence if the person is found to be in need of drug treatment by the Department of Health and Mental Hygene and to be sufficiently motivated to take advantage of the opportunity to receive treatment.

Continue reading "Narcotics Distribution Repeat Offender's Case Successfully Resolved with Health General Exception to Mandatory Sentence" »

Maryland Criminal Attorneys/Lawyers are often called upon to defend people in cases involving assaults on police officers and in matters involving perverted practice charges. Rarely are we called upon to represent someone charged with both of these offenses in the same case. I had such a case in Baltimore County District Court this week. The facts of the case are really quite humorous, although until this week when the cases were stetted, my client's failed to see the humor.

My client's are a married couple whom I will refer to as John and Jane in this blog to protect their privacy. John is in his early forties and Jane, who never took his last name, is in her mid fifties. Neither has ever been in any trouble with the law in their lives. John is in the printing business and Jane has been a school teacher for 30 years. They have been happily married for about 15 years.

Continue reading "Couple successfully defended in perverted practices/assault on police case in Baltimore County" »

Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon Convicted of Fraudulent Misappropriation. Maryland Criminal Attorney discusses whether this count is a Misdemeanor or a Felony and whether or not the Mayor is subject to a mandatory minimum jail term of one year.

As many have now heard Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon was convicted by a jury today of count four of the indictment that she was facing. This count was Embezzlement - Fraudulent Misappropriation by Fiduciary is a Misdemeanor although one that carries a maximum prison term of Five years in prison. The jury apparently acquitted her of all other counts including count one - Felony Theft which is a felony that carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years in prison. So what conduct constitutes Embezzlement - Fraudulent Misappropriation by Fiduciary?

Continue reading "Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon Convicted of Fraudulent Misappropriation" »

I have recently received a number of inquiries from persons who have either been denied a security clearance or have had their clearances revoked by government officials on installations across the United States. The tenor of the conversations is almost always one of defeat. Persons who lose their clearances almost always believe that they have no power to fight back. Read on to learn about your rights when the government tries to take your clearance away.

Few things can be more intimidating than the prospect of fighting the United States Government regarding your security clearance. Contractors and federal employees who work for Government agencies depend on their security clearances for their livelihood. Loss of a clearance – or refusal to grant one in the first instance – can be a devastating and life-altering event. For most people, the prospect of taking on a federal agency about the revocation of a security clearance is a daunting one. Many believe that because an agency has revoked or denied a clearance, there is nothing they can do to fight back. After all, the agency knows best . . . right? WRONG!

The truth is that the decision to revoke or deny a security clearance is almost always made by persons who may be influenced by “workplace politics,” and personal issues or problems with an applicant. In some cases, decisions to revoke or deny a clearance have been based on an employee’s desire to disqualify a particular contractor because the employee does not like working with the contractor’s employees. The power vested in those making security clearance decisions is tremendous, and all too often the power is exercised for the wrong reasons, and having little to do with the established criteria governing these decisions.

Here’s what you need to know:

Decisions regarding security clearances are tremendously important and must be based on a fair, impartial, and commonsense review of all relevant information about an applicant. Instead of focusing on one perceived problem, a decision must be based on what has been termed the “whole person” concept. This review encompasses numerous factors that must be addressed by the government in making a decision regarding a clearance. The factors include such things as 1) the nature and seriousness of the alleged conduct, 2) the circumstances surrounding the conduct and the extent that such conduct was purposeful or intentional, 3) the timing of the conduct – was it recent? Did it happen more than once? 4) whether the applicant has taken rehabilitative steps to address underlying issues (such as drug use or accumulation of large debt), 5) the potential for exploitation or coercion in the future, and 6) the likelihood of recurrence.

Continue reading "YOU CAN FIGHT THE REVOCATION OF A SECURITY CLEARANCE !!!!" »

As a full time Baltimore Maryland Criminal Lawyer/Attorney I handle dozens of Child Abuse cases each year without ever achieving a result as bad as the one that I will discuss in detail in this blog. In this case I was hired only after the client had gone through most of the process with another attorney and was obviously dissatisfied with the result. In these situations I usually tactfully ask the client what if any research they did on their attorney to determine whether he was a criminal law specialist and therefore sufficiently experienced to handle the case. I usually get little more than a blank stare in response as I did in this case. I have blogged about this issue in the past and am continually amazed at the lack of effort some criminal defendants put into the search for a qualified criminal defense attorney. It seems that most people just go to whomever they are referred to or the first name in the phone book and never even bother to ask the attorney about his qualifications much less do any independent research into them.

First, the facts of the case.

The client is a 60 year old naturalized American citizen from the Caribbean. She has lived in this country for over 40 years and prior to this situation had never been charged, much less convicted, with anything more serious than a parking ticket in her life. She has always worked, paid her taxes and raised a family. In other words, she is a solid a citizen as any criminal defense attorney could hope to represent.

Continue reading "Child Abuse First Offender Gets Six Years - Was She Properly Defended?" »

As A Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorney/Lawyer I represent many people charged with either handgun offenses or violations of the State's narcotics aka controlled dangerous substance laws. More often than not, so long as the defendant does not have an extensive criminal history, these matters can be resolved without the defendant having to serve much or any time in prison, even assuming that the State can prove the case. However, when a person gets charged with possession of firearms and felony narcotics offenses at the same time, things get a lot trickier.

This is because under Maryland Law and Federal Law there are minimum mandatory sentences that must be served without the possibility of parole associated with trafficking narcotics with a firearm - even for first offenders. Perhaps more surprisingly, these laws apply to the possession of any firearm and not simply handguns or regulated firearms such as assault weapons. So while a convicted felon may be in possession of a shotgun without violating Maryland Law (shotgun possession by a convicted felon is a violation of Federal Law) a person with no record who is caught trafficking narcotics with a shotgun would be in violation of these laws and face the mandatory penalties just the same as if he were caught with a handgun or an assault weapon; and the penalty is a stiff one indeed. Any person in Maryland who is convicted of trafficking narcotics with a firearm faces a maximum penalty of twenty years in prison but the real meat in the statute is that the convicted defendant faces a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison without the possibility of parole. I currently represent a person who finds himself in this exact predicament. I will explain the facts and then get into what exactly the State must prove to convict my client or any other similarly situated defendant of this charge.

Continue reading "Trafficking Narcotics With a Firearm - What Must the State Prove and What are the Penalties?" »

http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1300820.htmlAs a Maryland Federal Criminal Attorney I know that nothing in the federal sentencing guidelines strikes more fear into the hearts of defendants and defense attorneys than the Career Offender provisions, found at section 4B1.1. This section is the most overused and perhaps least understood of all components of the guidelines.

In a nutshell, a criminal defendant is considered a Career Offender if he is currently charged with a violent crime or controlled substance offense and has previously been convicted twice of “a felony that is either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.” It is basically the federal version of a “third strike” rule. The consequences of being labeled as a career offender are disastrous. First, a defendant’s criminal history category is automatically raised to Category VI—the most serious category in federal law. Second, the offense level for the current charge is also automatically inflated to some of the highest in the guidelines system. In most cases, the level is raised to 37. To give some perspective, level 43 is the highest designation in the sentencing guidelines, and applies to crimes such as 1st degree murder!

Moreover, federal courts have adopted a very wide “strike zone” in determining what constitutes a “controlled substance felony.” While most logical thinkers understand that a controlled substance felony means drug distribution or dealing, federal courts have ruled that a state drug possession conviction can qualify as long as the offense carries a maximum possible punishment of greater than one year. In Maryland, possession of cocaine carries a maximum possible punishment of four years, making it a “felony” for federal purposes, even though the crime is classified as a misdemeanor under state law. So an individual in Maryland who has been twice convicted of cocaine possession will be treated as a career offender if he thereafter is charged in federal court with drug dealing or conspiracy to deal drugs. The results are significant.

A defendant classified as a career offender in a federal drug case will typically face a sentencing range of 30 years – life! Facing such a monstrous guideline range forces many defendants to accept guilty pleas in defensible cases as well as cases where the defendant is actually innocent! http://www.ussc.gov/2004guid/4b1_1.htm

Continue reading "ATTACK THE CAREER OFFENDER LABEL !!!" »

As a Maryland Criminal Lawyer/Attorney I often counsel people that they must " win the race to the courthouse". What I mean by that is very often inexperienced or inept prosecutors will reflexively side with whomever earns the title "victim" (actually it is really complaining witness) by winning the race to the courthouse to file charges. The typical example is a bar fight or an altercation at some other location that is broken up or otherwise ceases prior to police arriving on the scene. Unless a weapon was used or someone was seriously injured, the police do not have the legal authority to make an arrest. This is because without a weapon or serious injury the only crime would that could be charged is second degree assault which is a misdemeanor in Maryland. The police can only arrest in misdemeanor cases if they actually witness the events. Otherwise, the police are supposed to simply write a report and advise the combatants as to the procedures for filing charges against one another.

I had a case like this in Carroll County earlier this week. The facts were that our client was riding his motorcycle and he got caught behind a slow moving tractor trailer. He rode behind the truck for between 2 to 3 miles and a line of cars developed behind my client. Although there were several places where the driver of the truck could have moved partially onto the shoulder to allow our client and the other cars to pass, he never did so. Needless to say, our client began to get impatient.

Continue reading "Carroll County Maryland Assault Case Demonstrates Need to Win the Race to the Courthouse" »

Maryland Criminal Lawyers/Attorneys are often called upon to defend people who are charged with Assault or Child Abuse as a result of incidents of parental discipline with their children. I have blogged about this issue in the past but it is worth repeating that prosecutors and police are far more aggressive today in terms of initiating criminal prosecutions in cases that were traditionally viewed as legitimate parental discipline.

My case last week in Prince Georges' County Maryland involved an incident between my client and his 14 year old son at a restaurant. The facts were that my client's son was graduating from middle school this past June. Originally the ceremony was scheduled to take place at 3:00pm. However a change in the time was made by the school a few weeks prior to the scheduled date. The time was moved up to 1:00pm. My client's estranged wife, with whom my he is currently entrenched in a bitter custody dispute, decided not to pass this information on to my client and as a result he missed the graduation.

Continue reading "Client Successfully Defended on Child Abuse Assault Case in Prince Georges County Maryland" »

Maryland Criminal Attorneys represent people accused of domestic violence assaults more and more often these days. As I have noted in the past, the numbers of these cases that are being pursued by the police and prosecutors have increased exponentially over the last decade and a half after the acquittal of OJ Simpson of the murder of his wife.

Very often in domestic violence cases the alleged victim refuses to cooperate with the prosecution. Alleged victims will often recant their allegations, evade service of process and refuse to appear in court or, if the couple is married, invoke the marital privilege and refuse to testify. There are many reasons why alleged victims do this including that the couple has reconciled their relationship, the defendant is the primary breadwinner in the family and his incarceration would cause economic hardship for the family, or that the charges were fabricated in the first place which, believe it or not, happens quite often and, I believe, it is what happened in the case I had this week in the District Court for Baltimore County.

Continue reading "Domestic Violence Defendant Successfully Defended With Constitutional Defense" »

Maryland Criminal Attorneys are commonly called upon to represent defendants who are charged with domestic violence assaults. As I have noted in previous blogs on the subject of domestic violence, there was an explosion of new domestic violence arrests in this country after the OJ Simpson acquittal in 1994. Police officers were encouraged to aggressively enforce the law in domestic cases where they previously might have considered these cases family matters and not law enforcement matters.

Additionally special domestic violence police units and prosecution teams were created throughout the country and new laws were enacted to allow the police and prosecutor to more aggressively pursue perpetrators of domestic violence. For instance in Maryland, new laws were enacted to allow for the warrant-less arrest of those suspected of domestic assaults under certain circumstances - even when the defendant is only suspected of committing a misdemeanor. Unfortunately, some people have taken advantage of these new laws and the new tactics of the police and prosecutors to have others falsely arrested. I had just such a case in Baltimore County Circuit Court this week.

Continue reading "Maryland Criminal Attorney Successfully Defends Client in Domestic Assault" »

I recently wrote a blog about the recent and dramatic change in the federal DOJ policy regarding the disparity between federal sentencing guidelines for crack and powder cocaine. http://www.marylandcriminalattorneyblog.com/2009/06/the_disparity_between_federal.html On May 1, 2009, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) released a Memorandum to all U.S. Attorney’s Offices instructing all federal prosecutors to inform sentencing courts “that the Administration believes Congress and the Commission should eliminate the crack/powder disparity . . .” and that prosecutors should not object to variances in sentencing to achieve that result.

The new DOJ memorandum gives federal criminal defense lawyers a powerful new tool to fight the draconian sentences that clients have faced for federal crack cocaine offenses.

Most recently, I convinced a federal judge in Maryland that the new DOJ Memo not only reduced the sentencing “regular” 2D1.1 guidelines for crack cocaine offenses, but it also reduced the Career Offender Guidelines under section 4B1.1. I argued that the DOJ Memo applied across the board to all disparity between crack and powder cocaine. Because my client was charged with conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of crack, the maximum possible punishment for the offense was life under 18 U.S.C. §841(b)(1)(A). The maximum possible penalty, however, for a similar offense involving powder cocaine was only 20 years under §841(b)(1)(C). This difference caused the career offender guidelines to drop from level 37, to level 32 because the career offender guidelines are keyed directly to maximum possible sentence for the charged offense.

Continue reading "DOJ Eliminates Crack Cocaine Disparity!!! " »