Maryland Criminal Attorney Blog

I have a current case that highlights the significant fork in the criminal justice road when juveniles are charged as adults. Zachary Watson (17) and Emmanuel Miller (16) are the 2 juveniles who were with alleged Neo-Nazi Calvin Lockner when he attacked an elderly black fisherman in Baltimore city this year. It was reported widely in the national media as a hate crime. Lockner, age 28, has already pled to 31 years in adult court.

Both Watson and Miller asked to be waived back to Juvenile Court. I represented Miller and requested his case be transferred to juvenile court. Watson made the same request. After a hearing, Miller’s request was granted and Watson’s denied. Since that time, Watson has been stabbed in prison and is constantly harassed by guards and inmates while awaiting trial. He is likely to get a significant sentence on 1/25/11 in adult court. The odds against Watson leading a productive life after prison are not favorable to say the least.

Miller, on the other hand, is a star in the juvenile system. Unlike the adult system, the juvenile system focuses on rehabilitation. He has been given 3 successful weekend furloughs from commitment. He has earned his GED while committed, plays on the football team and has received glowing reports from his teachers and counselors. By every indication, the judge who presides over his rehabilitation is so happy with his progress he is going to release Miller on probation next month.

Time will tell how these two similarly situated teenagers make out, but the picture is already starting to come into focus.

Experienced Baltimore Maryland DUI/DWI Attorney discusses Probation Before Judgment under Maryland Law. For those who are not familiar with the term "probation before judgment" or PBJ, it is a sentencing alternative that the trial judge may utilize in DUI and DWI cases, typically in cases where a person is a first offender. Probation Before Judgment is found in the Criminal Procedure Article (Sect. 6-220) and allows a judge who has found a defendant guilty of a crime, in this case DUI or DWI, to strike that guilty finding and allow a person to serve a period of probation without the conviction on his or her record.

So long as the person does not violate his or her probation the conviction will never go on their record. This disposition is particularly valuable in DUI cases as it spares the defendant the 8 or 12 points that would accrue on the person's record as a result of the conviction which invariable leads to action, including possible suspension or revocation of a person's driver's license, by the Motor Vehicle Administration.

Continue reading " Probation Before Judgment in DUI and DWI Cases " »

Changes in the Maryland Sex Offender Registration laws are, as a Maryland Criminal Defense Attorney something I have to be aware of. I have represented many defendants over the years who have been charged with sex offenses. In these cases the defendant faces not only the prospect of criminal punishment of his conduct but also the possibility of being required to register as a sex offender. On October 1, 2010 the Maryland Sex Offender Registration Statute, (Criminal Procedure Code Ann, Section 11-704) which was rewritten to bring in line with the comparable Federal Statute, went into effect. The new rules now require those convicted of fourth degree sex offenses to register. The issue and the reason for this blog is that the new statute was specifically designed to apply retroactively.

This retroactive application is legally problematic and possibly Unconstitutional in my view in certain instances. The Court of Appeals has already approved retroactive increases in the term of registration in the case of Young v. State. The Court ruled that sexual offender registration did not expose the defendant to to a greater penalty but was instead a remedial requirement for the protection of the public.

The real questionable application of the new law, that in my view can be differentiated from a mere increase in the term of registration, is the imposition of a retroactive requirement to register on people who were convicted of fourth degree sex offense and were not originally ordered to register as a result of their conviction. ( Prior to the change in the law it was left to the discretion of the trial court as to whether to require registration for fourth degree sex offenses and it was rarely ordered).

In particular I think this application becomes even more problematic when retroactive registration is applied to a defendant who pled guilty to a fourth degree sex offense when a specific component of the guilty plea was that he or she would not be required to register. This application I believe deprives the defendant of the benefit of the bargain that he or she reached with the State and therefore renders the guilty plea retroactively involuntary. I have a client who is in this situation right now based on a plea she entered last year. Here are the facts:

Continue reading " Maryland Sexual Offenders Registration Law Changes Causing Retroactive Reporting Requirements - Is this Legal? " »

As a Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorney I have always found that among the most difficult types of cases to defend is the client who is wrongfully accused of a http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1300820.html. I have blogged about this issue in the past but I am currently representing someone whose situation is a little different that most of my past cases. In most of the cases like this that I have handled, the issue was consent. There was never any question in these cases that sexual contact had occurred between the parties. The issue was did the woman consent or was she forced in some way or simply too intoxicated to validly consent?

The case that I am currently handling is even more difficult because the charges are an outright fabrication. As we all know, it is extremely difficult to prove a negative, that is, prove that something did not happen. This is precisely what we are faced with in this case because the alleged incident simply never occurred. Here are the facts:

Continue reading " Sexual Assault - Wrongfully Accused Client Successfully Defended " »

Judge Alfred Nance of the Baltimore City Circuit Court has ruled that defendants in Maryland criminal cases are entitled to be represented by an attorney at their initial appearance before a court commissioner.

Appellate Courts in Maryland have previously ruled that appearances before a court commissioner were not "critical stages in a criminal proceeding." Although I have not read his opinion, Judge Nance wisely stayed his seemingly maverick ruling due to the likelihood the matter is far from settled and will be taken up on appeal.

It has been longstanding practice in Maryland that when a criminal defendant is arrested, they are brought before a court commissioner within twenty-four hours of the arrest. Most jurisdictions outside Baltimore City move much faster. At the brief hearing, the commissioner will set an initial bail. These hearings occur at all hours of the day. The bail is subject to review by a Maryland District Court Judge the next day.

It is not required that a court commissioner be a lawyer, in fact, most are not. Notwithstanding, often the bail set by the commissioner is upheld by the Judge the next day. Defendants are afforded the right to be represented at the initial bail review before a Maryland District Court Judge. Based upon my experience, those who appear with lawyers fair better.

In allowing lawyers to enter the mix at the commissioner level, the system may grind to a halt, particularly in Baltimore City. What used to take 2 minutes may now take an additional 30 minutes. If upheld, will the Public Defendant be required to provide around-the-clock counsel? If so, at what cost does it make sense? Particularly when a Judge hears the same facts the next day. For these and other reasons, I do not see Judge Nance's ruling surviving an appeal.