Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyers

Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyers

Call Us Free Legal Consultation

(888) 205-9314

Area Cops Scan Thousands of License Plates Daily

By Leave a Comment

License plate scanners have been used in the area for years. The Maryland State Police has been using the technology since 2004 and with each year their use seems to expand. These scanners are used to identify stolen vehicles, expired registration, and revoked registrations as well. But they also scan plates belonging to law abiding citizens, something the ACLU takes issue with.
These scanners are usually mounted on the back of a patrol car or stationary, on the side of the road. The police car then has a monitor within the vehicle where the scans are displayed and the system alerts them to any law violations found. In one eight hour shift, a scanner can read 5,000 license plates, according to the Baltimore Sun.
If the system recognizes a car that’s been reported stolen or tags that are expired, it sounds an alert, telling the officer what he violation is and showing the scanned photo. If there’s no violation, the photo is stored for up to a year.
Local law enforcement credits the license plate readers with helping to bring auto theft down in the area. Over the past three years, car theft has dropped almost 40% in the state of Maryland. Though it’s unclear how much of this drop can be attributed to the scans, police say that car theft suspects often mention the cameras when they are being interrogated after an arrest.
Because of the suspected relationship between the scanners and the drop in car thefts, the program has received an additional $2 million from the state, doubling its funding.
Unfortunately, the technology isn’t infallible. The cameras cannot scan a vehicle moving at high rates of speed and often has difficulty scanning the small and sometimes obstructed plates on motorcycles. This has been the case with the tragic accident that killed Maryland State Trooper Shaft S. Hunter, who was killed when he hit a tractor trailer while in pursuit of a racing motorcycle.
The ACLU takes issue with the footage that is saved from the scanners. After all, if no law is broken, what is the purpose of storing the photos? Innocent drivers are, in a sense, being subjected to a search without their knowledge. “Police are not supposed to be keeping files on people who are not breaking the law,” says a spokesperson for the ACLU.
The prevalence of these cameras means more and more cases of auto theft and even driving on a suspended registration are using the footage from these devices as evidence. Even when such footage is not present, the evidence in cases like these can seem difficult to overcome.
If you’re facing auto theft charges or even charges of a traffic offense, contact our offices today to discuss your options.

Law Enforcement Solicits Assistance from Prince George’s Felons

By Leave a Comment

Summertime is notorious for elevated crime rates. Officials in the legal community of Prince George’s County are taking a new approach to crime prevention this summer, however, and hope residents who were once locked up can help.
According to The Washington Post, the police in PG County are focusing on five different high crime neighborhoods: Langley Park, Riverdale, Suitland, Hillcrest Heights, and Glassmanor. These areas have been pinpointed as having a high concentration of parolees and prior offenders, which law enforcement says is an indicator of future criminality.
Fifty-six people in PG County have been murdered since January 1. That’s twelve more than the same time last year. Many of those involved—both victims and suspects—had priors on their record.
Within these five areas, law enforcement selected 233 people to attend a meeting, all of which had previously been convicted in connection with a violent crime and were out on parole or probation. They were alerted to the meetings by their supervising officers and warned that their attendance was mandatory.
During the meetings, law enforcement and Maryland prosecutors delivered stern warnings to the groups, telling them there would be no lenience offered for new offenses and encouraging them to stay crime-free. But the meetings weren’t all about threats and harsh words—job training and educational programs were offered as incentive.
In 2004, the Maryland recidivism rate was estimated to be around 48.5 percent. This means that within three years of being released from prison, 48.5 percent of offenders would be locked up again. Using this data, officials hope to curtail at least some of the recidivist crimes.
Similar programs have been instituted in other cities across the country. High Point, NC., a relatively small town with a relatively large crime problem, has been using a similar system since 1997. Since that time, they’ve seen a 47% drop in the violent crime rate. (How much of that drop can be attributed to the prevention program is unknown.)
People who are out on parole or on probation normally understand that a judge and even the police won’t give them the same lenience as someone with a criminal record. But sometimes a reminder is necessary. David Kennedy with the Center for Crime Prevention and Control says, “The record is really, really clear that they respect that and they respond to it. What happens when you have these meetings is that word spreads like wildfire on the street.”
Facing criminal charges is frightening enough. But when you have a criminal history the potential consequences could be even more severe. If you are accused of a crime and are in need of a local defense attorney, contact my offices today.

Is Baltimore’s Gun Registry Unconstitutional?

By Leave a Comment

A Circuit Court judge this week ruled that the Baltimore city-wide gun registry is unconstitutional, stating it is “unconstitutionally vague and overly broad.” This doesn’t necessarily mean the registry will go away any time soon; a city spokesperson states that though they are considering all legal options, this represents only one judge’s opinion.
The gun registry was started in 2007 and was modeled after a similar one in New York City. It requires those convicted of a weapons offense within the city to register with the police department, providing their name, aliases, address, and other contact information. The registrants are required to keep this information updated twice yearly and are subject to police checking their listed residence to ensure they are actually living there.
According to the judge, the law doesn’t make the conditions of the registry clear, setting the offenders up for failure. He states that the rules aren’t just vague, they are unknown and require offenders to “go to the bowels of the Police Department to learn what constitutes the law and then instantly comply with its requirements or be found in violation of the law.”
Other opponents of the registry, including the public defender’s office, have stated they are concerned the police may use the registry to gain cooperative informants from the offenders who are listed, coercing them into helping with other cases or risk arrest for violation of the registry.
The judge himself states the registry could be implemented, but the methods didn’t give sufficient notice or information to the public. Prosecutors, on the other hand, state that offenders are repeatedly told of the rules and regulations of the registry several times throughout the criminal court process.
While the ruling won’t do away with the registry, it will impact those offenders seen in that specific courtroom. Likewise, if his colleagues agree with his rationale, other judges could apply the same standard. Challenges are likely to continue in coming months and years.
The city does what it can to reduce gun violence. Just a few weeks ago we blogged about the Mayor making a trip to Annapolis again to request tighter gun laws, including a mandatory minimum for those arrested with a loaded, illegal firearm.
If you are arrested on a gun charge in Baltimore, you will be met with some fairly strict laws and consequences. Both at the state and the local level, gun offenders are not treated lightly here. Contact our offices today for a consultation on your case and to see how we might be able to help.

Proposed Maryland Laws Would Save Money, Reduce Imprisonment

By Leave a Comment

In Maryland, like many other states across the country, corrections spending has been continuously climbing over the past few decades. On average it is fourth in state spending after only education, transportation, and Medicaid. Several proposed bills are attempting to tame this spending by making changes that would send fewer to prison.
The incarceration rate has tripled since 1980. In 2009, Maryland spent $1.4 billion on corrections. This is an alarming amount of money, something that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle would like to remedy. For that reason, many of the proposed bills were drafted by a bipartisan group.
Here’s a quick rundown of the proposed legislation to change Maryland criminal laws and charges that affect the criminal justice system:
SB 172 would give the parole commission final say on the choice to parole people serving life sentences. This was written specifically to remove the governor from the decision making process, “depoliticizing” the parole decisions. It doesn’t apply to those who were sentenced to “life without parole” and is being promoted as a worthwhile especially in cases where inmates are ill or elderly.
HB 1248 would allow parolees to reduce the time of supervision by satisfying all of the requirements of their parole. In other words, if they satisfied the conditions and followed the rules, they could be granted release from parole before the original sentence dictated.
HB 964/ SB 583 is a bill designed to establish the Recidivism Reduction Pilot Program. This program would use risk assessment tools and targeted staff training to focus effort on keeping people from reoffending. It would help probation/parole in determining who needed the greatest supervision.
SB 801/ HB 919 would change the options available to the courts and probation/parole officers when an offender violates the terms of their supervision. It would allow for incarceration for those most serious of violations and a graduated response for lesser violations.
HB 353 is designed to repeal some of the more harsh mandatory minimum sentences on drug related offenses, reestablishing judicial discretion in such cases and making more appropriate sentences available.
Finally, HB 606 would decriminalize marijuana. Less than 28.5 grams would be considered an infraction rather than a crime. This would result in a civil fine and not a court date and certainly not an arrest and unnecessary burden on the jail, courts, and taxpayers.
All of these bills are progressive pieces of legislation that wouldn’t only reduce costs; they would establish more integrity into the state criminal justice system. They are all supported by the ACLU among other prominent groups.

Violent Week in Baltimore Motivation For Tougher Gun Laws?

By Leave a Comment

This past weekend a 4 year old boy was shot and killed when he found a gun in his home; a police detective was sent to the hospital after being shot in the chest; and 16 others were victims of gun violence in Baltimore. A particularly bloody weekend left the city Police Commissioner advocating for tougher gun laws and promising more targeted enforcement.
According to the Baltimore Sun, both the Commissioner and the Mayor traveled to Annapolis to seek out tighter regulations, claiming there are simply far too many illegal guns on Baltimore streets. He argues that too many people are given fines and put back on the streets, only to get another gun and commit violent acts again.
The Department is going to be cracking down on traffic violations and loitering in problem areas though they maintain they will not be “opening the floodgates to arrests.” This cautious wording from the Commissioner, no doubt stems from a $870,000 settlement the city paid last year to the SCLU and NAACP on biased policing, after which the department rejected zero-tolerance policies or mass arrests for minor offenses.
The Commissioner states, “You can’t arrest enough of those guys, but patrolling the city indiscriminately is not the answer to this problem.”
Among the laws the Police Commissioner and Mayor would like to see passed is one that would set a mandatory minimum sentence for people arrested with an illegal and loaded firearm. That sentence would be boosted to at least 18 months and as many as 10 years. But the law is currently stalled in committee.
With the weather turning warmer, city officials expect the weekends and days in general will become more violent once again. It’s no surprise that this particularly violent past weekend was also one of record setting warmth.
Weekends like this, particularly one where a small child was killed, do sometimes spur lawmakers who wouldn’t have otherwise voted to pass more restrictive gun laws in Maryland. But, not always. The balance between public safety and personal gun ownership rights is a delicate one.
If you are facing weapons charges, contact us today. The laws surrounding such offenses are confusing and ever-changing.

Baltimore State’s Attorney Seeks To Eliminate Police Misconduct Unit

By Leave a Comment

Nevermind that the Baltimore Police Department is in the midst of the largest corruption case in recent history, the top prosecutor is considering eliminating the police misconduct unit. In office for only a few months, Gregg Bernstein has already eliminated a list banning certain officers from testifying at trials because of their known credibility issues. What isn’t clear is why he is moving in these directions.
The Police Misconduct Unit of the local prosecutor’s office was specifically created to handle issues within the local police department when there was the potential for criminal charges. It is only a decade old, though it may not last much longer if Bernstein has his way.
While the elimination of this unit would be contrary to what other cities across the nation are doing, it seems Bernstein is trying to mend a formerly troubled relationship between his office and the police department. One professor remarks, “There’s a kind of loss of confidence in the whole law enforcement structure of the city of the two main players are feuding with each other.”
What he doesn’t touch on is the public’s confidence in the “law enforcement structure” when there’s no formal route for accountability issues. For instance, if the department handles its misconduct internally, will the public have faith that the system will require accountability for complaints of misconduct? It seems discord between the police and the prosecutor’s office can be achieved without hampering the relationship between the police and the public they are tasked with protecting.
According to the Baltimore Sun, Bernstein has declined to comment on the changes aside from a paltry 500 word statement sent out last week, citing a “tight” schedule and an inability to “meet or talk on the phone” about the issues at hand.
The changes and Bernstein’s “clean up” of current processes and procedures are an attempt to undo harm caused by a serious rift between the former State Prosecutor and local police.
In Prince George County, another new prosecutor is making changes too, though hers are interestingly contrary to Bernstein’s. Prosecutor Angela Alsobrooks has created a Special Prosecutions Unit for issues involving police misconduct and corruption and has created a list banning certain officers from testifying (similar to the one destroyed by Bernstein).
The reason for such a list is pretty simple. If a prosecutor calls an officer to testify in a criminal case and that officer has any history of lying or misconduct allegations, his testimony can be pretty unconvincing and actually harm the state’s case. By not calling such officers, they eliminate the risk of damaging a criminal case against a defendant.
What Bernstein does with his intentions to dismantle the Police Misconduct Unit remains to be seen. However, he should be cautious not to harm the already damaged public trust in the Baltimore Police Department.

Baltimore Officers Suspended, Charged With Corruption

By Leave a Comment

Thirty-one police officers from the city of Baltimore are under suspension and 17 are facing criminal charges for a allegedly taking kick-backs from a towing company. The charges involve officers sending auto accident victims to the Majestic Auto Repair Shop against procedural rules and Majestic, in turn, paying the officers for their business.
According to the Associated Press, the city may have been tipped off that something was awry by the arrest of a competitor in the towing business. The owner of Frankford Towing was arrested in 2009 when she approached an officer at an accident scene after seeing a Majestic tow truck present. She told him Majestic wasn’t city-authorized. The officer told her to leave and then arrested her. She subsequently filed a complaint.
In Baltimore, when a cop responds to an accident, he is to allow the accident victims to arrange for their own towing or call one of the city-authorized towing companies. Instead, the officers are accused of telling owners that Majestic would waive deductibles and help with the insurance claims. In return for their business, the officers would receive about $300 for each vehicle sent to Majestic.
Officers also told citizens not to contact their insurance companies prior to speaking with the shop workers at Majestic. One officer is said to have received $14,000 over a two year period.
While the police union will provide an attorney in cases where officers are accused of a misdemeanor, the same isn’t true for felony charges like fraud. The Associated Press reports the officers in question will have to appeal to the union’s board if they want representation in this particular case.
Both members of the towing industry and police officials are worried about reputations being damaged. The Police Union President cautions the public that this group of officers represents only a small portion of the 2,800 member force. The woman who complained after being arrested hopes the case doesn’t paint her and other upstanding tow companies in a negative light as well.
When you are in an accident or really whenever you have an opportunity to deal with the police, you want to believe they are going to act with integrity. Unfortunately this isn’t always the case. Baltimore has been a hotspot for allegations of police misconduct in recent decades and this means the opportunity always exists that you will run into one of the “bad apples” of the force.
When you are facing criminal charges, part of the job of your defense attorney is to ensure you are treated with respect to your rights. If a police officer crosses a line during your search or arrest, there may be the opportunity for your attorney to motion for a complete dismissal of all charges.
If you are facing any criminal charges, contact our offices today to discuss your options.

Baltimore Leaders Push Lawmakers For Stricter Gun Control

By Leave a Comment

Baltimore City Leaders testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week in an effort to gain support for stricter gun laws and tougher penalties for those who run afoul of any state weapons offenses. The battle they face, however, seems to be an uphill one as lawmakers are resistant to making stricter laws when it seems Baltimore is the only area of the state in need of them.
Among the changes is a potential addition of 10 years to the already five year mandatory sentence for felon in possession of a handgun, making it a 15 year mandatory sentence. Another proposal on the table—increasing an illegal gun possession charge a felony with a mandatory 18 month sentence.
More than anything, it seems, the lawmakers want to ensure the laws aren’t overreaching. In regards to one proposed law, that would increase the sentence of possession of a loaded handgun from 30 days (misdemeanor) to 18 months (felony), a lawmaker states “It is unsafe? Yes. Is it a mistake? Yes. But should you be a felony and spend 18 months in jail? This bill is overreaching.”
Lawmakers year after year have to find a balance between public safety concerns and creating a police state, potentially infringing on the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms. Supporters of the measure state it would still be within the discretion of the prosecutor to charge the offense as a misdemeanor, handing the ultimate sentencing decision to a prosecutor rather than a judge.
The Baltimore Sun reports this is the seventh year that city officials have made the trip to Annapolis, voicing their concerns about weapons-safety and urging increased legislation. While such legislation made it as far as the floor last year, the session ended before a vote could take place.
Baltimore unquestionably has the highest crime in the state and the biggest justification for wanting tougher gun laws. But in an effort to make things safer there, lawmakers are worried about getting innocent gun owners wrapped up in the system.
As it stands, Maryland gun laws are pretty strict and it’s not all that difficult to find yourself facing felony gun charges. Some of the more common weapons violations we see in Maryland courts are listed here and as you can see, they carry some pretty serious penalties as it is.
If you are facing gun charges in Maryland, particularly in the city of Baltimore, you could be facing an uphill battle of your own. Having an experienced defense lawyer on your side is crucial in ensuring you get the best results possible on your day in court.
Contact our offices today for a free consultation on your case.

Maryland Red Light Cameras Doing Away With Officer Privilege

By Leave a Comment

If a red light camera catches you speeding through an intersection it will lead to a ticket—regardless of who you are. As a matter of fact, red light cameras aren’t only catching off duty police in driving infractions, they’re catching on duty ones as well. And according to officials, it’s up to the officer to prove that they were legitimately responding to an emergency in order to get out of the ticket.
As this article from the Baltimore Sun points out, cops used to get off from a ticket simply by flashing their badge, regardless of where they were headed or if they were on duty. Red light cameras, however, seem to be the equalizer, however, turning cops into just another driver.
When an officer is caught speeding or running a red light, investigators review dispatch records to confirm whether or not they had a legitimate reason to be in violation. If not, they face penalties like any of the rest of us would.
While the president of the Baltimore Fraternal Order of Police union states he hasn’t heard too many complaints, a few officers actually sued the department and lost.
Like “regular folk”, police officers don’t want to be caught on camera. Last year two were accused of using fictitious plates on their unmarked cars. It was assumed they were hiding from the cameras or trying to stay inconspicuous among local drug dealers.
Whatever the case, there’s not a whole lot you can say when you are caught violating the law on camera. A dire emergency would perhaps be the only thing that might garner you some leniency in court. Such footage is perhaps the most damning evidence there could be in a criminal case.
Right up there with video footage is eyewitness testimony, or at least this is true in the eyes of jurors. We’re not talking about speeding tickets here though, we are talking about serious criminal charges. Jurors are said to put a lot of weight on eyewitness accounts at trial—this despite the fact that eyewitnesses are prone to error.
Just like the cops caught speeding on tape, being told someone saw you commit a crime or heard you confess can be a slap in the face. This is particularly true if you know their account to be untrue. Overcoming such evidence in court can seem to be an insurmountable obstacle.
Consulting with a criminal defense attorney in Maryland can help put the evidence in perspective. If you’re curious about your options and wondering how the evidence against you might affect your case, contact our offices today.

How Police Testimony Impacts Criminal Trials

By Leave a Comment

We’ve all heard of cases getting continued or even dismissed when an investigating police officer doesn’t show up for court. We know their testimony can be crucial in a prosecutor’s criminal case against someone—so crucial that without it, there’s often no case at all. But, what about when the testimony comes from an officer who was deemed dishonest by a judge, several years ago?
According to the Baltimore Sun and numerous court rulings, the integrity of a police officer is so crucial, that a single case of dishonesty or blundering testimony can haunt them for years to come and potentially affect every case they touch from then on.
One officer, as profiled in this report from the Sun, testified in 2003 as the arresting officer in a drug case. His testimony differed from his written reports and the judge called him out, calling his story “implausible and incredibly presented”. The judge would dismiss the charges.
Now, seven years later, that same officer is still paying for his mistakes. His integrity was called into question in yet another drug case, with the suspected dealer’s defense lawyer questioning his credibility as the arresting officer. The prosecutor, in essence, defended the officer and although the dealer would be convicted, the conviction was overturned on appeal because the prosecutor overstepped his bounds in vouching for the credibility of the officer.
When an entire criminal investigation is based on a police officer’s account of what happened, that officer’s testimony in court is crucial to the state’s case against the suspect. If there’s any suspicion that the cop is less than honest or credible, it’s the defense attorney’s duty to bring this up in court.
On the flip side, the prosecutor cannot vouch for the credibility of the officer. This protects the integrity of the jury and the court proceedings overall. It’s believed if the prosecution is allowed to defend a witness’s credibility the jury might believe their opinion over facts and in criminal trials, the facts are what really matter.
When you are facing criminal charges, it’s the job of your defense attorney to dissect the case against you. This doesn’t only involve studying the police reports but ensuring that what’s presented as evidence against you is done so with respect to your constitutional rights. If a shady officer expects to testify in your case, a defense attorney would be remiss if they neglected to point out their questionable professionalism.
When you’re facing charges, you shouldn’t have to worry about the police officer’s history or their propensity towards telling the truth. Your lawyer can do that for you. If you’re facing charges, contact our offices today for a consultation on your criminal case.