Maryland Criminal Attorney Blog
As a Maryland Criminal Lawyer/Attorney I frequently handle cases involving Domestic Violence Assaults. I was hired yesterday to represent an individual who is charged with a domestic violence second degree assault. He was arrested on Monday and then taken to the Court Commission who set the bail at $25,000. Unfortunately, his family did not get him bailed out prior to his bail review the next morning. Many people are not aware but a Judge can not only decrease a person’s bail at the bail review, the judge can also INCREASE THE BAIL.
Baltimore Criminal Attorney Discusses Defense of Coercion and Duress also called The Necessity Defense
An experienced Maryland Criminal Attorney must have a thorough understanding of the defense of coercion and duress which is also called a necessity defense. I represented a defendant in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County Maryland today in which I investigated a necessity defense but ultimately concluded that such a defense was not viable under the particular facts of this case. Before going into the facts of my case today, here is a synopsis of the coercion and duress or necessity defense.
It is a defense to all crimes other than the taking of a life of an innocent person that the defendant acted under coercion or duress. The most common defense of this type is self-defense or its cousin, defense of others. It also applies to situtions where a person is coerced into committing a crime by an imminent and impending threat of death or serious bodily injury if the act is not committed. There also must not have been an opportunity to escape. If there was a legitmate opportunity to escape that is not acted upon, then the defense is not available. This is essentially the situation that I was faced with in my case and why I was unable to use the duress and coercion or necessity defense.
Continue reading ›
Maryland DUI/DWI Attorney on proof of notice requirement in Driving While Suspended or Driving While Revoked cases
As a Maryland DUI/DWI Attorney I represent many individuals who receive a DUI or DWI and as a result have to deal with a suspension or revocation of their privilege to drive, although this is certainly not the only reason why the MVA would suspend one’s license.
When a person receives a DUI or DWI in Maryland, that person faces two possible suspensions of his or her driver’s license. The person will first face a suspension of his driver’s license, depending upon whether or not he took the breathalyzer. The defendant will also face suspension if he is ultimately convicted of the DUI or DWI when the matters proceeds to court. In addition to suspensions resulting from DWI’s and DUI’s a person may have his license suspended for several other reasons. By far the most frequent cause of a license suspension is that a person fails to appear in court for a minor traffic citation or fails to pay the fine after appearing. These so called “H” violations make up the vast majority of suspended license cases. A person may also have his privilege suspended or revoked due to an accumulation of points, for not paying child support, for receiving three moving violations within a a six month period, and for several other reasons.
Continue reading ›
Mandatory Sentences in Maryland for Possession with Intent to Distribute Controlled Dangerous Substance Offenses
As an experienced and aggressive Maryland Criminal Attorney I regularly represent defendants in Baltimore County, Baltimore City, Anne Arundel County and throughout the State of Maryland who are charged with violating state laws criminalizing the manufacture of controlled dangerous substances (CDS), distribution of CDS or with possessing these substances in sufficient quantities and/or under certain circumstances which would lead to conclusion that the defendant possessed the substance with the intent to distribute it. The CDS’s mostly commonly involved in these cases in Maryland are cocaine, heroin and marijuana although an increasingly large percentage of these cases involve prescription pain killers such as Percocet, Oxycontin, Hydrocodone and others. A small percentage of cases involve so called “club drugs” such as MDNA also known as ecstasy, ketamine and others. Occasionally a Maryland criminal lawyer will run into a case involving PCP or methamphetamines.
Under certain circumstances, individuals charged with violating these Maryland laws, primarily dealing with schedule 2 and 3 narcotics as well as marijuana, are subject to mandatory prison terms that may not be suspended and must be served without parole.
In Maryland there are two classifications of offenders who qualify for mandatory prison terms. The first involves defendants who have been previously convicted of distribution or possession with the intent to distribute CDS. These defendants are commonly termed repeat offenders or subsequent offenders. The second classification deals with defendants who are charged with possessing large quantities of CDS, so called “weight counts” and situations where in addition to possessing large amounts of CDS, the defendant is charged with being an organizer or leader of a particular drug organization; so called “kingpins”.
Continue reading ›
Preliminary Hearings in Maryland Criminal Cases
As an experienced Maryland Criminal lawyer at Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White, LLC who has personally represented thousands of clients at the preliminary hearing stage, I am often asked by clients to explain exactly what is a preliminary hearing in Maryland?
In the Maryland criminal justice system, a preliminary hearing may occur when a defendant is charged with one or more felonies. In criminal cases in Baltimore City, preliminary hearings are automatically scheduled in all criminal cases. The practice in all other Maryland counties is to only schedule a preliminary hearing upon request of the defendant. Criminal defendants must make the request within ten days of the arrest or file a motion for good cause with a judge.
Preliminary hearings are conducted in the Maryland District Courts. If a judge finds probable cause, the case is sent (held over) to the Circuit Court for arraignment and possible trial. If the judge does not find probable cause that a felony has been committed by the defendant, then felony is dismissed. If a defendant is also charged with one or more misdemeanor, those charges remain and will be set for trial on another day at the District Court level.
Simply put, a District Court judge must find some link between the felony and the defendant. In most preliminary hearings in Maryland, the arresting officer will take the stand and read from his/her police report. The standard of review in a preliminary hearing is in the “light most favorable to the state”. In simple terms, the judge will give the prosecuting attorney the benefit of the doubt when determining if the defendant has committed the crime.
Continue reading ›
Video Taping of Maryland DUI/DWI Cases by Maryland Transportation Authority Police and Maryland State Troopers
Maryland Criminal and /DUI/DWI Attorneys frequently represent individuals who are charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, DUI, or driving while impaired by alcohol, DWI, by Maryland Transportation Authority Police or Maryland State Troopers. In many of these cases the entire stop is videotaped by the State Trooper or MTA Officer and this video tape can be subpoenaed by the Maryland Criminal/DUI/DWI Attorney. In a recent DWI case that I had in Baltimore County District Court, my client had blown just a .07 and insisted that he had not failed the field sobriety tests as the MTA Officer who stopped him had claimed in his report. To be fair to the officer, he did not claim that my client had done terribly on the field sobriety tests but had nonetheless concluded that he had failed. After being retained by my client I immediately issued a subpeona decus tecum for not only the video tape but for the MTA’s General Orders regarding the operation of dash board video cameras known as MVR equipment.
Continue reading ›
Possession of Controlled Dangerous Substances and Confidential Informants
Maryand Criminal Attorneys or Criminal Lawyers in Baltimore and around the State deal with a high volume of cases involving the possession of controlled dangerous substance (CDS) such as cocaine, heroin, marijuana, ecstasy, methamphetamine, etc., and cases dealing with possession with intent to distribute these substances. Confidential informants are one of the primary sources of information for narcotics detectives and are regularly utilized by them in narcotics investigations. In some instances the informants are registered and paid, in others they are facing charges themselves and are seeking leniency with the authorities also known as “working off their charge”. Other informants are simply concerned citizens who are reporting criminal activity but are unwilling to testify in open court. Typically in these investigations, narcotics detectives will use information provided by the confidential informant either to secure a search warrant for a particular place or to establish probable cause to stop a particular individual, usually in the context of a car stop. These warrantless encounters are more frequently litigated than are cases involving warrants. The reason for this is that searches based upon warrants that are duly signed by a judge or magistrate are afforded a presumption of reasonableness. In challenging a search warrant the defense attorney has to get over the additional hump that is the “Leon” good faith exception. The good faith exception basically states that even if the probable cause for a search warrant is found to be deficient or some of the information contained in the statement of probable cause is found to be incorrect, the court will still uphold the constitutional validity of the search so long as the police officers acted in good faith. In other words a defense attorney basically has to show that either the police intentionally lied in order to get the warrant or that the warrant application is so completely devoid of probable cause that no police officer acting in good faith could have believed it to be sufficient. Obviously, this is a very difficult standard.
Continue reading ›
Confidential Informants – When the Government must disclose their identity?
For a Maryland Criminal Attorney it is imperative to understand the law regarding the use of confidential informants by police and prosecutors. There are generally two issues when dealing with confidential informants: The first issue is does the confidential informant provide sufficiently detailed information about which he or she can demonstrate a basis of knowledge to justify probable cause for a search or at least reasonable articulable suspicion for an investigatory stop. The second issue is whether or not the government must disclose the identity of the informant. I will discuss this second issue in this blog and leave the first issue for another day. The issue of whether or not the government must disclose the identity of the confidential informant issue turns on whether the informant is a “mere tipster” or an actually participant in the transaction. I have a case that I am currently working on where I intend to request the disclosure of the identity of the confidential informant. Here is my memorandum of law in support of that motion. I have deleted the last names and other identifying information of the participants including my client for privacy reasons.
Continue reading ›
Speedy Trial in the District Court of Maryland – Discussion by Baltimore Maryland Attorney
An Aggressive Maryland Criminal Attorney will always review all criminal cases for Constitutional Violations such as Speedy Trial, Illegal Search and Seizure, Illegal Confessions in violation of a person’s Miranda Rights and, Illegal Traffic Stops. I have a case scheduled for next week in the District Court of Maryland for Baltimore City at the North Avenue location that involves a significant Speedy Trial issue that I believe will result in the dismissal of all charges.
The client allegedly had a domestic violence incident involving his girlfriend at the time, way back in March of 2006. The ex-girlfriend went to the court commissioner and swore out a warrant against him alleging that he had assaulted her in the second degree and repeatedly harassed her and committed telephone misuse by repeatedly calling her with the intent to harass her. The warrant was issued that day but there was apparently never any attempt to serve this warrant on my client until April of this year, over two years after the warrant was issued. This obviously puts the issue of Speedy Trial in play. Speedy Trial is an issue that comes up often in serious felony cases in the Circuit Court, particularly in Baltimore City. In felony cases that are charged in Circuit Court, either by way of indictment or criminal information, Speedy Trial commences upon the filing of that formal charge, not when the original warrant is issued. That is because the original warrant in the majority of circuit court cases is issued by way of a District Court charging document, known as a Statement of Charges, a charging document upon which the defendant cannot be tried.
Continue reading ›
Probable cause to search in “second stop” case in Baltimore CIty Mary
I had a CDS Possession case in which my client was alleged to have been in possession of both marijuana and cocaine this afternoon in Essex District Court in Baltimore County Maryland. As an Aggressive Maryland Criminal Attorney the first thing I look at in CDS Possession or Driving Under the Influence (DUI) or Driving While Impaired) (DWI) cases is whether or not the police officer had probable cause to stop and ultimately search my client for contraband. In a case that I recently handled in Baltimore City Maryland Circuit Court, the officer may have had probable cause to stop my client but he did not have probable cause to search my client’s person or his motor vehicle.
Continue reading ›
Should I take the Breathalyzer in a Maryland DUI or Maryand DWI Case
Maryland DUI Attorney – Maryland DWI Attorney – Maryland DUI Lawyer – Maryland DWI Lawyer
Just about the first question people routinely ask me when they find out that I am an Aggressive DUI/DWI Attorney is should they or shouldn’t they take the Breathalyzer if they are stopped by a police officer after they have been drinking. The answer to the question is somewhat more complicated than it used to be given recent changes in Maryland DUI/DWI law.
Continue reading ›
Changes to the Maryland Criminal Discovery Rules (Rules 4-262, 4-263, and 4-301) Effective 7/1/2008
The Court of Appeals of Maryland recently approved new discovery rules for criminal cases in Maryland, which will go into effect on July 1, 2008. The Court rescinded the previous versions of Maryland Rule 4-262, which governed discovery in the District Court, and Maryland Rule 4-263, which governed discovery in the Circuit Court, and replaced both rules in their entirety. The new rules incorporate more extensive discovery requirements for both the State’s Attorney and the Defendant than those contained in the old rules. Both rules were also expanded to include definitions. The changes to the rules are summarized below and copies of the new rules are attached.
A. Circuit Court:
Changes for the State:
The State’s Attorney’s disclosure requirements were expanded under the new rules, and in addition, some material that was previously available only upon request must now be provided to the Defendant without the necessity of a request. The new rule requires the State to make its disclosures within 30 days after the earlier of the first appearance by the Defendant before the Court or the appearance of counsel. Md. Rule 4-263(h)(1).
Without request, the State’s Attorney must now disclose:
• Statements of the Defendant and co-defendants – All written and oral statements of the Defendant or any codefendants are now required to be disclosed without request. All material and information, including documents and recordings, that relate to the acquisition of such statements also must be turned over. The state previously only had to disclose statements that it intended to use at trial, and then only upon request. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(1).
• Criminal Records and 404(b) evidence – The State must now disclose, without request, the prior criminal convictions, pending charges, and probationary status of the Defendant and any co-defendants. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(2). In addition, the State must also disclose, without request, all 5-404(b) evidence that the State’s Attorney intends to offer at any hearing or a trial. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(4). This information was not previously discoverable under the old Rule 4-263.
• Witnesses and Impeachment – The State must now disclose any written statements of any witnesses that the State’s Attorney intends to call at trial that relate to the offense charged. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(3). This is a large change from the old rules, which required only that the State disclose the name and address of any witnesses it intended to call. The State must also provide material or information in any form that tends to impeach a State’s witness, whether or not that material is admissible. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(6). That information includes:
o Rule 5-608(b) evidence of prior conduct of the witness that tends to show character for untruthfulness;
o Any relationship between the witness and the State’s Attorney, including the nature and circumstances of any agreement that may constitute an inducement for cooperation or testimony of the witness;
o Prior criminal convictions, pending charges, or probationary status that may be used to impeach the witness (the State is not required to investigate unless the State’s Attorney has reason to believe that the witness has a record);
o Any oral statement of the witness that is materially inconsistent with another statement made by that witness or any other witness; a medical, psychiatric, or addiction condition that may impair the witness’ ability to testify truthfully and accurately (the State’s Attorney, however, is not required to inquire into a witness’ history, unless he or she has information that would reasonably lead to a belief that an inquiry would discover such a condition);
o The fact that a witness has failed a polygraph examination; and
o The failure of a witness to identify the Defendant or a co-defendant.
• Experts – The State must now produce information about each expert consulted by the State’s Attorney without the necessity of a request by the Defense. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(8). In addition to the disclosure required under the previous rule, which included written reports or statements of experts and test and examination results, the new rule requires disclosure of the subject matter of the State’s Attorney’s consultation with any expert. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(8)(A).
• Evidence for Use at Trial and Property of the Defendant – the State’s disclosure requirements for these items are the same as they were under the old rules, with the exception that the State must now provide this information without a request by the Defendant, whereas under the old rules, the State was only required to produce this evidence upon request. Md. Rule 4-263(d)(9) &(10).
Continue reading ›
Illegal Search and Seizure and other Constitutional violations leading to Suppression of Evidence under Maryland Law
Maryland Criminal Attorney – Maryland Criminal Lawyer – Baltimore Criminal Attorney – Baltimore Criminal Lawyer In all criminal cases there are basically two types of defenses: legal defenses and factual defenses. Legal defenses are common in possession with the intent to distribute narcotics cases, rape, robbery, murder and burglary cases, as well as driving under the influence (DUI) and domestic violence cases. To determine whether a legal defense exists in a particular case an aggressive criminal attorney will typically ask several questions of the defendant such as: Were you read your Miranda Rights prior to giving the police a statement? Did the police show you a search warrant and leave you a copy of same? Did you consent to the search of your home, car or person? These questions will help an aggressive criminal attorney begin his investigation into whether the police violated the client’s rights either by conducting an illegal search or illegally obtaining a statement.
Continue reading ›
Federal Criminal Defense-United State v. Booker
The United States Supreme Court decision of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005) restored the Federal Disstrict Judge’s ability to fashion a sentence tailored to the unique circumstances of each case and each criminal defendant by requiring courts to consider factors other than the sentencing range prescribed by the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Thus, although the trial courts still must take the Sentencing Guidelines into account, Booker rendered the Sentencing Guidelines advisory.
Now in federal criminal cases in Maryland and across the country, the sentencing guideline range is no longer binding on the Court, but is only one of several factors to be considered in determining the sentence. The other factors the Court is directed to consider are: (1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant; (2) the need for the sentence imposed to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to afford adequate deterrence, to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant, and to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care or other correctional treatment; (3) the kinds of sentence available; (4) the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparity; and (5) the need to provide restitution.
In considering the § 3553(a) factors, the sentencing guidelines are to be given no more or less weight than any other factor. In addition, the Guidelines are not to be given any “presumption of reasonableness.”
Continue reading ›
Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyers
As one of the largest and most experienced criminal defense firms in the State of Maryland, Baltimore based Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White is experienced in handling state criminal cases throughout Maryland. The majority of criminal cases we handle are in the District and Circuit Courts of Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Anne Arundel County, Howard County, Harford County, Carroll County, Montgomery County and Prince Georges County. We also regularly handle cases in Frederick and Washington Counties.