Study, Neighborhood Residents Disagree on Methadone Clinics

Generally, neighborhood residents in the Baltimore area do not want methadone clinics in their communities. They see the clinics as breeding places for crime and loitering. But their arguments are rarely backed with statistics. A new study from the University of Maryland School of Medicine, however, is backed with statistics and those stats say apprehensive community members may be wrong.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the study is the first of its kind, looking at the link between crime and methadone users.

It analyzed FBI Uniform Crime Report (UCR) data from the Baltimore Police Department, looking closely at crime surrounding 13 different methadone clinics. The study focused on a two year period and compared those areas with the clinics to similar areas without clinics. What they found was that there was no relationship between methadone clinics and increased crime.

“I think there is still a very bad perception of methadone clinics,” said the University’s Dr. Susan Boyd. “There are many more people out there who need treatment, but there are not enough slots and clinics available, and part of it is because of the community stereotypes they have about methadone clinics.”

Methadone is a prescription drug used to ward off the cravings for opiates like heroin. By using methadone, users can avoid heroin withdrawals. While some say this is simply trading one addiction for another, others argue that methadone is not nearly the drug that heroin is.

Neighbors of the clinics see patients as drug abusers and this colors their perception of the clinic and activities surround them.

Joel Prell, operator of a Pikesville methadone clinic says he believes that residents are scared of the clinics due to misconceptions. “It’s the fear of the unknown and stereotypes. What most people don’t understand about drug treatment programs is that it works.”

At least one methadone user interviewed for the Baltimore Sun admits that before methadone, he would rob to support his heroin habit. The 73-year old methadone user says that he stopped committing crimes when he began methadone treatment.

Drug addiction is a serious battle waged by many people within the city of Baltimore, some of them come out triumphant and others don’t. For many, drugs are the gateway into the criminal justice system. Some of these people, arrested for drug-related crimes, find that they can use their arrest as an opportunity to get help.

If you have been arrested for a drug offense and are curious about your options for treatment, we may be able to help. Drug courts and other options exist to help you get off of drugs and back to a normal, productive life. Contact our offices today to discuss your case and what can be done.

Police Continue Collecting DNA Despite Court Ruling

The Maryland Supreme Court ruled last week that taking the DNA of a criminal suspect is a violation of the 4th Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. But, despite this high court ruling, law enforcement agencies across the state are continuing to collect the genetic information without a warrant.

According to the Baltimore Sun, agencies including the state Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services (who also collect DNA for Howard County and Baltimore City), and police officials in Anne Arundel and Baltimore Counties are among those sticking to their guns, waiting to see whether or not the state will appeal the ruling before making any changes.

Currently, DNA samples are collected when you are arrested for a criminal offense. This DNA is run through a database to see whether or not your genetic sequence can match you to any other unsolved crimes. Then it is stored indefinitely in the database.

So far, in the three years the DNA database has been utilized, it has resulted in 65 arrests and 34 convictions in cold cases, according to the governor’s office. For those law enforcement agencies resisting the high court ruling, this is evidence enough that the practice should be continued.

“The DNA database is critically important for all public safety agencies, as it not only helps solve crimes of violence, but also eliminates suspects who may have been erroneously accused,” said Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake.

But not everyone is convinced the public safety aspect is reason enough to ignore the Constitutional protection of the 4th Amendment.

“I think the U.S. Supreme Court would rule in a similar fashion,” remarked one local defense lawyer in speaking with the Baltimore Sun. “You have to have a warrant, point blank, end of discussion. Before you take my DNA, you have to have a warrant for that as well. You have a lot of innocent people who are constantly being violated.”

The 4th Amendment protects all citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures. It’s in this amendment that we find justification for warrants being required in arrests and searches. Anytime law enforcement wishes to search you or seize evidence they must have a warrant or exigent circumstances, meaning crucial evidence could be lost or additional crimes committed if they have to wait for a warrant. DNA collection should be no difference.

If there is enough justification to collect the DNA of someone, getting a warrant shouldn’t be a problem. But, to collect DNA from every arrestee or even every violent suspect without a warrant and before they have had access to the due process of the courts, seems to be a clear violation of the constitutional protections, and the state supreme court agrees.

When you are accused of a crime, even when the cops think it’s a “slam dunk,” even if you confess, you are still protected by the Constitution. You still have rights.

Contact us today to discuss your rights and your options when facing criminal charges.

Baltimore Cops Soon to Videotape “Serious” Interrogations

It’s something that a growing number of police agencies are doing, something that many initially resisted. But videotaping interrogations shouldn’t be something that’s shied away from, as it can provide clarity to both sides of a criminal case and can prove to be an important investigatory tool.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the Baltimore Police Department began using video cameras in its sex offense unit. But now they are considering videotaping other “serious” interrogations, in homicide and assault cases.

Though Commissioner Frederick Bealefeld III supports recording interrogations, he cautions that it’s “not as simple as going to Radio Shack and bolting a camera to the wall.” Instead the department is considering painting interrogation rooms and recarpeting them for acoustics—all in an effort to get the best footage.

In addition, a consultant has been brought in to help officers learn how their behavior on camera will “play” to a jury.

Many agencies within the state already use cameras in interrogations, but Baltimore has lagged in support for the increased technology. Early on, when the General Assembly showed support for videotaped interrogations but didn’t make it a requirement, in 2008, police were worried about how such footage would make them look and were also concerned that suspects wouldn’t want to cooperate if they knew they were on camera.

Now, along with reduced costs, police agencies are warming to the idea.

Hartford County Sheriff L. Jesse Bane calls the recordings a “standard for progressive law-enforcement agencies.” And Bladensburg police Chief Charles Owens refers to them as “just another step in logging evidence.”

What was once resisted is now becoming commonplace, to the benefit of everyone involved.

Not only are videotaped interrogations a great tool for police and prosecutors when building a case, but also for defendants who are concerned about police tactics in the interrogation process.

Right now in a Baltimore police interrogation, the cops take notes and only turn on audio equipment when the suspect is ready to make a statement. Critics say that the audio equipment is often left off until the police have assisted the suspect in coming up with exactly what to say. With cameras recording the entire process, such fears can be eliminated.

A police interrogation is a high stress environment. They typically want you to admit wrongdoing and you often aren’t sure what to say or what would be in your best interest. What every suspect needs to know during this period is that they have the right to have an attorney present. They don’t have to go it alone.

If you’ve been charged with a crime or if you have reason to believe you are under investigation, contact our offices today. We can help you decide what to tell the police and what strategic moves are in your best interest.

Federal Judge Rules Maryland Gun-Carry Law as Unconstitutional

A Maryland law that requires gun owners to show “good and substantial reason” before being able to carry a weapon in public has been ruled unconstitutional in a federal lawsuit. U.S. District Court Judge Benson E. Legg says the law puts restrictions on the constitutional right to bear arms, restrictions that aren’t warranted and aren’t legal.

Some see the ruling as a victory, allowing citizens to arm themselves more freely. Others, however, see it as a risk to public safety.

The state’s attorney general’s office plans on appealing the ruling and requesting a stay of its implementation. One lawmaker, however, states that he has already proposed a bill that would eliminate the “good and substantial” wording from the current laws.

“I have a bill that does exactly what the court said we needed to do,” said Delegate Michael D. Smigiel Sr. according to the Baltimore Sun. But, he says, though it would pass committee, politics would prevent it from getting to vote. He hopes this latest ruling will garner his bill the needed support.

Legg’s ruling came after considering two “basic questions”, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Those are whether or not the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms extends outside the home, and whether the “good and substantial” clause is constitutional.

Because people are allowed to hunt and the 2nd Amendment was written with this and militias in mind, Legg determined that it does apply to outside of the home. On the second question, Legg reasoned that states make certain laws and requirements to improve public safety and keep firearm ownership reasonable, but that the “good and substantial” requirement went beyond this and actually restricted law-abiding citizens’ right to bear arms.

When a Maryland citizen wants a permit to carry a weapon with them, they must obtain a permit from the secretary of the state. The permit requires they show that they aren’t a convicted felon, an addict, an alcoholic, and that they aren’t violent. All of this is done in the name of public safety. In addition, however, the secretary until now had to determine if the citizen, “has good and substantial reason to wear, carry, or transport a handgun, such as a finding that the permit is necessary as a reasonable precaution against apprehended danger.”

Currently, there are 12,000 such permits in the state. That figure is expected to rise, however, if Legg’s ruling stands.

Gun laws are strict and when you are accused of violating them, they carry significant penalties. If you are accused of a weapons offense in Georgia, contact us today to discuss the details of your case and how we might be able to help.

Baltimore Has Only 196 Murders in 2011, a First Since 1977

For the first time in decades, Baltimore City’s murder rate has fallen below 200. Sure, it’s still at the top of the list of murders per capita, but it’s a significant decline and definitely a reason to celebrate. It represents just the third time since the 1960s since there were fewer than 200 murders.

In 2001, officials were celebrating a murder rate that finally dropped below 300, saying it was just the beginning of things to come. In 2007, it was on target again to breach the 300 mark, but was held below.

Neighboring cities like Washington DC have also experienced a similar drop. D.C. saw a high of 479 murders in 1991, and only 108 in the last year.

According to The Baltimore Sun, murders are often seen as “a reliable barometer of crime because they are less subjective than other categories.”

So what’s the cause of the drop? No one can say for certain, though city officials would like to take credit. From taking down drug organizations to targeted enforcement operations, police, probation, and prosecutors are all believed to have played a role in the overall decline of crime and violence in the city.

“A very small segment of our population pool disproportionately contributes to violent crime in this city. Many of these guys are known to us,” said Police Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III, who took office in 2007. He admits that when he took over the city lacked a real crime reduction plan. He instituted a plan to focus on the “worst of the worst”, targeting known “bad guys” and creating the Violent Crimes Impact Section.

The existing murders still tend to disproportionately affect members of the African American community. Ninety-five percent of the victims of last year’s homicides were black. Only one of the cases have been closed and only 46% of the murder cases have been solved by police—one of the lowest clearance rates on record.

The positive effects of a lower homicide rate, however, are appreciated by all. Police see kids playing football on streets where they wouldn’t have normally been out and about. Community activists remark on the changing scene, saying there were street corners so packed with drug dealers, in years past, that you couldn’t push through.

Do Baltimore police still go after the “little guys”? Yes. Though they are primarily interested in the “worst of the worst”, they will still arrest you for seemingly petty offenses like drug possession and theft.

If you are facing charges, whether for drug possession or homicide, you need a criminal defense attorney on your side. Contact our offices today to discuss your case and how we might be able to help.

Maryland Judge Says ‘No’ To Cops Requesting Access to Cell Phone GPS Data

U.S. District Court Judge Susan K. Gauvey refused this week to issue a warrant to federal authorities who wanted to access the GPS information of a suspect. Law enforcement wanted the information so they could track down the suspect in a felony case, though they had made limited efforts to track him down prior to the request.

In her refusal, Gauvey said limiting the officers’ access to this information “does not frustrate or impede law enforcement’s important efforts, but rather places them within the Constitutional and statutory framework which balances citizens’ rights of privacy against government’s protection of society.”

Courts across the country are exploring cases similar to this one, discussing how police’s access to GPS data should be dealt with. When it comes to placing GPS units on vehicles, appellate courts in both California and Oregon have ruled that police do not need warrants for such tracking. A Washington state Court of Appeals ruled otherwise and the U.S. Supreme Court plans to take up this issue soon.

Police practices and policies have not been able to keep up with the quickly evolving technologies of the day. Because most smart phones now have GPS capabilities built in, it’s possible to track someone even without them making any calls. Phone companies are said to be able to tell you where their customers are within a 10 meter radius, something the cops would love to have unlimited access to.

Cell phones and similar technology has become a top tool in law enforcement investigations. However, the benefits of this technology as an investigative tool must be balanced with the Constitutional rights of the people. “This technology is going to cause more and more of these arguments,” says Douglas Ward of the Division of Public Safety Leadership in the Johns Hopkins University School of Education. “Like anything else, there can be abuses. Justice demands that we weigh that.”

In this specific case, police had the cell phone number of their target and with that information (and a warrant), they could have located the suspect using GPS data. However, they didn’t prove to the judge that the suspect (whose identity and crime were kept secret) posed any flight risk. As a matter of fact, they located and arrested him in the meantime, without the warrant.

Much of the argument in such cases arises about what sort of “expectation of privacy” a person can have in regards to their movements. Should the police have access to your future movements? This is a question that hasn’t arisen in decades past; only with the advent of GPS technology has the ability to track movements in real-time even been possible.

For now, it remains a gray area for law enforcement, where judges can really go either way depending on the facts of the case and evidence presented by law enforcement in pursuit of a warrant.

Can Top Cop Be Held Accountable for Baltimore’s Problems?

How many scandals can a police department weather before the leadership is blamed? That’s what many people are wondering about the Baltimore Police Department and it’s Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III. While the initial shakeups provided him an opportunity to show his leadership under pressure, some are starting to wonder if the problems are now a sign of poor leadership.

According to the Baltimore Sun, when asked to reflect on his time with the department in 2009, Bealefeld said “Come on, has anybody had to go through what we’ve gone through?”

Known for not pulling any punches at press conferences and being relatively available, Bealefeld has steered clear of the press lately while maintaining contacts with community leaders.

He could be pulling back because he knows the heat is on. Just this year, a plainclothes officer was shot by other officers outside a nightclub, a veteran officer was indicted for running a heroin ring and even selling heroin on police property, and 50 officers have been identified in a kickback scheme involving towing companies.

While crime in the city is down, this reflects a nationwide trend and may not be indicative of Bealefeld’s performance. “The reality is, chiefs of police nationwide work for a political leader, and their tenure is based on how they serve that political leader,” says the director of Johns Hopkins University Police Executive Leadership Program Sheldon Greenberg. “What politicians want first and foremost is good stats, and they’re willing to forgo a lot of other things if their chiefs give them good statistics.”

In other words, had crime risen or even remained steady, there’s a chance Bealefeld may not have lasted this long.

Despite all of the drama within the department, some of Bealefeld’s support is holding pretty steady. He has the confidence of community leaders behind him and that of the FOP. On the other hand, some believe his time is up and the department could benefit from new leadership.

There’s little doubt that community confidence in the department is wavering. How can a city expect to stand behind its police when the police keep making headlines with questionable and even criminal behavior themselves. Pointing fingers doesn’t solve the problem and while the finger-pointing is going on, leaders are missing their opportunity to restore public confidence.

It’s normal to not trust the police in Baltimore—a sad but true fact. But when you are arrested and charged with a crime, your mistrust can be at an all-time high. A criminal defense attorney is often the only person that you might feel comforted by within the legal system. If you are facing charges, contact us today for a consultation on your case.