Maryland Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Study, Neighborhood Residents Disagree on Methadone Clinics

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Mon, 07 May 2012 20:19:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Tue, 01 May 2012 15:36:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:01:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 19:14:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:42:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Mon, 29 Aug 2011 20:46:00 +0000

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?

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 18:48:00 +0000

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.

“Clerical Error” Renders Firearm Serial Number Law Invalid

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Fri, 22 Jul 2011 03:05:00 +0000

Altering or removing a serial number on a firearm is not a crime in Maryland. At least for the time being. Turns out, when the laws were changed in 2003, a “clerical error” rendered the prior law invalid, making the crime not a crime at all.

According to the Washington Examiner, the Maryland Supreme Court overturned a man’s conviction after reviewing the law and finding no penalty was outlined for the offense, invalidating it as a criminal offense. The judges said in their finding, “When an individual is convicted pursuant to a charge that does not constitute a crime, that conviction must be reversed and the sentence vacated.”

The courts will likely see some appeals from this matter as those people convicted of altering serial numbers on weapons between 2003 and now would be eligible to have those sentences vacated and their convictions overturned.

Serial numbers on firearms are used to track weapons. Often, stolen guns or those used in the commission of a crime will have the numbers altered, making them impossible to trace. “It’s not like on TV where it’s easy to trace it back to the owner. This could make it more difficult for prosecutors at the state level,” said senior attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence Daniel Vice.

The case that brought this flawed law to the attention of the courts was one where the defendant had been convicted on a multitude of charges. Although this one was overturned, his other convictions are still valid.

Lawmakers in the state are expected to change the law and get it back in working order by this fall. It’s also important to note that altering the numbers on a firearm remains a federal offense. Even though the state of Maryland can’t charge you with this violation, the federal government can.

Gun laws in Maryland are otherwise fairly serious. Unlawful carrying of a handgun, for instance, carries a mandatory minimum 30 day sentence and up to 3 years in prison. This is one of the least stringent gun laws in the state; a second offense of this crime has a minimum 3 years in prison.

When you are facing gun charges, the likelihood that a clerical error was made is slim to none. More than likely, you will be charged with a legally sound crime and it will be up to you and your defense attorney to contest those charges in court.

If you’ve been charged with a weapons offense in the state of Maryland, contact me today for a consultation.

Baltimore Crime, Arrests and Indictments All on Decline

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Tue, 12 Jul 2011 16:15:00 +0000

Changes in police practices and prosecutors’ procedures, along with potentially unexplainable factors, have all led to a drop in crime, a drop in the number of arrests, and a drop in the number of defendants released from booking without being charged. As explored in this in-depth piece from the Baltimore Sun, many are taking credit for the shift, though not everyone is completely convinced that the numbers tell the whole story.

In 2000, under the leadership of Martin O’Malley, police in Baltimore city were arresting anyone that ran afoul of even the most minor “quality of life” offenses. People were being arrested and booked into jail for things like loitering, nuisance crimes that would otherwise be handled with a warning or a ticket. This led to a mountainous arrest rate over the next several years, with 98,000 arrested in 2005, at the peak of this zero-tolerance practice.

But this high number of arrests led to prosecutors having to turn many arrestees away. Whether the arrest was made on charges that wouldn’t stick or if the offense was simply too minor to clog up the courts, prosecutors released more than 25,000 people without charging them in that same year.

In 2007, Police Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III took over and began a more focused approach to enforcing the law. His department is far more concerned with arresting only the serious, violent offenders. While crime has fallen during his time as Commissioner, some believe it’s an anomaly and has nothing to do with what they fear is a more lackadaisical approach to law enforcement.

During zero-tolerance days, nearly anyone who looked suspicious or who was found loitering would be “slammed to the ground” and searched for drugs. Now, some citizens say those same drug dealers who were scared to come back on the corners are doing just that—standing side by side with the police, unafraid of potential consequences because they know the cops aren’t interested in nonviolent and low level drug offenders anymore.

In 2010, the number of people arrested by Baltimore police was down to 62,341. About 42,000 of these arrests were made “on view” or without a warrant. In 2005, 76,500 of the 98,000 arrests were “on view”. So far in 2011 there have been only 16,000 “on view” arrests.

Because the police are being more discriminate about their arrests, they are giving prosecutors better cases to work with and fewer suspects are being released without charges. Some say changes within the state attorney’s office have also made changes contributing to the lower arrest and higher resolution rates.

Another factor not addressed within the Baltimore Sun article is the “unknown” factor of crime reduction. Major cities across the country are experiencing dramatically lower crime rates and cannot put their finger on the cause. Despite the poor economy, fewer crimes are being committed and no one seems to know why. It would be rash to suggest falling crime could be attributed to good old fashioned police work and nothing else, particularly when the residents of the city see at least some crimes being committed in plain view with nothing being done.

Area Cops Scan Thousands of License Plates Daily

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:23:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 19:54:00 +0000

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?

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:43:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 20:25:00 +0000

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?

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 15:38:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 17:45:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 20:13:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 19:22:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 03 Feb 2011 16:35:00 +0000

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

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 22:19:00 +0000

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.

Tis the Season For Increased Thefts?

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Fri, 03 Dec 2010 20:42:00 +0000

It’s holiday time and as Peter Herman with the Baltimore Sun reports, it’s time for law enforcement to start issuing mass warnings about everything from locking your bags in your trunk to leaving your lights on at home when you leave the house. But is there really a peak in theft related crimes over the holidays or is this just a fallacy?

Interestingly, despite the belief that everything from theft to domestic violence peak over the holidays, the statistics tell another story.

With regard to car break-ins, one of those offenses we commonly hear the news and police agencies warning about, there were 57 such crimes in 2009 over a week’s time period including the busiest shopping day of the year—Black Friday. In August of that same year, there were 178 of those break-ins.

Similarly, domestic violence crimes are thought to rise over the holidays when stress is high and finances are often stretched thin. But, according to the Md. Network Against Domestic Violence, November and December 2009 were the two months with the lowest domestic violence complaints.

Despite the numbers telling a different story, the police will likely continue to send out their holiday warnings, with local news stations doing the same sort of thing. Keep your shopping bags in your trunk, never leave your house dark when out of town, and remember to be vigilant on the crowded roadways!

One criminologist states that larcenies do spike over the December month, however, leaving some questions about the trend and the warnings. Also, the roadways do seem to become deadlier as the number of people traveling increases.

With such conflicting data and opinions, maybe the police are right—better safe than sorry. And if you are one of those people who stands on the other side of the law, accused of committing holiday thefts or even being charged with a DUI after a holiday party, know a criminal defense attorney can help.

Whether you are facing reckless driving charges or assault—contact us today for a free consultation on your case.

Maryland Cops Can Stop For Window Tint

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 22:33:00 +0000

A Maryland court of Appeals clarified under which conditions law enforcement can stop cars who seem to have illegal tint on their windows this past week. Basically, they found that if an officer can articulate in a credible manner what made the vehicle appear to have illegal tint, it can be stopped. Their wording suggests, however, that cops may want to have a tint testing device handy when making those stops, however.

Maryland law states that no less than 35% of light can be transmitted through a vehicle window for it to be considered legal. More often than not, the initial estimate of this and the source of a fine is nothing more than a guess by officers.

The case that brought the issue before the Court of Appeals involved a man driving a vehicle that was suspected of carrying drugs. The officer had no legal justification for stopping the car he saw, even though he thought it to be the suggested drug car. The tint, however, did appear suspiciously dark.

According to the officer, the vehicle’s driver was obeying all traffic laws but noticed at an intersection that he couldn’t see into the vehicle. This was the basis of his traffic stop—possible illegal tint. By the officer’s own admission, he hadn’t received any training on window tinting but that he believed he should have been able to see inside.

In the vehicle was found cocaine and marijuana. The Circuit Court in the driver’s criminal case suppressed the evidence stating it was an illegal seizure as there wasn’t sufficient probable cause to stop and search the car. The Court of Appeals agreed.

When the police search you or your vehicle, they must follow the letter of the law. This includes having what’s referred to as probable cause or a warrant. Without it any evidence seized might not be admissible in court, as the drugs in this case weren’t.

According to the Baltimore Sun, 30 State Troopers carry light meters, able to test tinting while about 1,500 do not. By their own estimate, if you can’t see in the vehicle, you may want to get it checked before you end up in a questionable traffic stop.

Criminal evidence can take many forms. All criminal evidence must be seized legally for it to be used against you in court. As a Maryland criminal defense attorney, it’s part of my job to look at how the evidence against you was taken and to ensure your constitutional rights are protected throughout the criminal process.

If you’re facing charges, contact me today for a free consultation on your case.

Second Degree Assault for Threatening with Sword

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:15:00 +0000

A Maryland man was sentenced to 18 months in jail on a second degree assault charge, after threatening a group of people with a sword.

Via the Herald-Mail and washingtonpost.com, This strange story is the result of a heroin drug problem. The defendant was supposedly high on heroin at the time of the assault, and the rational for the assault was an attempt to collect money from a previous drug sale.

The man brought the sword thinking the men at the house were armed with guns.

Clearly, this was not a well thought out plan.

A significant jail term is unusual with assault and battery charges where ultimately no one was injured, but certainly the unusual circumstances, the drug abuse, and the potential for severe injury, it is not completely surprising.

Under Maryland law, the maximum penalty for second degree assault is 10 years in prison.

Maryland Man Almost Serves 14 Additional Unwarranted Years in Prison

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 14:58:00 +0000

Just how much can one clerical error cost? Well, for one man in Maryland, a simple error nearly cost him 14 years of his life. One entry into the state’s criminal records database meant the difference between 6 years and 20 years behind bars.

According to the Baltimore Sun, the man didn’t have a clean record when he faced federal weapons charges in 2006 but he didn’t have the kind of record that officials thought he did.

The problem arose when a charge he faced in 2000 was entered into the system as a conviction. It would have been his third felony distribution charge for the man and would have qualified him for a enhanced sentence for the federal weapons charge. And because that’s the way it was entered in the system, he was sentenced to 235 months in the federal prison system as opposed to the 77 he should’ve faced.

Under federal laws, the third conviction would have deemed him a career criminal, the type of person the courts want to keep off the streets. But this particular defendant knew he was right and knew he wasn’t convicted in the 2000 drug distribution case. So he fought.

He filed appeal after appeal and even petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his case. They rejected him and Appeals Courts upheld the sentence. He finally petitioned to have his sentence corrected.

The burden was on the defendant to prove to the courts that he had never received that 2000 conviction despite what their computer system showed. He had the paperwork to back his claims and won. The defendant was recently resentenced in a rare case of a clerical error with nearly disastrous effects.

The Court’s skepticism for this man’s claims is no doubt based on hearing numerous baseless appeals every single year. And according to the Sun, the Maryland U.S. Attorney stated this was the first case that he had personally heard of where the information within the state clerk‘s records were incorrect.

When you face criminal charges, this is the exact kind of thing that can put undue stress on you. It’s bad enough to be looking at a lengthy prison sentence or even a few months in jail. But, when you have to worry about whether or not everyone involved in your case is doing their job, it becomes nearly unmanageable.

If you are facing criminal charges and in need of an advocate on your side, call our offices today. We will give you a free consultation on your case and some valuable legal advice.

Maryland Case of Cop Recording Thrown Out by Judge

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Mon, 04 Oct 2010 14:43:00 +0000

In a case of videotaping a police officer that I wrote about last week, a judge has issued his ruling, a ruling in favor of police accountability and the rights of the people. A 24 year old National Guardsman was facing felony wiretapping charges for recording a Maryland state police officer during a traffic stop.

At issue was whether citizens had the right to record the police acting within an official capacity—with or without their knowledge. The state argued that this man had no right to record the encounter, while his defense and the ACLU stated there was no “expectation of privacy” on a crowded roadway.

The judge ruled in favor of the defendant, tossing his wiretapping charges while upholding his traffic citations. According to the Baltimore Sun, he recognized that public servants like the police shouldn’t expect to be “shielded from public scrutiny.” He also cited the Rodney King case in his findings and said that with the onslaught of technology, people in general can’t really expect to not be recorded at any given time.

Finally, he affirmed what the ACLU argued in saying, the incident “took place on a public highway in full view of the public. Under such circumstances, I cannot, by any stretch, conclude that the troopers had any reasonable expectation of privacy in their conversation with the defendant...”

Current wiretapping laws were written years ago, long before nearly everyone was walking around with recording devices in their pockets. As technology advances, so must the interpretation of the laws.

The State Attorney for Harford County could appeal the decision if he disagrees with the judge’s ruling. But, at the time of the Sun article, that decision hadn’t been made. He is quoted as saying he believes the ruling will make the police’s job more difficult—though I question how.

With great power comes great responsibility and a potential for abuse. Although the majority of police officers conduct themselves in ethical and responsible manners, we have seen what happens when this isn’t the case. Being able to record police interaction in public is a win on the side of citizen protection.

Without recordings, most cases boil down to he said/she said and other evidence. It’s very rare to have video footage at a criminal trial. However, this other evidence can be used to build a case successfully against a defendant or, on the other hand, can serve to prove their innocence.

When you are facing criminal charges, an attorney will help you analyze all of the evidence against you and that evidence that may work on your behalf. If you have questions about your case or are in need of representation, contact me today.

Is It Illegal to Record the Cops?

noreply@blogger.com (Dave Matson) — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 17:21:00 +0000

The cops can record you. Whether it’s a dashboard camera or a red light camera, your objection doesn’t hold any ground with law enforcement. So, why is a Maryland man facing charges for recording an officer during a traffic stop?

Prosecutors argue the man was in violation of wiretapping laws when a camera mounted on his motorcycle helmet recorded his interaction with a state trooper. The defense counters that people should be able to record police acting within an official capacity while in public and that the conversation between trooper and suspect was not a wholly private conversation to begin with.

The case is the first of its kind in Maryland and is definitely one to watch. With recording devices in nearly everyone’s pockets these days, clarifying if wiretapping laws apply to cell phone videos is an important matter. Important not only to clarify the law but also to ensure citizens have the ability to keep officers accountable.

Think of Rodney King and all the other video recordings since that time that have uncovered police abuses. As the Baltimore Sun points out in this important quite from ancient Rome, “Who will watch the watchers?”

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) has sent several attorneys to represent the man in this case, stating there’s no reason a citizen should be denied the right to record a conversation when there is no “expectation of privacy.” In other words, if you are in a public place where your tone is audible to others, the recording of your conversation is completely legal.

The Attorney General for Maryland issued an opinion in July telling police that it was within the right of the people to record officers and that those conversations could not be considered private. The Attorney General is considered the law enforcement and legal official for the state.

The suspect in this case uploaded his videotaped encounter to the Internet, which is how law enforcement became aware of his recording. He now faces up to 16 years in prison for this felony charge.

There’s little doubt in my mind that the case will go to trial and whatever the result is, it will be appealed. Definitely a case to watch in months to come, this one could have lasting effects.

The bottom line is that citizens should be allowed to record police interactions when officers are acting in the line of duty. As public servants, law enforcement must be held accountable for their actions and having video evidence of their actions should be seen as positive rather than something to fear.

After all, if they are acting with integrity and respecting the rights of the people, why would evidence supporting this be such a bad thing?

You may not have a tape of your arrest, but chances are I can help you regardless. If you’re up against criminal charges and need an advocate on your side in court, contact me today.