Assault Category Archives — Maryland Criminal Lawyer Blog Published by Maryland Criminal Attorney

What to Do When a Prosecution Witness Invokes the Fifth Amendment in Response to Your Cross-Examination Questions in a Maryland Criminal Trial

November 23, 2021 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

One of the most potent elements of your criminal defense can be the cross-examination of the witnesses who testify against you. That cross-examination may shed critical light onto the witness, revealing them to be something less than believable and trustworthy. When a witness tries to avoid answering your questions on cross-examination, it pays to have a skilled Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side, as that witness’s failure to answer may entitle you to have the witness’s entire testimony thrown out.

S.C. was on trial for his alleged actions during a dispute with the mother of his baby son. The woman, despite the presence of an order of protection she had against S.C., voluntarily chose to text him and ask him for money. She subsequently agreed to meet him and accompany him to a hotel room. While at the hotel room, the woman smoked marijuana and agreed to spend the night with S.C.

The next morning, the woman and S.C. allegedly became embroiled in an alleged physical altercation that was the basis for the charges the state brought against S.C.

Police Officer Testimony About Out-of-Court Statements and When that Is — and Is Not — Inadmissible Hearsay in a Maryland Criminal Trial

October 29, 2021 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

A successful defense in a criminal case involves many things. One of these is keeping inadmissible evidence out of your trial. That can include excluding inadmissible hearsay testimony that potentially harms your case. To do this, and to make sure that your rights are fully protected throughout the process, it pays to have an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side.

Winning these kinds of hearsay arguments can be nuanced. Consider the felony case of J.S., who was on trial for assaulting his partner, S.B. In June 2019, the pair became involved in a dispute at their home in Cecil County. Police responded to the home and interviewed both the man and the woman.

During the man’s trial, the prosecution put one of the police officers on the witness stand. Under questioning from the prosecutor, the officer stated that the alleged victim told him that, before the officer arrived at the home, she had made plans to go to dinner with her mother, but that the accused had told her she was not free to leave the home and had pointed a gun at her head.

How a ‘Batson Challenge’ Works and How It Can Help You Avoid Potential Racial Discrimination in the Jury Selection Process

September 24, 2021 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

One of the most basic concepts underlying criminal trials in this country is the notion of fundamental fairness in the process. One element of that fundamental fairness is having your guilt or innocence determined by a jury of your peers. Toward that end, the law says that the prosecution cannot engage in racial discrimination in the jury selection process. When it comes to protecting your rights, before, during, and after your criminal trial, make sure you have a skilled Maryland criminal defense lawyer advocating for you and protecting you from this and other forms of unfairness.

One of the most essential tools in the criminal defense attorney’s “toolbag” when it comes to thwarting racial discrimination in the jury selection process is something called a “Batson challenge.” (That name comes from the 1986 U.S. Supreme Court case of Batson v. Kentucky, in which a Black man was convicted by an all-white jury after the prosecutor struck all of the Black potential jurors during voir dire.)

To give you an example of what the Batson challenge process looks like, we have a recent assault and theft case from Cecil County. B.B., a Black man, was on trial for second-degree assault, conspiracy to commit robbery, conspiracy to commit second-degree assault, and conspiracy to commit theft.

When the Video Footage Recorded by a Maryland Law Enforcement Officer’s ‘Bodycam’ May Constitute Hearsay and Be Inadmissible in Your Trial

September 10, 2021 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

As body cameras are becoming more and more common among law enforcement officers, bodycam video footage will continue to become more and more common in criminal trials. If you are someone facing criminal charges, it is important to recognize that, just because something was recorded by a police officer’s body camera, that doesn’t necessarily make it admissible against you in your trial. There may be a variety of different reasons why an officer’s bodycam video footage would be inadmissible but, to keep that proof out, you have to know how to mount a successful objection. When it comes to achieving success in this and other tactical maneuvers in your case, it pays to have an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer on your side.

An assault case from Baltimore demonstrates how the hearsay rule may be a powerful weapon in your case where the state wants to use police bodycam footage. In that case, R.B., the defendant, was facing charges that he attacked D.K.

The state did not call the alleged victim as a witness, presumably because the prosecution team could not locate him. The prosecution tried to get around the problem posed by the alleged victim’s absence by introducing into evidence the video footage from the bodycam worn by the local police officer who responded to the scene of the alleged crime and interviewed the alleged victim. In that footage, the police sergeant asked the alleged victim what happened, and he presented his version of events which, unsurprisingly, portrayed himself as innocent and the accused as the sole aggressor.

How a Change in a Maryland Health Statute Gave One Man a Winning Ex Post Facto Violation Argument

October 22, 2020 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

“Ex post facto” is a phrase that often gets overused… and misused. Many people may recall learning about ex post facto laws in junior high or high school civics and government classes, but may not really understand what the phrase truly means. Unskilled “jailhouse lawyers” often apply it incorrectly in appeals they file. On the other hand, a valid ex post facto argument, when in the hands of a skillful Maryland criminal defense attorney, can be a powerful constitutional claim in your criminal case.

To get an idea what a valid ex post facto situation looks like, there’s the case of E.H. from Prince George’s County. In 2011, E.H. was convicted of first-degree assault and weapons charges. He received a sentence of 25 years.

Under Section 8-507 of Maryland’s Health General Article, the inmate had, at that time, an “essentially unrestricted right” to seek commitment to the Department of Health for substance abuse treatment. In December 2017, E.H. applied for such a commitment. The judge denied the man’s request, but told him to try back in about a year. “I fully intend to grant this petition at some point,” the judge said from the bench.

What the ‘Doctrine of Merger’ Is and How It May Greatly Reduce the Final Sentence in Your Criminal Case in Maryland

July 22, 2020 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

There are so many reasons why representation from a skillful Maryland criminal defense attorney is worthwhile. One of those reasons is that there are countless areas of the law that are well-known to criminal defense attorneys, but largely unknown outside those circles. By having a knowledgeable attorney on your side, you can have the full benefit of all of the law, and make sure that your rights are protected to the maximum.

One of those areas of the law is “merger.” Even people who have a little bit of knowledge of the law probably think that the law of “merger” refers simply to the process of two business entities combining to form one, larger business. In Maryland though, “merger” has an important meaning in criminal law and, as one case recently demonstrated, it can make a massive difference in the amount of time you serve.

First, here’s a little background about criminal sentences. Say you’ve been put on trial for several crimes. The jury hears the evidence and acquits you of some charges, but convicts you on two crimes. The judge sentences you to serve two years for Crime A and 10 years for Crime B, and also declares that the sentences shall run “consecutively.” That means that your total time of imprisonment is the one sentence plus the sentence for the second crime. In other words, 12 years. (With “concurrent sentences,” the total imprisonment would’ve been 10 years.)

When You Can Keep Police Body Camera Video Footage Out of a Criminal Trial in Maryland

December 24, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Today, newly emerging technologies have the potential to provide people accused of crimes powerful weapons in their defense. These technologies also can do harm, however, when they allow for inadmissible evidence to get before a jury. This is but one reason among the countless ones why you need a skilled Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side who can vigilantly and diligently fight to protect your rights at trial.

S.P. was a man whose case involved one of those newer technologies – police body cameras. S.P., who was on trial for the false imprisonment and assault of his wife, allegedly used electrical tape to cover her mouth and bind her hands and feet, then threw her in the rear of his SUV. A Montgomery County Police officer responded to the neighbor’s house, which was where the wife was at the time. The responding officer was wearing a body camera.

At the husband’s trial, the prosecution wanted to use the body camera video footage against the accused man. The husband opposed this evidence, but the court allowed it in anyway. The man was ultimately convicted. On appeal, though, that conviction was overturned. The husband’s trial counsel had been correct to challenge the admission of the body camera footage into evidence.

A Man Charged in a Maryland Machete Attack Defends Himself Without a Lawyer… and Gets the Maximum Possible Sentence

June 20, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

An old adage says that “a man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client.” The adage, of course, means that it is generally never a good idea to proceed without skilled legal representation in any legal action. The need for effective counsel is never greater than in a criminal case, which is why your defense needs to include a knowledgeable Maryland criminal defense attorney working for you.

G.S. was someone who tried to defend himself, and the result of his trial was not a favorable one for him. He was on trial for a very serious matter. Allegedly, he stabbed another man with a machete during a May 2016 altercation. The state charged G.S. with attempted first-degree murder, attempted second-degree murder, first-degree assault and second-degree assault. The defendant did not hire his own attorney and was appointed a public defender. In fact, he was appointed two different public defenders at two different points. G.S., however, decided that he could do a better job than these lawyers, and asked to proceed without counsel. The judge concluded that the defendant hadn’t provided a good reason for dismissing the public defenders but let him do it anyway.

Unsurprisingly, the trial was not a success for the accused. The jury found him guilty on all counts and he was sentenced to life in prison for the attempted first-degree murder count. In other words, the result of G.S.’s trial was the least favorable one possible for him. The lawyers he fired literally could not have done worse in terms of outcomes no matter how well or poorly they performed.

When the Prosecution Can — and Cannot — Use Your Old Convictions Against You in Your Maryland Criminal Trial

June 11, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

When your defense involves you testifying in your trial, the prosecution is almost certainly going to do something called “impeaching” you. Unlike in politics and government, where impeaching often means seeking to remove an official from office, impeaching in this sense means offering proof that casts doubt upon the truthfulness and reliability of the person testifying. Whether or not you’re testifying in your own defense at your criminal trial, one thing you definitely need is representation from a skilled and experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney.

There are lots of ways in which the prosecution can try to impeach you as a witness in your own defense. In some circumstances, the law may allow the prosecutor to bring up past criminal convictions you have on your record. One of the rules that the law imposes, however, on this type of impeachment is that the conviction’s significance and connection to the alleged crime(s) at hand must be greater than the potential that the information will unfairly bias the jury against you, the defendant. When you hear a TV lawyer or judge talking about evidence whose “risk of unfair prejudice outweighs its probative value,” that’s what they’re talking about.

Here’s a real-life recent case that gives a good example. B.H. was a man on trial for several serious crimes. A shootout in a parking lot in Baltimore left B.H. facing charges of attempted murder, assault, reckless endangerment, drug possession and several gun crimes. Part of B.H.’s defense was to argue that he did shoot a gun that night, but that he did so in self-defense.

What Happens When the Judge Doesn’t Go Along with Your Maryland Plea Agreement?

February 7, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

You probably are familiar with the concept of plea bargains in criminal cases. What you may (or may not) know is that when the prosecution and defense reach a plea agreement, the judge isn’t obliged to follow the deal’s terms. So, even once you have worked out a plea deal with the prosecution, it is essential to be prepared for every possible outcome, including the judge not going along with the deal. In other words, you need skilled Maryland criminal defense counsel that can have you prepared for all possibilities.

A recent case from Baltimore County was an example of this scenario. The background to the case was a domestic dispute. H.H. had allegedly gotten into an argument with his girlfriend at her home and, after being escorted out by other men, threatened to “shoot up” the home. A few hours later, three men arrived at the residence, burst through the rear door and shot up the home. Based on these events, the state charged H.H. with 52 counts, including two attempted murder charges, several assault charges and multiple gun crimes.

H.H. pled guilty, as part of a plea deal, to one count of conspiracy to commit first-degree assault, and the state nolle prossed the other charges, meaning that it declined to prosecute those other 51 counts. The sentence to which H.H. agreed was 15 years with all but three years suspended. The judge sentenced H.H. not to 15 years with all but three years suspended but to 25 years with all but 13 suspended. In other words, the judge tacked on an extra 10 years. The man asked to withdraw his plea and receive a new trial, but the judge refused.