Case law

Mental Competency To Stand Trial in Maryland Criminal Cases

January 14, 2014 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In a recent case, the appellate court looked at questions of mental competency in the case of a criminal conviction. The case arose from the defendant’s alleged stabbing and killing of an adult male. The victim, who was dying of cancer and who had been recently beaten on an earlier occasion, was discovered by a friend who occasionally checked on him.

The victim’s home was ransacked and the dresser drawer where he kept medication was toppled. The friend called the police from the nearby grocery store. The owner of the store explained that on the night of the stabbing, the defendant came into the store with a note from the victim letting him purchase beer on the arrangement between the victim and the store.

Other testimony against the defendant came from his friend and his mother. The defendant’s friend said that the defendant wanted to rob the victim in order to steal his pills. The defendant’s mother claimed that the defendant said he hurt the victim because the victim said something bad about her. Continue reading

Immigration Consequences of Maryland Criminal Convictions or Guilty Pleas

December 26, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

If you are a noncitizen immigrant, you should be aware that there may be adverse immigration consequences, such as deportation, for pleading guilty or being convicted of a crime in Maryland and other states. In a recent appellate case, a native of Belize who was a permanent resident in the United States pled guilty to cocaine possession with intent to distribute. He was sentenced to five years in prison.

During his sentencing, the defendant was informed that he had the right to appeal his conviction. He did not appeal, nor did he file a petition for post-conviction relief, and served out his five-year sentence.

Afterward, he traveled to Belize and was detained when he tried to reenter the United States. The United States Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) started a deportation proceeding against him. To delay deportation, he filed a Petition for a Writ of Error Coram Nobis. He claimed in the petition that his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary because his attorney had not advised him of possible immigration consequences of his plea. Continue reading

What Constitutes “Contempt of Court” in Maryland Criminal Court?

December 12, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In a recent case, the defendant tore up a copy of his probation papers after his criminal trial. He was on trial for second-degree assault after hitting and kicking his girlfriend during an argument. After the guilty verdict, the girlfriend claimed financial hardship and said she wanted to be left alone. The defendant was sentenced to 10 years in prison with most of it suspended, plus three years probation.

He was given a probation order with standard conditions, including obeying all laws. A week later, the State petitioned to revoke his probation. The State based its request for revocation on ripping up his probation papers and making loud threatening statements about witnesses like, “She don’t know it, but she just signed her death warrant.”

The trial court revoked the defendant’s probation, finding him in contempt for ripping up the papers and making threats. An intermediate appellate court held that the ruling wasn’t clearly erroneous. The controlling statute did not require the threats be made directly to a witness or victim. Continue reading

Obstruction of a Maryland Police Officer’s Investigation

November 26, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In Maryland, it is illegal to obstruct or hinder a law enforcement officer trying to perform his duties. There are three kinds of obstruction: direct obstruction (physical resistance), passive direct obstruction (refusal to act as required), and positive indirect obstruction (where police officer are acting against other citizens and a citizen not involved prevents their ability to prevent or detect crime).

In a 2011 obstruction case, a motorcyclist and friend were traveling parallel in the southbound lane. Someone from the sheriff’s department saw one of them cross the double yellow line several times. He initiated a stop and ran the vehicle information to get the motorcycle’s registration information. He discovered the motorcycle belonged to someone named Titus. The motorcyclist presented him with a driver’s license from another state and a name different from Titus.

At some point the sheriff found Titus’s license had been suspended and revoked. The person driving the vehicle claimed that Titus was his roommate and he borrowed the vehicle. The sheriff smelled alcohol on his breath and saw his eyes were glassy. He asked the motorcyclist what he’d been doing that evening. The motorcyclist claimed he drank two beers earlier. A Standardized Field Sobriety Test was performed. The motorcyclist claimed to have bad ankles, but agreed to the test. Continue reading

What Happens if a Maryland Judge Erroneously Advises a Defendant Waiving His Right to Jury?

October 17, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Criminal defendants in Maryland have a right to jury trial and the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. In a recent case, the court was asked to consider whether a waiver was valid where the trial judge offered the defendant advice that was erroneous.

The case was a murder case in which the defendant was charged for the murder of his father. He entered a plea of not guilty and not criminally responsible, but was interested in a bench trial (one in which the judge rules on guilt or innocence.)

In Maryland, judges are required to ask a defendant waiving his or her right to a jury trial specific questions. The judge in this case asked whether the defendant wanted to waive a jury. He also asked about his schooling, substance use, and physical illness.

The Impact of a Defendant’s Signed Statement in Maryland

October 12, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

If you are suspected of a crime, you should always ask to talk to an attorney before answering questions from the police. You also should not sign anything the police give you nor write your own statement without advice of counsel. In a recent case, the issue of confession arose in connection with multiple arson attempts. A man, his wife, and their daughter returned home at about 1:00 a.m. one night. The man noticed lights coming through his blinds. He saw a fire coming out of the front of his garage and alerted his family before telephoning the fire department.

The man tried to contain the fire with a garden hose. The firemen asked him to move out of the way and proceeded to spray down the place. The police investigated the cause of the fire. An arson investigator determined someone had set the fire. Shortly thereafter, the man awoke at 3:00 a.m. and found the house filled with smoke. The roof was on fire. They called 911. The Fire Marshall smelled accelerant on the roof.

The police collected roofing and other materials for testing. They determined there was gasoline in the samples. The family put up 12 cameras for surveillance and the couple slept in shifts so they could monitor what was happening. A month later, during the wife’s shift, she noticed someone walking down the street carrying a container. The person poured liquid on her car. Continue reading

Sale of Counterfeits in Maryland

October 11, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Maryland law prohibits the intentional distribution, sale and possession of items identified by a counterfeit mark. In a recent case, the defendant was driving on Route 301 with two burned out tag lights when he was pulled over by a state trooper. The state trooper noticed that the defendant did not make eye contact and that there were four air freshening trees hanging in the car, including at the rear of the car.

He radioed to the station for a criminal history and traffic check on the defendant, which revealed the defendant’s license had expired and the defendant had been charged with drug possession. Accordingly he called for backup and began citing the defendant for driving on an expired license.

When the other trooper arrived, they spoke about the situation and asked the defendant and his companion to exit the car. A trained dog searched the vehicle for illegal substances. There were two marijuana cigarettes, which the defendant admitted belonged to him. Also recovered were more than 300 DVDs and CDs suspected to be counterfeits. The defendant was charged on numerous counts, including a charge of distributing, selling and possessing counterfeit items. Continue reading

Maryland’s De Novo System

August 30, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

What is Maryland’s de novo system? It is a system that allows review of decisions rendered in courts of limited jurisdiction by a trial court of general jurisdiction. A defendant who is convicted in a District Court of Maryland can appeal the conviction de novo to a circuit court. The reason de novo appeals were originally allowed was to permit people who cannot afford a transcript of the record to have a member of the judiciary take a second look.

Allowing a trial de novo means that a criminal defendant is permitted a “new bite at the apple,” as if the charges hadn’t previously been heard and no decision had been made. The State must produce evidence as if it hadn’t already been produced.

In a recent case, a defendant exercised his de novo right, but was convicted again on the basis of evidence from the first trial. The defendant was convicted for the first time for second-degree assault after attacking someone in the elevator of his apartment building in Silver Springs. The victim testified that the defendant was already in the elevator when he entered the elevator. But before the victim could hit the button for his floor, the defendant punched his face and hit him. The victim, who was injured, next remembered getting up and looking for his wife. The police responded before the victim could call them. Continue reading

What Effect Can a Maryland Judge’s Instruction to the Jury Have on a Criminal Trial?

August 9, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

As we’ve mentioned in earlier posts, Maryland takes a criminal’s right to trial by jury very seriously. While deliberating, however, jurors may need instruction from the trial judge. If a question is asked of the trial judge, any answer the judge gives must accurately state the law, respond to the jury’s question, but still permit the jury to decide the case.

Often a juror’s question concerns the law related to the evidence. However, a jury may also ask about the absence of something in the evidence. In a recent case, a man was on trial for second degree assault, committed against his girlfriend. The girlfriend testified that the man often came home drunk and hit her. On the day in question, he cursed at her, threw a glass at her, started hitting her with his fists and kicked her until she ran outside and hid.

She called 911 and in the call stated he had hit her in the head and was throwing her things into the street. When the police came they ordered the man to leave the property and told the woman to go back inside. Later the man returned and beat her again. She again ran and called 911. Continue reading

Can You Use the Misconduct of Maryland Police Officers to Discredit Their Testimony?

August 5, 2013 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In a recent criminal case, the Maryland Court of Appeals considered whether it was permissible to look into internal files related to the misconduct of two detectives and use the information to challenge their credibility in a criminal trial.

The case arose when two men were tried jointly and convicted after a shooting in Baltimore, Maryland. The Court of Special Appeals reversed the judgments and a new trial followed. They were tried again and convicted. The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the more serious judgments.

The men petitioned the Court of Appeals to review several questions. One of the questions for review was whether the trial court had made a mistake in refusing to let the defense inspect internal investigation division files related to officer misconduct and refusing to let them be cross-examined regarding the misconduct.

The shooting occurred in 2003 and was motivated by revenge. The jury found one of the petitioners guilty of second-degree murder, attempted murder, conspiracy to commit murder, and handgun offenses. The jury found the other petitioner guilty of conspiracy to murder and handgun offenses. Continue reading