Articles Posted in Evidence

You’ll hear the phrase “he said she said” come up a lot in relation to certain types of court cases. Many times, it might be a family court matter. Other times, though, it’s a criminal case, especially when the alleged crime is sexual in nature. When you’re on trial in one of these kinds of cases, credibility is key… does the jury believe what you said, or do they believe the alleged victim? There are lots of ways that experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyers have of procuring evidence that will bolster your credibility, diminish the accuser’s credibility and give you the fairest possible trial.

Take, as an example, the case of R.G., a man on trial for rape in Montgomery County. At around 5:00 pm on Oct. 8, 2018, R.G. and the alleged victim met up and traveled together to his home. At the residence, the pair consumed tequila. By 7:15 am the next morning, the woman awoke in R.G.’s bed, naked and allegedly experiencing a great deal of pain in her genital area.

The prosecution’s theory of the incident was that the accused had manipulated the woman into drinking to excess, may also have laced a lime wedge with a “date-rape” drug, then proceeded to rape the woman repeatedly in an extremely violent and savage manner.

Continue reading →

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.

Continue reading →

If you’re familiar enough with policing, you know that a significant number of criminal arrests start out as traffic stops. Some law enforcement officers, armed only with their own intuition, will do their very best to concoct a reason to make a traffic stop because they believe they can get substantial proof of a crime… if they can just get you pulled over. Many times, though, these kinds of traffic stops are violations of the Fourth Amendment. If you’ve been arrested as a result of an improper traffic stop, you may be able to get all the evidence the police seized tossed, but you’ll have to win a suppression argument to do it. When it comes to this and other critical elements of your criminal trial, make sure you have the legal representation you need from an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer.

Most people are aware of the broad stereotype that people under the influence of marijuana drive very slowly. Comedic actor Tommy Chong once remarked, “Everybody worries about driving when you’re stoned. No! Not gonna hurt anybody going five miles an hour!” Law enforcement officers are aware of this, too.

As a recent drug crimes case demonstrates, though, just driving very slowly down a highway does not, by itself, amount to the required degree of “reasonable articulable suspicion” that the constitution requires in order for a police officer to make a traffic stop.

Continue reading →

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.

Continue reading →

If you watch enough courtroom movies or TV shows then you’ve likely seen the following scene or something like it: Our star, an intrepid attorney, has unearthed enormously helpful evidence but it is not admissible. Then the other side makes an ill-considered comment or asks an unfortunate (for them) question. Our protagonist seizes the moment and moves to admit the key evidence. When the other side objects, our intrepid advocate confidently counters, “Your Honor, they opened the door!” and gets the proof before the jury. Of course, real life is often much more complex than TV dramas and movies, but being able to use (or to block) an “opening the door” argument can be extremely important to your real-life case. When it comes to getting all of your best evidence admitted at trial, you don’t need a gifted actor; you need a skilled Maryland criminal defense attorney advocating for you.

So what exactly does “opening the door” look like… and not look like? A recent felony case that originated in Howard County helps us see. Police, who were investigating a string of burglaries and a robbery in late 2018, searched a Columbia home three times.

Ultimately, after finishing their searches and collecting evidence, the state charged R.D. with, among other things, armed robbery. At trial, the accused man admitted that he lied to the police about where he lived but said he did so to protect the woman who eventually became his wife. The prosecution then set about questioning R.D. about a “whole bunch of stolen goods and” property the police found inside the residence.

Continue reading →

Television has a major impact on how many people view the world, including the world of criminal justice. Of course, police procedural TV shows represent creative minds’ artistic interpretation of a crime scene investigation, a police interrogation, or a criminal trial. While that’s true, there still may be opportunities to use certain knowledge jurors have absorbed from TV shows to create reasonable doubt in your criminal trial. As with any aspect of your defense, a skilled Maryland criminal defense attorney can help you advance your case in the most effective way possible.

One of the more influential shows of the last few decades is “CSI: Crime Scene Investigation” and its spinoffs. In the “CSI” shows, the stars often solve cases and identify wrongdoers through fingerprints, DNA, and other forensic evidence.

Sometimes, in a Maryland criminal trial, the prosecution’s case against the defendant may have a noticeable absence of “forensic or scientific techniques often featured in police procedural television shows.” This absence may, of course, allow the defense to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of the jurors about the strength of the state’s case. To combat this, Maryland law allows trial judges to issue what’s called “anti-CSI effect” jury instructions.

Continue reading →

Events from outside Maryland have once again placed into the national spotlight the issues of police stops of citizens and the bases the police use for initiating an encounter with someone. One important thing to know is that, in this state, the police must have a legitimate basis for stopping you and, if they lack that legitimate reason, then any potentially incriminating evidence they find on you may be excluded from your criminal trial. An experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer can help you succeed in these kinds of evidence suppression and other critical arguments.

Here in Maryland, there is strong caselaw upholding citizens’ freedom from being accosted and searched by the police without a reasonable basis. The police still cross that line, though, which is why it is necessary to have skilled legal counsel on your side to get wrongfully seized evidence thrown out when you stand trial.

A weapons and drugs case from Baltimore illustrates this well. In October 2018, a Baltimore police officer was patrolling a mall when he noticed J.M., who had on “slim fitted cargo shorts.” Inside one of the pockets, J.M. had something large that “appeared to slide back and forth.” J.M. allegedly was walking with a stiff right arm to help keep the object inside the pocket from moving. J.M. also allegedly tapped his pocket occasionally “as if to make sure” the object was still there.

Continue reading →

When you are on trial for drug crimes or weapons charges, there’s a realistic chance that the primary evidence the state intends to use against you was obtained by a police search conducted without a warrant. The state will inevitably attempt to argue that the evidence is admissible under one or more of the exceptions to the general rule against warrantless searches but, sometimes, that argument is deficient, and there is no constitutionally permissible basis for the warrantless search in your case. When that happens, it is critical to have a skillful Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side to get that evidence excluded from your case.

One of the exceptions to the rule against warrantless searches is something called the “community caretaking” exception. This exception recognizes that the police wear multiple hats. Not only do their job duties include obtaining evidence to use against criminal suspects, but also ensuring public safety. It is important to recognize, however, that a police officer’s public safety duties do not give them carte blanche to do whatever they want in terms of conducting a search. If they do a search that goes beyond what is necessary to ensure safety, then the exception will not cover the evidence they find.

A recent drug case from Frederick was a good example. A police officer responded to an apartment building at 2:00 a.m. after a 911 call and a potential domestic disturbance. In the apartment, the officer encountered a man and a woman. Later, a second officer arrived as back-up. At that time, the woman disclosed that her children were in the apartment.

Continue reading →

If you’re on trial, one thing you may find exceptionally intimidating is when the prosecution puts on a scientific expert witness to testify. You may fear that the jury will give great importance to what this person says and, if his/her testimony seems to indicate that you’re guilty, then the jury will say so, too. However, what if there was a way to keep the jury from hearing anything at all from this expert witness? There is and, with the help of a skilled Maryland criminal defense attorney, you too may be able to accomplish it and reap the benefits of a stronger defense as a result.

One way to block the prosecution from putting an expert witness’s testimony before a jury lies within something called Rule 5-702. That’s a rule of evidence that says that all expert testimony must have “a sufficient factual basis … to support” it and, if not, then you are entitled to make a motion objecting to the expert, and the trial judge should exclude that expert’s evidence.

A recent murder case illustrates how this process works. K.M. was on trial in connection with the deaths of two people shot multiple times at close range.

Continue reading →

Chances are pretty high that you’re rarely heard the phrase “statement against penal interest,” if you’ve heard it at all. Chances are also very, very high that your knowledgeable Maryland criminal defense attorney knows exactly what this is and how to use it.

A “statement against penal interest” is one of the exceptions to the general rule of evidence that says hearsay statements are not admissible at trial. That’s a big deal because if you can establish that a statement meets the criteria of this exception, you can use an otherwise inadmissible piece of evidence at trial to strengthen your defense.

An example of this kind of statement might be an ex-girlfriend who testifies, “He told me he killed that old couple.” As you can see from that example, the “statement against penal interest” exception is something that often will be used by the prosecution. Sometimes, though, as a recent case highlights, this kind of statement can be a helpful element of an accused person’s defense.

Continue reading →

Contact Information