Posted on January 29, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Any experienced criminal attorney in Maryland will tell you that the answer to this question is yes, at least in cases where the State has evidence other than the testimony of the alleged victim. In fact, in a non-domestic violence assault case that was recently decided by the Court of Appeals, Edmund v. State, the Court held that the State need not even identify the victim by name. The only requirement, according to the COA is that the victim be "substantially identified". http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2007/94a06.pdf In the Edmund case, which incidentally I tried in the Baltimore County Circuit Court for the trial of this case, the defendant was alleged to have fired 5 shots from a handgun at nearly point blank range at a man whom the defendant claimed had been bullying him for some time. Remarkably, the victim was apparently not hit and he fled the scene. The police canvassed the area and checked the local hospitals with negative results. The police recovered the gun and shell casings and my client and his brother (a correctional officer) both gave written statements describing the incident. My client was indictment on attempted first degree murder, first degree assault and various handgun offenses.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 28, 2009 in Medical Malpractice

A Las Vegas jury has awarded a woman $1.5 million in a failure to diagnose cancer medical malpractice case. The woman, a 24-year-old mother, had found blood in her stool and kept having pain when she went to the bathroom. She went to local doctor who repeatedly told her that she was just suffering from hemorrhoids. Seven months after she visited the doctor, she was rushed to the emergency room because of major pain. Shortly after that, she was diagnosed with colon and rectal cancer. She died in 2007 at the age of 27.

A jury found that the doctor violated the standard of care and awarded the woman’s family $2.5 million. It is thought to be the largest medical malpractice verdict there since 2004.
The woman’s family argued that if she’d been properly diagnosed when she first visited the doctor, her chances of surviving the cancer would have been 97 percent, but because of the malpractice, her chances dropped to 50 percent by the time she was diagnosed. The family also claimed that the woman likely would be alive today if doctors had diagnosed her cancer earlier. Instead, before she died, the woman went through chemotherapy and major surgery, including the removal of her uterus and part of her lower intestines.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 16, 2009 in Driving Under the Influence

Maryland DUI Attorney. I had a somewhat interesting DUI/DWI case with a client who was repeat offender yesterday in the District Court for Baltimore County. My client, who is from West Virginia, was charged with DUI and DWI. The facts of the case were that he was travelling Westbound on Pulaski Highway in Baltimore County, Maryland at approximately 12:15AM on the morning of September 12, 2008. He and a friend were visiting other friends in Maryland and were staying at a motel on Pulaski Highway. They had gone out to dinner and then to a "Gentleman’s Club" and were returning back to the motel.

The motel was located on the East side of Pulaski Highway which is a divided four lane road with two lanes in each direction and a cement barrier separating the lanes. My client and his friend were not intimately familiar with the area and it was dark. They inadvertently passed by the motel and had to proceed approximately a half mile further West on Pulaski to reach the first break in the median. Here, there was a dedicated left turn lane and no signs prohibiting either a left turn or a u-turn.

Because my client did not see any other cars in the area he did not utilize his turn signal prior to executing the legal u-turn. Unfortunately for him, a police officer was behind them. According to the police officer, he had his headlights on but was approximately 300 feet behind my client’s vehicle at the time my client executed the u-turn. According to my client and his passenger, the police officer did not have his headlights on and they never saw him until he activated his emergency equipment.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 14, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Driving on a Suspended License is one of the most common charges that causes people to appear in the District Court in Maryland. I appear as a criminal defense attorney almost on a daily bases in these cases. Many first offenders are surprised to find out that a person can actually go to jail for driving while suspended, even if suspended for what seems to be a relatively minor reason. Before I get into what a person should do prior to court if they are charged with driving while suspended in Maryland, let me first describe the most common reasons why a person’s license might be suspended and the penalties associated with each type.

By far the most common reason that a person may end up having his license suspended is for failure to appear in the District Court for a minor traffic violation. Anyone who has ever been to minor traffic court knows that many people fail to appear for their court date. When someone fails to appear in court, even for something as minor as a seat belt ticket, the Motor Vehicle Administration is notified and the person’s license is suspended. In Maryland the maximum penalty for driving while suspended for this reason is 60 days in jail and a fine of $500. A person’s license can also be suspended for failing to pay a fine or failing to appear in court for a ticket received in another state. This did not used to be the case. It used to be that the person’s privilege would only be suspended in the state in which that person failed to pay the fine. Today under what is known as the Interstate Compact, the state in which the person is licensed will be notified of the failure to pay the fine or of the failure to appear in court by the state where the violation occurred and the person’s license is suspended.

Probably the next most common reason that people have their licenses suspended is for failure to pay child support. After that, accumulation of points, conviction of an alcohol related offense and failure to pay a civil judgment related to an automobile accident are the probably the most common reasons that a person’s license can be suspended. These violations are considered more serious and carry a maximum penalty of one year and a fine of $1000. Repeat offenders can receive up to 3 years under certain circumstances if the state files for enhanced penalties. A person who has medical issues such as seizures or who has multiple alcohol related offenses may have his or her license suspended indefinitely by the Medical Advisory Board.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 07, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Rarely does a day go by during which I don’t have one of my clients or potential clients complain of police brutality or excessive force by the police. In fact, the opposite is almost true. That is it is rare these days when clients tell me that the police effected their arrests in a professional and respectful manner and without resorting to the use of unnecessary excessive force.

So it came as no surprise to me to read in today’s edition of USA Today a survey of 315 emergency room physicians found that an astounding 98% percent of them believed that some of their patients had been the victims of excessive force at the hands of the police. Think about that – 98%? You can’t get 98% of people in a survey to agree that the Earth is round and here we have almost unanimity amongst a large group of emergency physicians across the country that the police use and more often than not, get away with using, excessive force.

Of course the police deny that excessive force is widespread and actually challenge whether the doctors could know if excessive force was used without having witnessed the encounters. I don’t know, but I’m going to guess that emergency room doctors have seen enough injuries working day in and day out in the emergency room to be able to tell the difference.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 06, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Theft is one of the most common crimes, if not the most common, charged in Maryland and tried by Maryland Criminal Attorneys. Excluding complicated fraud and white collar thefts, most of these cases are run of the mill in terms of the facts, the law and the outcome and rarely pose much of an intellectual challenge for the attorneys handling the case. I had a theft case this morning, however, in Baltimore City Circuit Court that had a rather unique issue that posed a bit of a challenge and made the case much more interesting that the average theft case. First the law.

There are only two elements to the crime of theft and they are both simple and logical. The elements are that property must be taken from another and that it must be taken with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of that property. The issue in the case went to element number two, whether or not my client intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property in question. The specific issue involved, and was ultimately resolved upon, a somewhat arcane legal concept known as asportation. Essentially what it means is that there must be an attempt by a would be thief to carry the property away from the area where the property was originally taken in order to complete the crime of theft. In other words it is not sufficient for the State to prove that the alleged thief merely took possession of the property that did not belong to him without the permission of the owner; there is the additional requirement that the State prove that the alleged thief moved the property from its original location or at least made an attempt to do so. More on the law in a moment but first, here are the facts of the case:

On July 3rd, 2008 my client was out with 3 friends, one male and two female, in the Canton area of Baltimore City. It was after 2:00pm when my client and his friends encountered the alleged victim and her friends on Boston Street. For unknown reasons a verbal altercation began between the female members of the two parties. In short order the verbal altercation became physical between the women. The men in both parties entered the scuffle and a few punches were thrown between them resulting in no real injury to anyone. At some point during the scuffle the alleged victim dropped her purse to the ground. My client picked the purse up and said something to the effect of " I should take your s*#!" or "I’m gonna take your s*#!". At this point two of the alleged victim’s male friends took the purse back from my client and that essentially ended the altercation.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 11, 2008 in Medical Malpractice

A federal judge in a federal tort claims act case involving medical malpractice has ordered the U.S. government to pay $8.6 million in damages due to an air force base doctor’s misdiagnosis of flesh-eating bacteria. In 2002, the woman went to the base emergency room for pain and swelling in her right arm. Court documents say that the doctor believed the woman was an addict looking for prescription drugs and told her to go home and take Motrin. Weeks later, the woman was diagnosed with necrotizing fasciitis or flesh-eating bacteria. A bench trial was held in August. In a decision late last month, the judge faulted the doctor and wrote that the woman suffers continuous, debilitating pain. A copy of an article regarding the case can be found here.

I have successfully handled a number of medical malpractice / medical negligence / medical error cases in Baltimore and other counties in Maryland involving a failure to timely diagnose and treat infections. Cases against the U.S. government are always more difficult because they must be brought under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which means that they get tried before a judge and not a jury.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 09, 2008 in Criminal Defense

Many people with certain "old" convictions in other states often ask if he/she has a legal requirement to register in Maryland under the current sexual offender registration laws. As former prosecutors and current defense attorneys, we are very familiar with the issue. Often times persons who were required to register in other states are not required to register in Maryland.

Criminal Procedure Subtitle 7 Registration of Certain Offenders provides that citizens of Maryland do not have to register for offenses committed before July 1, 1997. This is also confirmed by case law. The statute specifically holds that out of state offenders who committed their offense before July 1, 1997 must still register. This provision treats out of state offenders differently then in state offenders violating Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution. The Interstate Privilege and Immunities Clause.

If he had committed this act in the State of Maryland he would not have to register. This is discussed in the editors note to Criminal Procedure § 11-704.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 09, 2008 in Medical Malpractice

The medical malpractice lawyers at Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White, LLC handle medical malpractice cases throughout the mid-Atlantic region. As a service to our colleagues who are considering filing a plaintiff’s action in North Carolina, we are publishing the following on key areas of the law:

A. Statute of Limitations:
Medical malpractice suits must be brought within three years from the date of the last act of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action or within one year of the date when the injury was or should have been discovered, but not more than four years from the date of the last act of defendant giving rise to the cause of action. N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 1-15 and 1-52(16) (1996). Foreign object cases must be brought within one year from the date of discovery, but no longer than ten years from the date of the occurrence. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-15 (1996). Wrongful death actions based on alleged medical malpractice must be brought within the foregoing period or within two years from death, whichever is shorter. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-53 (1996).

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 05, 2008 in Medical Malpractice

Los Angeles County has finally acknowledged for the first time in a medical malpractice case that a woman who died shortly after writhing in pain for nearly an hour on the waiting room floor of a county hospital been saved if she had been properly treated. The woman was captured on security videotape as a janitor mopped around her and a triage nurse dismissed her complaints early one morning in May 2007. The woman’s death helped precipitate the closure of the hospital’s emergency room and inpatient care after federal regulators determined that staffers had failed to deliver a minimum standard of care.

The woman’s boyfriend, who had accompanied her to the emergency room and called 911 from a nearby pay phone after no one would help, recently was offered a $250,000 settlement by county supervisors. A separate lawsuit against the county filed by her adult children could potentially prove far more costly and is considered more likely to go to trial. The children have asked for $1 million for each minute she was denied treatment — $45 million in all.

Continue Reading ››