Posted on September 28, 2010 in Criminal Defense

When persons under the age of 18 are criminally charged as adults in Maryland, the defendant has the right to ask the adult court to "waive" the defendant back to juvenile court. A successful waiver hearing could be life changing to a minor defendant.

Take, for example, the recent case of white supremacist Calvin Lockner. Lockner and two minors were recently arrested in a high-profile attack of a 77 year old black fisherman named James Privott. All three men were charged as adults. My client, Emmanuel Miller 16 and the other minor defendant Zachary Watson asked a Circuit Court Judge to transfer each of their cases from adult court to juvenile court. The court was persuaded by my argument and sent Miller’s case to juvenile court. Watson, who was represented by a different attorney, did not fair so well and is being prosecuted as an adult.

The effect on each of their lives is profound. Privott, for example, has agreed to a plea bargain of 31 years. My client Miller, on the other hand, will be provided social services, vocational training and educational services up to his 21st birthday. How his life turns out beyond that is any one’s guess, but there is hope. Because of a successful juvenile waiver hearing, this young man will not be warehoused for the next 30 years of his life.

When considering whether a case should be kept in adult court or juvenile court, a Maryland Circuit Court Judge will consider 5 factors:

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 27, 2010 in Driving Under the Influence

As an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney, friends are always asking me "how do I beat a DUI?" Ironically, this question most comes up during, you guessed it, cocktail parties. My first response is automatically "don’t drink an drive." Of course, no one wants to hear that response and the inevitably follow-up question is "seriously, what do I do if I am pulled over?"

This is a complex question, because the question of "what do I do?" begs the question of "how much did you have to drink?".

Assuming the answer is "allot" or "too much", the law allows for just about any Maryland driver to beat an otherwise certain DUI, albeit at a price (which we will get into later).

When an officer pulls over a Maryland driver, the driver is required to only provide a valid driver’s license and registration. Just because a driver has been pulled over, the driver is not required to speak. Imagine a situation where a police officer pulls over a driver for speeding. The driver cracks his window and hands the officer his license and registration. The officer suspects something is up and asked the driver if he is drinking, and the driver simply nods his head "no".

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 27, 2010 in Personal Injury

Often times Maryland lawyers who represent injured victims are faced with the real-world problem of collecting on an otherwise valid claim. This arises in situations where the plaintiff/ victim is injured by a person who does not have any assets or insurance. When the defendant causes the injury while working, the experienced plaintiff’s attorney will immediately look to recover (or collect) from the employer or his insurance policy. This is known as the doctrine of Respondent Superior.

Respondent Superior comes from the idea that where one of two innocent persons must suffer for the wrong of a third, it should be the one who enabled the third to do the wrong. In order to hold the employer liable for the injuries to a third person through the negligence of the employee the Plaintiff must show (1) that the employer had control or right of control over the employee; (2) that the action was within the scope of the employee’s employment; (3) the action was in furtherance of the employer’s business. It might also be necessary to show that the employer knew, or should have known of the need to control the employee.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 27, 2010 in Personal Injury

To sustain an award of punitive damages in tort cases in the District of Columbia, the plaintiff must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant committed a tortious act, and by clear and convincing evidence that the act was accompanied by conduct and a state of mind evincing malice or its equivalent. Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Breeden, 665 A.2d 929, 938 (D.C.1995). The Standardized Civil Jury Instructions for the District of Columbia, No. 16.01[1], provides that the jury "may award punitive damages only if the plaintiff has proved with clear and convincing evidence:

(1) that the defendant acted with evil motive, actual malice, deliberate violence or oppression, or with intent to injure, or in willful disregard for the rights of the plaintiff; and

(2) that the defendant’s conduct itself was outrageous, grossly fraudulent, or reckless toward the safety of the plaintiff."

Croley v. Republican Nat’l Comm., 759 A.2d 682, 695 (D.C.2000) (quoting Standardized Civil Jury Instructions for the District of Columbia, No. 16-1 (1998 ed.)); see also United Mine Workers of Am., Int’l v. Moore, 717 A.2d 332, 341 (D.C.1998).

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 27, 2010 in Criminal Defense

I have represented both businesses and individuals before the Maryland Securities Commissioner on both civil and criminal charges stemming from selling unregistered securities. Most are under the impression that these enforcement actions by the Commissioner are civil in nature. Although this is most often the case, a criminal prosecution could result as well.

Selling unregistered securities or acting as an unregistered sales agent in Maryland is potentially punishable both with fines and imprisonment. Such penalties are contained in Title 11, the Maryland Securities Act, in the Corporations and Associations Article of the Maryland Code rather than the Criminal Law Article. Criminal penalties, however, are only likely to be imposed when a person willfully violates a provision of the Maryland Securities Act or an order of the Attorney General Securities Commission. MD. CODE., CORPS. & ASS’NS § 11-705. The statute specifically points out that "a person may not be imprisoned for the violation of any rule or order if the person proves that the person had no knowledge of the rule or order." MD. CODE., CORPS. & ASS’NS § 11-705(a)(3).

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 20, 2010 in Criminal Defense

As a Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorney I have written frequently about the critical importance choosing the right lawyer if you find yourself charged with a serious felony. As I have noted in the past there are many lawyers out there who are primarily domestic or accident lawyers or have other specialties who occasionally take on a criminal case very often with tragic results for the client. These bad results for the client are usually the result of inexperience and lack of expertise by lawyers who don’t regularly operate in the criminal realm. These lawyers should not take these cases but the simple fact is that they do.

I don’t mean to impugn the integrity of these lawyers as I’m sure that they have convinced themselves that they are in fact qualified to handle criminal cases and may even have successfully resolved the majority of the few criminal cases they have handled. But it only takes one mistake to have devastating consequences on your life if that mistake is made on your case. I handled a domestic violence assault and handgun case in Baltimore County Circuit Court recently that illustrates this reality in rather stark terms. Here are the facts:

My client was driving in an automobile with his girlfriend one day when they got into a very heated argument. She pulled the car over and they both got out of the car to continue the argument. At some point she struck him in the head with an unknown object causing a laceration to his head. Shortly after this occurred a Maryland State Police Officer pulled up behind the car to investigate why it was stopped on the side of a pretty busy thoroughfare. The police officer did not witness an assaultive conduct by either party. What he saw was my client bleeding rather profusely from a recent head wound.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 17, 2010 in Criminal Defense

https://www.silvermanthompson.com/lawyer-attorney-1300820.html Aggressive Maryland Criminal Attorneys handle a wide variety of criminal cases. Among the most common types of cases we see are domestic violence or family violence assaults. Prosecutors and Police categorize a case as domestic violence if it involves people who are involved in a romantic relationship whether or not they are married or children.

As noted, these cases are increasingly common in the District and Circuit courts primarily because the police and prosecutors have become increasingly aggressive over the past few years in investigating, charging and prosecuting these matters. In many cases by the time these matters make it to court the parties have reconciled and the alleged victim will not cooperate with the authorities in the prosecution of the case. In other cases the alleged victim exaggerates or even fabricates the incident entirely because of some other motivation such as child custody or simple revenge. I tried a case falling into this latter category this week in the District Court for Baltimore County. Here are the facts:

My client is a 22 year old man with no prior criminal record or history of domestic abuse. At the time of the incident he was living with his girlfriend and their 1 year old daughter as well as her five year old son from a previous relationship. He came home one evening after work to find the house in a state of disarray as well as the children to be dirty and hungry. His girlfriend was talking on the telephone and essentially ignored him when he entered the home. Needless to say this made him a little angry.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 10, 2010 in Personal Injury

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress is very difficult to establish under Maryland personal injury law.

In order to prove a prima facie case of IIED in Maryland, the Plaintiff must show:

1. That the conduct was intentional or reckless;
2. The conduct is extreme and outrageous;
3. There is a causal connection between the wrongful conduct and the emotional distress;
4. The emotional distress is severe.

To meet the fourth element, the emotional distress must be "severely disabling," such that "no reasonable man could be expected to endure it." Being "upset" and "embarrassed" is not sufficient to show severe emotional distress. Evidence that the Plaintiff could continue with his normal life activities or that he did not seek professional treatment can show that the distress is not "severe."

In Green v. Shoemaker, the Maryland Court of Appeals determined that a plaintiff cannot recover for emotional distress unless a "physical injury" results from the tort. Later, the court expanded a "physical injury" to include injuries "manifested by an external condition or by symptoms clearly indicative of a resultant pathological, physiological, or mental state." The physical injury can be proven through evidence of an "external condition or by symptoms of a pathological or physiological state." Also, it can be proven through evidence that indicates a "mental state." However, medical testimony is not required in order to show mental distress.

For more information on Maryland Personal Injury law and Maryland tort law, please contact us for a complimentary consultation.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 10, 2010 in Personal Injury

Many savvy corporations and other entities in Maryland are slyly slipping in arbitration clauses in agreements between parties. Many times these arbitration clauses force victims of personal injury to forgo their right to a jury trial and and undergo binding arbitration. Many times consumers do not even realize what they have agreed to because the arbitration clause is buried in the fine print of a document or contract.

History of Arbitration in Maryland:

In 1973, the Maryland Legislature adopted the Maryland Uniform Arbitration Act (hereinafter, "MUAA"). See MD. CODE ANN. CRTS. & JUD. PROC. §§ 3-201, et seq. (West 2010). Arbitration is the process whereby parties voluntarily agree to substitute a private tribunal (e.g. the arbitrators) for the public tribunal (e.g. the courts) otherwise available to them. Gold Coast Mall, Inc. v. Larmar Corp., 298 Md. 96, 103, 468 A.2d 91, 95 (1983). Parties may agree to arbitrate disputes pursuant to a contract between them, commonly known as an Arbitration Agreement. Id.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 10, 2010 in Criminal Defense

Maryland criminal defense attorneys are seeing more prosecutions involving the exploitation of vulnerable adults. Section 8-801 of the Maryland Code Annotated, Criminal Law provides for a criminal action against a person who exploits a vulnerable adult. The elements are:

1. The victim is a vulnerable adult
a. A vulnerable adult, as defined in § 3-604 of the Criminal Law Article is an adult who lacks the physical or mental capacity to provide for the adult’s daily needs.
b. § 8-801(b)(2) prohibits exploitation of an individual who is "at least 68 years old" and does not appear to require the victim in this case to be classified as a "vulnerable adult"
2. The defendant knew or should have known that the victim was a vulnerable adult 3. The defendant knowingly and willfully obtained possession to the victim’s property by deception, intimidation, or undue influence, and a. Undue influence does not include the normal influence that one member of a family has over another member of the family, but means domination and influence amounting to force and coercion such that the vulnerable adult of individual over 68 years old was prevented from exercising free judgment and choice.
b. Deception is defined in § 7-101 and states that deception occurs when "a person knowingly either creates or confirms in another a false impression that the offender does not believe to be true or fails to correct a false impression that the offender previously has created or confirmed.
4. The defendant intended to deprive the victim of her property.

Continue Reading ››