Gun Crimes

Published on: October 25, 2024

School Board Adopts Emergency Crime Reporting Measures

The Maryland State Board of Education recently voted in favor an emergency measure designed to mandate school administrators be informed when a student has been convicted or charged with serious crime. The emergency measure came in response to a 17-year-old Howard County student being found with a loaded ghost gun in his backpack after he was arrested on a warrant for murder. School administrators from Howard County were not informed that this student had been previously accused of attempted murder in another unrelated case and was attending classes while wearing a GPS ankle monitor issued by the Department of Juvenile Services. This student transferred from Anne Arundel County schools to Howard High, and during the transfer process neither principal nor the Howard County superintendent were informed of the student’s criminal background. The student reportedly would not have been allowed to attend classes in person had administration known about his past.

Previous regulations gave the original school system discretion about what information to share with the new school system, but now the sharing is mandatory for serious offenses including robbery, carjacking and sex crimes. It took an alarming incident for changes to be implemented, and the Howard High community is still reeling from the recent events that began with a shooting outside of a Columbia office building on October 5. The defendant was arrested at Howard High 10 days after the shooting and charged as an adult with first degree murder. He will also face charges for possessing an illegal regulated firearm on school property. Police say the firearm was a ghost gun with no serial number and a large capacity magazine. These firearms are illegal for anyone to possess, and Maryland law prohibits large capacity magazines and anyone under the 21 from possessing a firearm. The Maryland Public Safety Code also prohibits anyone under the age of 30 with a qualifying record of juvenile delinquency from possessing a firearm.

In addition to the Board of Education coming under fire, there has also been an outcry of criticism directed toward the Department of Juvenile Services and its leadership. Concerned citizens are questioning why the 17-year-old student was out of custody in the first place, much less attending classes at a public high school. DJS seemed to deflect responsibility about reporting requirements to the police and the State’s Attorney’s Offices, who are required to report certain information to schools. They also noted that juveniles are detained by DJS when charged with certain high-risk category 1 offenses, but it is then the judge’s call whether to release or hold at a detention hearing on the next business day. Ultimately it is up to lawmakers to develop policy where decisions are not left up to DJS officials who can find themselves choosing between unlawful disclosure of juvenile records and protecting the public.

Continue reading →

Published on: September 19, 2024

State Police Arrest Woman in Armed Road Rage

By Benjamin Herbst

Maryland State Police troopers recently arrested a woman for allegedly pointing a gun from her BMW SUV at another motorist in Prince George’s County. The 37-year-old woman was arrested at her home the day after the alleged road-rage incident and charged with two counts of first-degree assault, one count of second-degree assault, use of a firearm in a crime of violence and loaded handgun in vehicle. She was held without bail by a District Court Commissioner but granted release on private home detention at her bail review in front of a judge. According to the MSP press release the woman allegedly pointed a firearm at another driver on Route 5 in PG County. The other driver apparently had a child in the vehicle at the time of the incident. Law enforcement officers were able to locate the suspect’s vehicle at her residence later that day and seized two loaded handguns from the BMW. MSP also stated that the woman attempted to destroy evidence by smashing her cell phone during a police interview, though she was not charged with obstruction of justice or tampering with evidence.

The defendant is set for a preliminary hearing in October at the Upper Marlboro District Courthouse. The preliminary hearing will likely not occur, as they rarely do in Prince George’s County. The State will likely nolle pros. the case on the preliminary date and then indict the matter in the circuit court. It does not appear that the defendant has any prior convictions in Maryland, so her defense lawyer may be able to argue for the felony assault to be dropped assuming the State can prove its case. The defendant must also focus on the charge for use of a firearm in a crime of violence, which is classified as a misdemeanor but carries a harsh 5-year mandatory sentence and a 20-year maximum penalty. The State and eventually the judge will certainly be concerned about the presence of firearms on a public highway and the fact that a child was inside the victim’s car. There may not be any direct proof that the gun was loaded at the time of the alleged assault, though the State may be able to establish this based on circumstantial evidence that it was loaded at the time police executed the search and seizure.

Under Maryland law a person can be charged with felony first-degree assault for causing or attempting to cause serious physical injury, strangling another person or committing an assault with a firearm. In firearm cases like this one, the defendant does not have to discharge the gun or use it to strike the victim to be charged. The only requirement is that the defendant commit a simple assault with a firearm, which can be any act that places the victim in fear of immediate harm. If you have been charged or are being investigated for assault or use of a firearm, contact Maryland gun crimes attorney Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in aggravated assault with a firearm, domestic assault, possession of a firearm by a disqualified person or convicted felon and use of a handgun in a crime. He is available on short notice for bail reviews in all Maryland counties and can file a motion to recall your arrest warrant or bench warrant if you have missed court. Contact Benjamin 7 days a week at 410-207-2598 and learn what defenses may be available in your Maryland gun charge.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 1, 2024

Maryland Teen Facing Five Cases Extradited from Michigan

By Benjamin Herbst

An 18-year-old Carroll County man with multiple outstanding arrest warrants was recently extradited from Michigan back to Maryland and is now being held in the Wicomico County Detention Center without bail. Additional charges have been filed since his return and now according to court records he has been charged with committing five criminal offenses in four separate counties on the same day. In Baltimore County the man is charged with multiple counts of rogue and vagabond and theft alleged to have occurred on May 30, which resulted in a Towson District Court judge issuing an arrest warrant. The alleged crime spree also ran its course on Eastern Shore where the man allegedly committed additional thefts from motor vehicles, disturbed the peace, and destroyed property. He was initially issued an arrest warrant out of Queen Anne’s County for rogue and vagabond, theft, malicious destruction of property and disorderly conduct, but now faces felony burglary and theft charges in another case with the same incident date. As he continued down Route 50 the man allegedly stopped in the Easton area to yet again commit more car burglaries resulting in a Talbot County District Court judge issuing another arrest warrant.

The apparent spree ended in Wicomico County where police allegedly located the man driving a stolen vehicle but were unable to apprehend him as he ditched his ride and fled into the woods. Shortly thereafter the suspect is accused of breaking into a nearby home and stealing a firearm and a truck. The resulting charges from his brief time in Salisbury include first degree burglary, felony theft, possession of a firearm by a minor, handgun in vehicle and motor vehicle theft. This set of charges resulted in the defendant being held without bond, while he was released on this own recognizance in the other three cases. The Wicomico case also likely played a role in the extradition process, as there is a chance he would not have been brought back to Maryland if the charges were limited to misdemeanor rogue and vagabond, theft and disorderly conduct. On the other hand, the fact that there were multiple warrants would likely have been motivation enough for someone from a Maryland law enforcement agency to make the trek to Michigan.

The story brings up a few interesting criminal law issues such as the complicated nature of extradition proceedings. All individuals who are arrested on an out of state warrant have the right to contest their detention and ultimate transfer back to the charging state, but doing so is almost certain to be a losing proposition. A defendant who contests the extradition process may end up serving additional time without receiving credit for the time served. Ultimately the only grounds that can be raised are whether there is a warrant and the defendant is actually the person who is sought. Defendants have no right to challenge the charges or even to attack the existence of probable cause. Contesting extradition is a lengthy process that only requires the state to produce a warrant signed by the governor. Hypothetically the state could fail to provide a Governor’s Warrant by the deadline (usually in the range of 90 days) and the defendant could be released but, in most cases, this is not a strategy worth exploring. This defendant had a short stay in Michigan, which means he almost certainly waived extradition upon being brought before a judge.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 24, 2024

Supreme Court Upholds Firearms Ban in Civil Domestic Cases

By Benjamin Herbst

The United States Supreme Court recently decided to uphold a federal statute that criminalizes gun possession for those subject to civil domestic violence court orders. In the 8-1 decision, the Court appeared to offer a looser interpretation of the gun rights afforded by the Second Amendment than the previous landmark ruling in New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. The opinion in Bruen cited our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation in striking down a New York law that previously required citizens to prove a need to obtain a concealed carry permit. In this recent opinion the Supreme Court said the appeals court incorrectly set our searching for a historical twin to the modern law prohibiting respondents in civil domestic violence orders from otherwise lawfully possessing firearms. Rather, the high court admonished the lower court for not for not looking for a historical equivalent that was readily available. Centuries old “going armed” laws banned gun possession for those thought to present a danger to others. Modern civil protective orders are granted in cases where a judge determines the respondent presents a danger to the petitioner, and thus the historical analogue mentioned in Bruen is satisfied.

The law at issue was 18 United States Code section 922, which is one of the most commonly prosecuted gun crimes in federal court. It allows federal prosecutors to charge convicted criminals, fugitives, those dishonorably discharged from the military, juveniles, drug users and the mentally ill with a crime for knowingly possessing a firearm. Subsection (g)(8) deals specifically with those who after being afforded a hearing have been ordered by a judge to refrain from harming or placing in fear a former spouse or intimate partner. Violation of this subsection is a serious felony offense that carries up to 15 years in prison, so even first-time offenders could potentially face a significant prison sentence without ever having been convicted of a crime in the past. We do not see a ton of cases being prosecuted under these circumstances due to the fact that many states have their own laws regarding gun possession by respondents in civil domestic cases. Maryland for example has strict laws regarding firearm possession by respondents in protective order cases. Anyone who is currently under a domestic violence protective order is prohibited from possessing a gun under Public Safety code section 5-133. A violation of this statute could lead to up to five years in prison and additional charges for violation of a protective order under family law section 4-509. Even those who are under a temporary protective order may be prohibited from possessing a firearm if the judge determines a firearm was used or there was a threat of serious bodily harm.

The fact that the law was upheld by the Supreme Court means the protective order subsections of the Maryland Family Law Article will not have to undergo major changes. Striking down the law would have required the legislature to change the language in a host of statues, but now it will be business as usual. Respondents in protective orders will almost always be forced to surrender their firearms after a temporary order is signed by a judge, and in all cases when a final order is effectuated. If you have a question about a protective order, contact Maryland domestic violence lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in domestic assault, protective order violations, peace orders, destruction of property, telephone misuse, harassment and all other state and federal crimes. Benjamin is also highly experienced in defending state and federal gun charges such as possession by a convicted felon or other disqualified individual, possession of a firearm at a federal facility and minor in possession of a firearm. He is available 7 days a week to discuss your case and is standing by to take on bail reviews and motions to recall bench warrants or arrest warrants on short notice. Call Benjamin at 410-207-2598 to discuss your case today.

Published on: March 21, 2024

Two Maryland Gun Laws Scrutinized in Federal Court

By Benjamin Herbst

While Maryland lawmakers are busy hamming out new legislation to send to the Governor for a signature two current state laws are under scrutiny in the United States Court of Appeals for the 4^th Circuit. These laws have been the subject of numerous headlines over the last few years, and now their Constitutionality is being put to the test. The first law is the Maryland Handgun Qualification program, which requires all citizens to obtain a license in order to purchase a handgun. The license, commonly known as an HQL, can only be obtained after a rigorous background check complete with fingerprinting and completion of a 4-hour gun safety class. As a result of these requirements, purchasers face a delay of weeks or even months before they can obtain a handgun. The HQL was originally struck down by a panel of three federal judges, but the State of Maryland filed for a rehearing and the program was brought back to life. The State Police never actually stopped enforcing the HQL program despite the original ruling declaring it unconstitutional back in November. Arguments are currently in progress, and a ruling could come down in a matter of weeks. Either side could potentially petition the Supreme Court of the United States to review an unfavorable decision, but at this stage if the law is struck down the HQL program would likely be shelved or scrapped completely.

The second law that is up for debate in the federal appeals court is the assault weapons ban that followed with the passage of the Firearms Safety Act of 2013. This debate is far more complex and involves a full examination of the history of the Second Amendment and the balance of gun rights against the dangers of military style weapons being readily available for purchase. Maryland criminal law section 4-301 provides the definition of an assault weapon per Maryland lawmakers. It lists more than 80 specific gun models including the infamous AK-47, Uzi semiautomatic pistol and AR-15 rifle. These weapons have been widely used on Hollywood movie sets and unfortunately in a host of real-life shootings. The problem with these weapons is not only their large capacity magazines but also their ability to fire numerous rounds within seconds. This ultimately reduces accuracy and places innocent bystanders at risk if the weapon falls into the wrong hands. A violation of the ban on possession of an assault rifle is currently a misdemeanor with a 3-year maximum penalty under 4-306 of the criminal code. If the assault rifle is used in a crime the penalty becomes up to 20 years with a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison. Use of a firearm in a crime does not require the State to prove that the gun was discharged.

The Blog will continue to follow each of these cases and will post a follow-up article when the courts have made their rulings. If you or a loved one has been charged with any criminal offense, contact Maryland gun possession lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin has successfully defended more than 200 clients in gun crimes ranging from possession of a firearm by a convicted felon or disqualified individual to unlawful wear, transport or carry of a firearm. He has represented out of state residents and juveniles charged as adults in cases involving possession of a firearm by a minor. He has successfully transferred numerous cases from adult court to juvenile court, and secured the release of his juvenile clients. Benjamin has also represented dozens of clients in federal court for gun possession at a federal facility such as the NIH or various miliary bases and has handled unlawful transfer of a firearm to an out of state individual. Contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation about your case at 410-207-2598.

Continue reading →

Published on: January 25, 2024

PG County Police Seize Firearms and Fentanyl

By Benjamin Herbst

Three men were arrested after Prince George’s County Police executed a search warrant at an apartment in Laurel. Police seized more than 3,000 fentanyl pills, cash and numerous weapons. One of the weapons was an AK-47 style semi-automatic machine gun. The main defendant, was recently charged by the State’s Attorney’s Office in a 20-count Circuit Court indictment, which includes eight felony counts. The charges include possession with intent to distribute narcotics, possession with intent to distribute fentanyl, firearm possession in a drug trafficking crime, CDS possession and machine gun aggressive purpose. The machine gun law under 4-405 of the Maryland criminal code is basically an enhanced statute that has double the maximum penalty of a possession of a typical firearm. While this law does not provide a mandatory minimum penalty, it does carry a 10-year maximum prison sentence upon conviction. For comparison, illegal possession of a regulated firearm under the Maryland public safety code and wear, transport and carry of a firearm both carry a 5-year maximum penalty.

Two of the defendants face numerous mandatory minimum sentences for firearm possession in a drug trafficking crime under Maryland criminal law 5-621. The focus of any criminal defense strategy typically begins with the crimes that carry mandatory jail time, as even the most lenient judges are unable to get around a mandatory sentence. After addressing the firearm drug trafficking charges, the focus will likely shift to the fentanyl possession with intent to distribute count. Under Maryland law, PWID fentanyl carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison, which is half the 20-year maximum penalty for PWID narcotics such as cocaine or heroin. On the other hand, the sentencing guideline offense score is significantly higher for a fentanyl charge than a standard narcotics charge. While this makes little logical sense, the fentanyl statute is newer, and rather than lower the maximum penalty for narcotics distribution (which always scare lawmakers) the legislature simply made a more reasonable and modern maximum penalty for the fentanyl charge.

The main defendant in this case will have to face trial in the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County, but he has another case to take care of first. Court records show that he pled guilty to a misdemeanor gun possession offense and a misdemeanor conspiracy to possess narcotics with intent to distribute back in 2022. He was originally in drug court, though it appears he was removed from drug court last week and will be sentenced on the original charges in March. The second co-defendant does not appear to have a prior criminal record in Maryland, though he hails from Washington D.C. Finally, the third co-defendant, a young man from Howard County, faces charges for drug possession, false statement to a law enforcement officer and machine gun aggressive purpose for this incident. He is currently being held without bail in Howard County for charges stemming from an alleged unrelated second degree assault and is scheduled to appear in the District Court for Prince George’s County in February.

Continue reading →

Published on: December 15, 2023

PG County Teenager Sentenced to 8 Years Federal Prison

By Benjamin Herbst

According to the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland a 19-year-old man from Greenbelt recently received an 8-year prison sentence in a multi count federal indictment. Following completion of the prison sentence, which is not parole eligible, the young defendant will be on three years of supervised release. Supervised release is the federal terminology for probation, and violation of supervised release can lead to an additional jail sentence. The case resolved by way of a guilty plea to illegal possession of a machinegun, possession with intent to distribute oxycodone and fentanyl and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Despite his young age, the defendant was already on probation in an unrelated Prince George’s County state court case and had been arrested and released on other state charges before being indicted in federal court. The press release from the USAO MD does not indicate whether the defendant had a juvenile criminal record, and at least some of the alleged criminal acts in the indictment occurred when he was just 18.

According to the facts recited by the government at the plea hearing the Prince George’s County Police began investigating the defendant back in the spring of 2022 for suspected firearm and drug trafficking offenses. The defendant allegedly advertised the sale of guns and narcotics through social media posts, which ultimately lead to the execution of a search warrant of his apartment. In preparation for the execution of the search warrant officers observed the defendant conduct a hand-to-hand transaction with an unidentified individual outside of the apartment. The defendant allegedly reached into a designer bag and handed the contents to the suspected customer. A short time later the defendant left his apartment with the same designer bag. Prince George’s County officers followed the suspect as he left in a rideshare vehicle, and conducted a traffic stop a short time later. After ordering the suspect out of the vehicle police observed a .40 caliber handgun with an obliterated serial number on the floor where he was sitting. Cops also recovered close to 300 counterfeit oxycodone pills containing fentanyl and $790 in cash. Despite these facts the defendant was released 12 days later at a bail review. Rather than stay on the straight and narrow, the defendant admitted in the plea that he continued to sell drugs and possess firearms.

Less than two months after the first arrest, and shortly after his 19^th birthday a PG County police officer in District Heights observed the defendant smoking marijuana on a sidewalk. The officer then observed the defendant discard an item behind a car and begin to walk away. This action obviously peaked the officer’s interest, and he exited his unmarked patrol car to have a closer look. The defendant then fled on foot but was apprehended a short time later. A search in the area revealed an AR-15 style ghost gun with a loaded 30 round magazine and a round in the chamber. Police also found two pill bottles that contained 5mg oxycodone pills and counterfeit oxy pills with a fentanyl mixture. The defendant was arrested and charged in Prince George’s County state court, but the charges were announced nolle prosequi in lieu of the federal indictment.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 29, 2023

State Police Enforcing HQL Despite Court Ruling

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland State Police recently issued an agency-wide memo instructing its employees to continue to uphold the HQL law, which was just declared unconstitutional by a panel of three federal judges last week in Richmond. Citing the infamous 2022 Supreme Court decision out of New York, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that Maryland’s Handgun Qualification License is overly burdensome and not consistent with historically accepted limitations on firearm purchases. Gun lobbyists from the NRA hailed the ruling as a major victory, while state officials including the Governor and the Mayor of Baltimore City expressed displeasure with the decision. When the ruling came down last week the Governor’s Office issued a statement expressing a desire to continue to fight for the HQL, but this week the Attorney General’s Office stated they are weighing their options. Enforcing the HQL despite the recent ruling may not end up being much of a story, as the decision has yet to become legally binding. The federal court has not issued a mandate yet and will not do so until 7 days after the 14-day window to request a rehearing has expired. If the State does not request a rehearing the mandate to strike down the HQL process would go into effect on December 11. The State could also seek review by the Supreme Court though based on the Bruen ruling out of New York it would be unlikely to prevail.

The Blog will continue to follow this exchange between the courts and a state that is predominantly anti-gun. Some lawmakers may try to circumvent this federal trend to loosen the state’s gun laws by introducing bills when the legislative session commences in January in Annapolis. While these bills can sometimes create a few news headlines for attention hungry members of the House or Senate, they will likely be shot down by more experienced members of the judiciary committees. Local politicians have already tried to circumvent state federal law by enacting county ordinances that restrict handgun possession beyond what state law allows. A recent opinion in the Montgomery County Circuit Court struck down a county ordinance that prohibited firearm possession within 100 yards of any public or private place of assembly including schools, daycare centers, libraries and businesses. The ordinance brashly attempted to start the measurement from the edge of the parking lots of these places, which would have restricted firearm possession of a licensed individual while traveling on a state highway. Another provision of this overturned law attempted to restrict possession of ghost guns by outlawing privately manufactured gun parts without serial numbers. Once again, this attempt to circumvent state and federal law was struck down by a judge for being overly broad and more restricted than state law.

January is shaping up to be an interesting month in Annapolis, and we will be providing updates on all the criminal law developments, including those aimed at banning ghost guns and making it more difficult to wear, transport and carry a firearm. If you or a loved one has been charged with a firearm crime, contact Maryland gun possession lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin vigorously defends adults and juveniles in all Maryland courts from the Eastern Shore to Western Maryland. He has won jury trials for offenses such as possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, use of a firearm in a crime of violence and possession of a firearm by a minor. Benjamin also specializes in warrant recall motions, bail review hearings for gun offenses and domestic crimes and is an experienced Maryland violation of probation attorney. Contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598 and learn what defenses may apply to your case.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 22, 2023

Federal Court Strikes Down HQL Law

By Benjamin Herbst

Roughly ten years ago Maryland lawmakers passed the Firearm Safety Act of 2013. For the last decade anyone who wished to purchase a handgun in Maryland was forced to apply to the State Police for Handgun Qualification License or HQL. There were several requirements for obtaining a HQL, with the first being eligibility to own and possess any type of firearm. In Maryland this meant the applicant must have been at least 21 years old and have no prior convictions for an offense that carried a maximum penalty of two years or more. Additionally, all Maryland HQL applicants must have completed a four-hour gun safety course that included firing an actual round and passing a background check. The background check mandated that the applicant be fingerprinted, and any prior criminal or domestic violence related cases that show up were be considered. There is no statute of limitations for prior convictions, as we have seen applicants denied for 40 and even 50-year-old criminal convictions. Once the State Police approved a person for an HQL, he or she would be permitted to purchase a handgun provided the appropriate federal ATF forms are also filled out properly. In Maryland an HQL did not give a purchaser the right to carry or transport a handgun or any firearm for that matter. A person who is caught driving with or carrying a firearm without a concealed carry permit will likely be arrested and charged regardless of whether they held a valid HQL. Possessing an HQL potentially helped in mitigation, but it was never a defense to a firearm possession charge.

Maryland Handgun Qualification Licenses have been much easier to obtain than wear and carry permits, but the 2022 Supreme Court decision in Bruen drastically turned the tide. These days in Maryland a large percentage of HQL holders were able to obtain a carry permit if they completed additional gun education and safety requirements. Lately we have received more calls about HQL denials than wear and carry permit denials, but as of this week we may never field a call about a HQL denial again. On Tuesday a federal appeals court struck down the entire HQL policy, and specifically called out the background check requirement that has forced law abiding gun purchasers to wait a minimum of one month before being able to obtain a handgun. The appeals court opined that the state failed to demonstrate any historical requirement that a citizen receive advance permission to purchase a firearm in Maryland. The court stated a person should be able to purchase a firearm if they feel they are in danger and being forced to wait 30 days or more is unacceptable. The wait time is exactly what supporters of the HQL policy have lauded as an effective tool in preventing gun violence. The Governor and the Mayor of Baltimore have expressed displeasure over the ruling, while the gun lobby is celebrating a major victory. Maryland is one of a dozen or so states that require gun purchasers to pass strict background checks, and this number could be zero within a year if the Supreme Court agrees with this decision out of the Richmond federal court.

The Blog will continue to follow this story as it will generate a ton of attention over the next few months. The legislature begins its session in January and there are bound to be reactive attempts to keep Maryland a strict gun law state. Federal courts can intervene when laws are deemed to restrict the Second Amendment, but the courts are generally not able to interfere with the harsh punishments that Maryland provides for gun offenders. Anyone caught carrying or transporting a firearm without a license in Maryland still faces arrest and potential jail time depending on where the offense took place. This includes federal property such as the NIH, CMS and the various military bases in Maryland where even state carry permits are not valid. With respect to state cases, Prince George’s County, Baltimore City and Charles County often attempt to hand down the harshest punishments for gun offenses, but each case is different and there is always a legal argument that can be made in a gun case. If you or a loved one has been charged with a gun offense contact Maryland criminal defense lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in Maryland gun crimes such as wear, transport and carry, possession by a prohibited person, minor in possession of a firearm and possession of a firearm at a federal facility. He is an experienced juvenile gun lawyer and has successfully argued for the dismissal of adult gun charges in state and federal court. Contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598 and learn how you may be able to fight your gun charge.

Published on: October 26, 2023

Minor Charged with Handgun Possession at School

By Benjamin Herbst

Montgomery County Police recently arrested a 17-year-old high school student for various firearm offenses after he was found in possession of a loaded 9mm handgun on the public school’s campus. The student, who lives in Bethesda, was charged with possession of a firearm by a minor, possession of a loaded handgun and possession of a dangerous weapon on school property. School security was tipped off by a fellow student, who apparently observed an object that looked like a gun in the defendant’s backpack while in the restroom. Montgomery County police officers confronted the suspect and ultimately performed a search that yielded the handgun. This all occurred around the same time that police were responding to two false bomb threats that locked other county schools down. Upon being arrested, the student was taken to the Montgomery County Detention Center and was held without bail. As a detained juvenile, his bail will likely be reviewed in two weeks if he is still in custody. In the meantime, he will be held in a secure juvenile facility. We are unable to track the progress of this case because the judiciary seals all juvenile cases from public view, but depending on his record and his representation, he may have a good chance at eventually facing trial in the juvenile court and avoiding an adult criminal record.

The student was charged as an adult because Maryland juvenile courts do not have original jurisdiction over gun crimes committed by defendants 16 or older. This includes all firearm offenses from misdemeanor possession of a firearm by a minor to felonies such as armed robbery and possession of a firearm in a drug trafficking crime. Other crimes that start in adult court include first degree assault, vehicle and boat offenses, robbery with a dangerous weapon and felony sex offenses. These cases may be transferred to juvenile court upon a motion that must be filed within 30 days. While a transfer motion is pending a detained juvenile defendant shall be held in a juvenile facility unless there is no space, and the Court finds the juvenile to be a danger. If the reverse waiver transfer motion is granted, the juvenile will immediately be scheduled for a detention hearing and may be released to his or her parents at that point.

Minors who are charged with gun offenses including misdemeanor unlawful firearm possession can, and often are, held in jail without bail in Maryland, which makes it extremely important to retain an experienced juvenile criminal defense lawyer. Judges from certain jurisdictions such as Baltimore City and Prince George’s County are less inclined to release juveniles with firearm charges due to the ongoing gun violence in the Baltimore and Washington D.C. metro areas. If your son or daughter has been arrested for a gun offense anywhere in the state, contact Maryland juvenile lawyer Benjamin Herbst 7 days a week for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in juvenile gun crimes and represents clients in all jurisdictions from the Eastern Shore to Western Maryland. He has extensive experience representing juveniles charged with minor in possession of a firearm, robbery and first-degree assault. Benjamin has obtained the release of clients at numerous juvenile bail reviews and has prevailed in reverse waiver hearings for serious felony offenses such as carjacking and armed robbery. He fights tooth and nail to protect his client’s futures from intake hearing to trial and to make sure they are home with their families and not placed in a state program. Contact Benjamin anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598 to discuss the defenses that may be available in your child’s case.

Continue reading →