Uncategorized

Published on: March 1, 2025

Lawmakers Debate Juvenile Justice Bill

Juvenile justice reform continues to be a hot button issue in Annapolis, as lawmakers recently debated measures to decrease the number of cases where minors are charged as adults. In previous legislative sessions gun laws and marijuana dominated the criminal justice headlines, but state policy on these topics is somewhat settled for now. Juvenile justice however is a fluid issue, with strong arguments coming from both sides. Last year numerous State’s Attorney’s Offices lobbied for decreasing the age of juvenile criminal jurisdiction for certain non-violent crimes from 13 to 10. That law passed and went into effect in October. Now Public Defenders and other lobbyists from around the state are seeking to eliminate the direct filing of adult charges for 16 and 17-year-old juveniles in many offenses, including some violent felonies. If the bill passes these teens would be charged in juvenile court and then see a magistrate judge for a detention hearing rather than a bail review. Their cases would then be on the juvenile timeline, which is generally much quicker than an adult case.

Senate Bill 422 seeks to increase the juvenile court’s jurisdiction over 16 and 17-year-olds who are charged with numerous crimes such as robbery, firearm possession and assault in the first degree. Current Maryland law requires teens in this age group to be charged as adults if they are arrested for these crimes and others such as third-degree sexual offense, attempted robbery and all crimes involving possession or the use of a firearm. These juveniles are arrested and booked into the adult jail facilities pending a bail review, and many are initially held without bail. Juveniles held without bail have the opportunity to request detention in a secure juvenile facility, but transfer could take several days. A large percentage of these direct filed cases end up in juvenile court by agreement of the attorneys or if the judge grants a motion for reverse waiver to juvenile court, but this process could take several months.

An experienced juvenile criminal defense lawyer should file for the reverse waiver immediately upon being retained, but there are still unavoidable delays in setting matter for a hearing. The Department of Juvenile Services must first complete a study and provide this information to the Court. DJS often fails to meet the deadlines imposed by the Court, and in some jurisdictions DJS completes the study but the hearing is set way down the road. On average, juveniles charged as adults will wait about 5 months for cases to be resolved or transferred to juvenile courts. Those in favor of changing the law argue that this 5-month wait costs the state millions of dollars due to the high cost per day of detaining a juvenile and the slow nature of the transfer process. This argument does not factor in the percentage of juveniles who are released pending a waiver transfer hearing.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 25, 2024

New Juvenile Justice Law in Effect

By Benjamin Herbst

Juvenile crime was a hot topic during the last Maryland legislative session, and a controversial criminal law from that session is now in effect. Since 2022 with the passage of juvenile justice reform, juveniles under the age of 13 were not permitted to be charged with a crime unless it was an offense classified as a crime of violence under Maryland law. Crimes of violence include carjacking, robbery, assault in the first degree and attempted murder. Rather, these children were required to be immediately released to a guardian upon being arrested, and in many cases there were children who the police knew were involved in crimes but never arrested due to their age. Those lobbying for change argued that older children would frequently induce their younger friends, neighbors and classmates to commit crimes for them. This included a dramatic spike in car thefts in Baltimore City and County that gained nationwide media exposure after a child was accused of upwards of ten motor vehicle thefts without being charged for a single one. Younger children, like this child, were thus placed in more harm than exposure to the juvenile system could ever cause. Lawmakers agreed and passed legislation that lowered the minimum age to for when a child could be charged for certain non-violent offenses to 10.

The list of crimes includes handgun possession and other firearm offenses, felony animal cruelty and certain sex offenses such as sex offense in the third degree. Other modifications to the existing juvenile justice policy include adding a provision that requires respondents in juvenile delinquency cases to be placed on GPS monitoring if released from detention on a felony. Juveniles facing misdemeanor charges will not be permitted to be detained unless the offense involves firearm possession or in cases where the juvenile has a history of more than two delinquency findings. Respondents who are charged with motor vehicle theft may also be summoned to appear in court for CINA proceedings where DJS could be ordered to intervene in the child’s home life.

Juvenile justice reform has been a highly controversial topic since the pandemic, as certain juvenile offenses have skyrocketed over the last few years. Carjacking, firearm possession and motor vehicle theft continue to receive the most attention, but overall juvenile complaints rose 75% from 2021 to 2023. Firearm offense numbers are particularly alarming, as reports indicate juvenile handgun violations are up more than 200%.

Continue reading →

Published on: October 3, 2024

Maryland Man Arrested for Carjacking, Dog Theft

By Benjamin Herbst

A Montgomery County man was arrested over the weekend in North Carolina after he allegedly stole an 87-year-old Veteran’s car with his dog inside. Reports indicate that the defendant forcibly took the victim’s keys from his pocket before stealing his car and dog from the parking lot of a Pennsylvania retail store. Pennsylvania authorities charged the defendant with carjacking and theft and had been searching for him for over a week before he surfaced more than 500 miles away. North Carolina authorities received a call about a suspicious Ford Focus with Pennsylvania plates and as they encountered the suspect vehicle it become clear that the car was stolen. After attempting a traffic stop the defendant sped away, allegedly reaching speeds of more than 100 mph on Interstate 95 before crashing from police executed a PIT maneuver. The PIT maneuver is also known as tactical vehicle intervention and is an effective but controversial method for police to disable a fleeing vehicle by forcing it into a spin. Luckily there were no injuries from the high-speed chase, but North Carolina officers did allege the defendant intentionally rammed a police vehicle. As a result, the defendant was charged with assault with a deadly weapon along with felony hit and run and reckless driving. He is currently incarcerated in North Carolina and will eventually be extradited to Pennsylvania and ultimately Maryland.

It turns out that the defendant has numerous criminal contacts within Maryland and was recently incarcerated at the Montgomery County Detention Center just weeks before this multi-state crime spree that left at 87-year-old Vet without his pet and sidekick. The defendant was placed on probation in Frederick County for unauthorized removal of a motor vehicle this past March. His probation judge issued a violation of probation bench warrant in July and then he was arrested in August for theft and false statement to a law enforcement officer. Despite the VOP warrant and the new pending case he was released by a Montgomery County District Court judge on an unsecured bail. Three weeks after his release he received another criminal charge for theft but was issued a citation and never arrested. The alleged carjacking in Pennsylvania occurred just 4 days after the theft citation.

The defendant may not face a Maryland judge for months or even years as it seems his situations in North Carolina and Pennsylvania are far more serious. He will most likely miss his three court dates in Maryland and be issued failure to appear bench warrants. The warrants will serve as detainers and Maryland will be notified before he is released from any sentences served out-of-state. When he was incarcerated in Montgomery County back in August the defendant certainly had a valid argument for release on the violation of probation and the theft charge. Neither of the cases were violent in nature and the bail review judge could never have predicted the defendant would make the jump from theft to carjacking and aggravated assault in a matter of weeks. Nevertheless, these are the kind of cases that judges hate and are a large reason why so many defendants are held without bail at the district court level.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 14, 2024

Crab Shack Owner Charged with Crab Theft

By Benjamin Herbst

Police in Cecil County recently arrested the owner of a burned-down Elkton crab shack after he allegedly plundered other restaurants in Maryland and Delaware in a misguided attempt to get back on his feet. The defendant was arrested last week and extradited to Delaware on a warrant shortly thereafter to face theft scheme charges. He is no longer in custody in Delaware but will be due in court at some point soon. As of now there are no theft charges in Maryland, which means Delaware may end up prosecuting all the alleged thefts. Theft crimes can be prosecuted in the jurisdiction where the theft originally occurred or in a place where the defendant allegedly took the stolen goods. For example, if a defendant steals a motor vehicle in Montgomery County and is eventually pulled over in Baltimore County, he or she could face charges in either county, but not both.

The theft scheme was likely hatched after the defendant lost his crab shack to a fire back on July 8. Typically when we see a restaurant owner arrested after a fire it is due to an allegation of arson, but that does not appear to be the case here. The crab shack was a shack in the truest sense of the word as reports indicated the defendant was running a worn extension cord under the door to a chest freezer inside the kitchen. There was no electricity inside the kitchen area, so the defendant used propane tanks, which ultimately exploded when the worn cord started emitting sparks. The explosion was so violent in rocked the defendant’s landlord’s home that was located in front of the shack. Reports indicate that the landlord agreed to lease the shack to the defendant on the condition that he obtain insurance. Allegedly the defendant told his landlord he had insurance but did not, which left the landlord the foot the bill for all the damage. The plot thickened as the defendant allegedly started a fundraising page asking for money to rebuild the shack, when in reality he was not the owner.

The defendant was arrested in Cecil County on August 5, and it appears that he attempted to bring contraband into the Cecil County jail. Court records show he was he was charged with possession of contraband in a place of confinement by the Sheriff’s Department. He was issued a summons on this case and not required to post a bond. This charge requires the State to prove the defendant knowingly possessed contraband, which means he may be able to fight the case by arguing he had no knowledge. Police always search a defendant immediately after placing them under arrest, but sometimes these searches are not thorough. Deputy Sheriffs and Correctional Officers will perform a more thorough search before a defendant is booked into jail, and often these searches can yield a small item that can be considered contraband. It could be a pill or a small piece of a marijuana cigarette that the defendant had no idea was still on his or her person, and if found the detention staff will not hesitate to file charges for contraband introduction. The defendant is due in court in September for the contraband case and has another pending matter for operating a food establishment without a license scheduled for August. Both cases are set in the District Court of Maryland for Cecil County located in downtown Elkton.

Continue reading →

Published on: July 5, 2024

Former MVA Employee Indicted for Bribery, Misconduct

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland Attorney General’s Office recently announced the indictment of three individuals for their alleged roles in an identity theft scheme at an MVA branch in Baltimore City. The individuals were indicted back in April and the scheme allegedly took place in 2022. It is not entirely clear why the AG’s Office waited until July to report the indictments, but all three cases are still in the early stages of prosecution. While all three defendants face felony identity theft scheme and bribery charges, only one defendant has been charged with misconduct in office. This defendant, a 34-year-old woman from Baltimore City, was a MVA employee at the Reisterstown Road branch office. She allegedly conspired with two custodians, who were contracted to perform janitorial services at the branch, to sell drivers’ licenses and learners’ permits for cash.

It turns out that one of the custodians allegedly advertised the scheme on Instagram, which seems like a decision she’ll regret. The Instagram post reportedly offered up the licenses and permits for a fee of $600 and included a free test taker for the written portion of the exam. This test taker was of course one of the co-conspirators who is accused of taking as many as 66 tests under the guise of an actual applicant. The former MVA employer oversaw the tests and is accused of knowingly allowing her co-conspirator to take the tests for a portion of the proceeds. Under Maryland law bribery is charged when a person accepts or solicits a bribe. The two custodians face bribery and conspiracy to commit bribery charges while the former state employee faces one bribery count and the aforementioned misconduct in office charge.

Bribery cases are relatively uncommon in Maryland courts, and as a result tend to be treated with more attention and scrutiny. Bribery always involves at least two people, and one must be some sort of public employee or officer. Public employees include those working for state or local government entities. In cases where a bribe is offered and accepted the public official and the person offering the bribe would generally be charged as co-defendants. In attempted bribery cases the public employee often reports or arrests the other party on the spot when dealing with police officers. Bribery and attempted bribery are considered the same offense under Maryland criminal law 9-201. The maximum penalty for this offense is 12 years in prison including a 2-year mandatory prison sentence. Since the statute does not specifically say the mandatory portion cannot be suspended there is no mandatory jail sentence in practicality. Public officials who are accused of accepting bribes with typically face more scrutiny from the court system, but anyone charged with this offense has an uphill battle to stay out of jail and keep a clean record.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 3, 2024

Department of Education Releases School Arrest Report

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland State Department of Education keeps detailed records of all school related arrests, and since the 2015-2016 academic school year has released an annual report with detailed data from all 24 state jurisdictions. The reports covers arrests made on school grounds or during off-campus school activities such as sporting events and performances. It also includes arrests made for an incident that may have occurred on a school bus or other school sponsored transportation. Most of the individuals involved in these incidents are juveniles, which means they can technically be arrested without being handcuffed and taken away. The data includes both physical arrests where the student is actually taken away in cuffs, and paper arrests where an officer initiates a referral or request for charges to the Department of Juvenile Services. Some of the main takeaways from the report are that overall school arrests declined significantly, and that School Resource Officers in Wicomico County are not shy about using their arrest powers.

Last school year there were 1,568 school arrests effectuated compared to 2,187 in the 2021-2022 academic year. This represents a significant decline, especially when factoring in that school attendance was likely up as things began to return to normal following the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the results of the annual report are informative, they must be taken with a grain of salt due to the fact that arrests are within the discretion of the SRO. For example, a fight in a Howard County school may commonly result in internal discipline of the students involved, while the same fight at a Wicomico County school seems to commonly end in an arrest. In fact, there were 72 students arrested in Wicomico County schools for fighting last school year, which is almost three times more than the 26 total arrests in Baltimore City Public Schools. Wicomico County reported 204 total arrests in the 2022-2023 academic school year, followed by 175 in St. Mary’s County. Calvert County reported 168 arrests, which means the top three counties in arrests are also some of the smallest by total enrollment. Anne Arundel County, Baltimore County, Harford County and Washington County were the only other school districts that reported triple digit student arrests last year. Queen Anne’s County was the only jurisdiction with zero arrests, and Kent, Allegany and Garrett counties had single digit arrests.

Fighting was by far the most common reason for student arrests during the academic year, and these students were likely charged with assault in the first or second degree or affray, which means participating in a fight or disturbance. There were 222 drug related arrests last year in schools and 28 firearm arrests. 120 students were arrested for possessing other types of weapons and 18 for false bomb threats. Other crimes with more than a handful of arrests include destruction of property, theft, and trespassing. Most of the students charged will likely be able to have their cases resolved at intake, though the more serious offenses such as firearm possession, sexual assault and first-degree assault will end up with juvenile delinquency petitions being filed. If your child has been arrested or charged with a criminal offense anywhere in the state, contact Maryland juvenile crimes attorney Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin specializes in defending assault charges, CDS drug offenses and firearm offenses for juveniles and adults of all ages. He has successfully handled numerous school firearm offenses and all other delinquency petitions such as detention hearings. Benjamin also appears at intake hearings where cases can be closed prior to being filed in court. He is available 7 days a week at 410-207-2598 and offers flexible payment plans in all cases.

Continue reading →

Published on: May 9, 2024

School Employee Arrested for AI Recording

By Benjamin Herbst

Baltimore County Police recently secured an arrest warrant for Pikesville High School’s former athletic director, and he was arrested at BWI Airport just one day after the District Court Commissioner signed the warrant. The defendant was taken in for questioning by TSA after attempting to travel to Houston with a firearm when an issue arose regarding the way the gun was packed. Law enforcement noticed the warrant while dealing with the firearm and placed the defendant into custody. He was released later that day on an unsecured bond, which means he was not required to pay a bail bondsman. In Maryland unsecured bonds only become due if the defendant fails to appear in court, and even then, the State rarely pursues a judgment. The defendant faces charges for felony theft, disturbing school activities, witness retaliation and stalking, and has his first District Court trial date in June.

The charges stem from an incident back in January that made national headlines when a recording of racists statements allegedly made by the school’s principal began circulating on social media. The principal denied making the statements from the beginning and police began to investigate the possible use of artificial intelligence to create the recording. County police detectives consulted with an AI expert from Colorado who has been contracted as an expert by the FBI. The expert opined that the recording was in fact AI generated and was not a particularly skilled fake, as there was an obvious presence of fabricated background noise. In addition to investigating the recording, police also were also looking into the motive for the former AD to target his principal. Police were directed to an open internal investigation where the former AD was accused of improperly compensating his roommate for coaching the girls’ soccer team at PHS. The roommate was a coach at the school, but never coached girls’ soccer and was never properly contracted to do so as required by Baltimore County Public School policy. A check for nearly $2k was drafted for the roommate by the former AD, and school administration was potentially in the process of a disciplinary proceedings. The check written for the roommate is the basis for the felony theft charge and also for the witness retaliation charge, as the principal was the one of the school officials looking into the possible criminal activity regarding the check.

At this time no other individuals have been charged, but police are apparently still investigating. Charges could potentially be filed against the former AD’s roommate if there is probable cause to believe he was an accomplice to the theft charge. Accomplice liability for the individuals who spread the fake recording could also potentially trigger criminal charges. The Blog will continue to follow this case as it presents a host of criminal law issues, including some that we have never seen. The Baltimore County State’s Attorney’s Office has never prosecuted a case involving an AI generated recording until now. AI is a valuable tool, but when used maliciously could be quite damaging as we now see. In the days following the release of the recording the principal received multiple threats and basically had his life turned upside down. Police were originally investigating the defendant for reckless endangerment for placing the principal in harm’s way, though these charges are not pending at this point.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 17, 2024

Two Women Facing Prostitution Charges in Montgomery County

By Benjamin Herbst

Montgomery County Police recently announced the arrest of two women after a 6-month long prostitution investigation into multiple local massage parlors. The investigation spanned three counties and involved the Anne Arundel County and City of Laurel Police Departments. Accorded to the MCPD the two suspects owned massage parlors in Montgomery County, Anne Arundel County and Prince George’s County where sex acts were offered in exchange for money. The investigation began back in October of 2023 at a “spa” in Kensington. Detectives allegedly observed dozens of male costumers exiting the Kensington location daily and obtained confessions from multiple Johns. Detectives also became aware that an employee attempted to bribe a Health and Human Services inspector during an inspection to prevent the business from being shuttered.

In early March detectives executed a search warrant at the Kensington parlor and located one of the owners, a 34-year-old woman from Columbia. Court records show the Howard County woman was arrested for sex trafficking, running a prostitution business and prostitution on March 7, and released two days later on an unsecured bond. The other co-defendant, a 50-year-old woman from Philadelphia, was arrested on March 7 for bribery of a public employee and multiple counts of prostitution. She was released the same day of her arrest on an unsecured bond. Both defendants were charged by way of criminal information in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County where they will stand trial this summer.

Under Maryland law the general prostitution statute prohibits engaging in prostitution and occupying a building used for the purpose of prostitution. Any defendant found in violation of this law faces up to 1 year in jail and a $500 fine under criminal law section 11-303. The severity of prostitution offenses in Maryland increases drastically for those alleged to have received profits from the business of prostitution. Receiving earnings of a prostitute under criminal law 11-304 is still a misdemeanor, but the maximum penalty jumps to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000. Those who are charged with receiving earnings of a prostitute are typically also charged with human trafficking under Maryland criminal law section 3-1102. Human trafficking and or sex trafficking has a broad definition under Maryland law and is considered a sex offense under Maryland law. Anyone convicted faces mandatory sex offender registration for 25 years as a tier II sex offender. It is currently a misdemeanor with a 10-year maximum penalty, though the violation becomes a felony with a 25-year maximum penalty if a minor is involved. Anyone who participates in the business of prostitution, which includes receiving money, encouraging participation or harboring a participant may face human trafficking charges.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 4, 2024

Lawmakers Pass Strict Exhibition Driving Laws

By Benjamin Herbst

The Maryland General Assembly recently passed strict laws aimed at eradicating street racing and exhibition driving, and now the Governor’s signature is all that is needed for the law to take effect as early as June 1 of this year. House Bill 601 and Senate Bill 442 add significant penalties for drivers and other participants in organized highway speed contests and spontaneous racing or exhibition driving. Up to 8 points will be assessed for any driver convicted of either racing or exhibition driving, and this jumps to 12 points if the act results in serious bodily injury. Drivers and other participants in either of these acts could also face criminal penalties of up to 60 days in jail and a $1,000 fine upon conviction. The potential maximum penalty jumps to 1 year in jail if serious bodily injury occurred during the act. While only drivers would face license points, other participants such as flagmen and timekeepers could face criminal penalties for being involved.

The two bills received an outpouring of support from law enforcement and local officials around the state. Exhibition driving was also in the spotlight during the legislative session after numerous roads were effectively shut down in the Takoma Park area of Montgomery County in February due to driving exhibitions and unlawful races. Ocean City even sent its mayor and other town officials to Annapolis to testify in favor of the bills. Back in 2018 Ocean City lobbied for permission to criminalize exhibition driving in special event zones after the beachfront town had for years struggled to deal with non-sanctioned rally car events that would often result in impromptu races and exhibitions. The situation in Ocean City became so out of control that the local government warned non-resident property owners to stay away during the pop-up rally events.

Exhibition driving is defined as excessive, abrupt acceleration or deceleration, skidding or smoking of the tires, intentional swerving from side to side, producing unreasonably loud noises, grinding the gears, using hydraulics to pop the tires off the ground or transporting passengers in areas of the vehicle not intended for people to sit. Sitting on the hood or roof of a moving vehicle in motion will be classified as exhibition driving. The definition of exhibition driving includes a large number of acts, and in order to prevent abuse of this offense by charging officers the legislature has created a section for affirmative defenses. A driver could be acquitted from the charge if he or she demonstrates the act was reasonable and for safety purposes. This is important, as we have seen numerous citations issued where drivers skidded or accelerated abruptly for legitimate reasons and not to put on a show. Sitting on a car during a properly permitted parade would also be an affirmative defense, so police will not be out in force on July 4^th ticketing en masse.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 21, 2024

Lawmakers Introduce Host of Criminal and Traffic Bills

By Benjamin Herbst

The 2024 legislative session is about halfway through, and Maryland lawmakers are currently debating dozens of criminal and traffic bills that would become law as early as June 1. One bill gaining a decent amount of attention is a measure introduced in both houses to criminalize exhibition driving throughout the state. Exhibition driving is defined as operating a vehicle in a crowd or large gathering in a manner that includes abrupt acceleration or deceleration, skidding, squealing or smoking tires, or swerving a vehicle from side to side. Those familiar with the Blog are well aware that Ocean City has enforced exhibition driving laws in so called “special event zones” in Worcester County for the last two years. Officials say the law, which carries up to 1 year in jail, has reduced the number of exhibition driving incidents. While serving a year in jail for exhibition driving is not a realistic punishment save for the most egregious cases, the simple threat of being arrested has proven to be a major deterrent for Ocean City visitors looking to show off their driving skills on Coastal Highway.

Lawmakers are hoping for the same deterrent effect from Senate Bill 442 and its companion House Bill 601. If enacted the law would add points and criminal penalties for exhibition driving under 16-402 and 21-1116 of the Maryland Transportation Code. A conviction for exhibition driving would add 8 points to a person’s license and 12 if there was an injury. Criminal penalties would include a jail sentence up to 60 days if no injuries, and up to 1 year if there was a serious bodily injury. This bill would effectively end the special event zone requirement and would become state law in all jurisdictions.

Lawmakers are also attempting to strengthen Maryland child pornography laws by adding provisions that would make possession of more than 100 images or videos a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. Additionally, possession of any child pornography that depicts a person under 13 years old would be a felony regardless of the number of images. Possession of child pornography is currently a misdemeanor offense in Maryland, though this modification would result in a large number of possession cases being filed as felonies.

Continue reading →