Uncategorized

Published on: April 5, 2023

Six Juveniles Arrested for Carjacking, Firearm Possession

Over the past week Prince George’s County Police officers arrested six boys in connection with two separate carjacking incidents. The boys were also charged with illegal firearm possession after police located ghost guns in their possession. The first arrest occurred at the end of last week when police located a vehicle that had been carjacked three days earlier. After making a felony traffic stop, officers located four teenaged boys from Washington D.C. inside the vehicle and also recovered a loaded ghost gun. All four were arrested and charged with multiple serious crimes, though it appears they will be charged as juveniles due to the fact that they were 15 at the time of the incident. It is unclear whether the juveniles were released to their parents or remain detained at a secure juvenile facility.

The four boys will cclappear at the Prince George’s County Circuit Court for their respective trials. While the cases will start out in the juvenile court, the State may choose to seek a discretionary waiver for some or all of the juveniles. Maryland law allows a judge to order the transfer of a case to adult court for a 15-year-old defendant if a finding is made that the child is not fit for juvenile rehabilitative measures. A child under 15 can only be prosecuted in adult court for an offense such as murder that carries life in prison. Juvenile discretionary waivers are rare, and in all likelihood would not be utilized for a carjacking case unless the juvenile has an extensive history of violence. Carjacking by definition is a serious offense, but if the facts are especially egregious the Court certainly could consider a discretionary waiver.

Just four days later Prince George’s County officers made yet another carjacking arrest. The suspects in this case were also juveniles, with one being a 16-year-old from Fort Washington, and the other a 17-year-old from Temple Hills. Police received a call for an attempted armed carjacking on April 3 at around 1:30 p.m. in District Heights. When officers arrived, they observed two suspects running from the scene and were ultimately able to take them into custody. Search incident to arrest revealed that both juveniles were in possession of loaded ghost guns. In the first three months of 2023 alone 32 juveniles and 19 adults have been arrested for carjacking in Prince George’s County. This alarming trend

Continue reading →

Published on: December 22, 2022

Anne Arundel County Man Charged Criminally in DUI Accident

By Benjamin Herbst

A 28-year-old Anne Arundel County man has been charged with multiple criminal violations in addition to being issued four traffic citations for allegedly causing a head-on collision in Lothian earlier this week. The accident left three family members injured, including 15 and 9-year-old children. According to Anne Arundel County Police all three of the occupants were treated for life-threatening injuries, while the defendant was uninjured in the crash. Police investigation revealed that the defendant crossed the center line, which caused his Rav4 to strike a smaller Nissan Versa head on. Another vehicle then crashed into the Nissan from the rear as a result of the sudden collision. Police responded to the scene and began a criminal investigation after bystanders informed officers that the driver appeared to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The driver then allegedly failed field sobriety tests and was placed under arrest for DUI. He then agreed to submit to a blood alcohol concentration test at the station in lieu of submitting to a mandatory blood draw. The result of the breath test was .18, which is more than twice the legal limit.

In a normal Maryland DUI or DWI case the defendant is usually charged via citation and released to a friend or family member a short time later. While police do have the authority to book a defendant into the jail for drunk driving, going to jail for a DUI charge in Maryland is rare outside of Baltimore City. This case was far from normal due to the severity of the victim’s injuries, and the overall egregious nature of the defendant’s alleged actions. Most people are aware that causing a death in a traffic accident or boat accident while under the influence can result in criminal charges for homicide by vehicle or vessel or manslaughter. But the legislature also chose to criminalize causing a serious injury accident while under the influence. Based on the totality of the circumstances, the defendant was booked and charged with this fairly new criminal violation under §3-211 of the Maryland Criminal Code. This law makes it a criminal violation to cause life threatening injuries by a motor vehicle or vessel while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. A first offense for this violation carries up to 3 years in prison for DUI and up to 2 years for DWI. If a defendant has a prior conviction for impaired driving in Maryland or any other state, the maximum penalty would become 5 years in prison. The defendant in this case was charged with 3 counts, though he can only be lawfully sentenced on one of the counts. He was held without bail by the court commissioner and by a District Court judge the next day at bail review. He is now being held at the Jennifer Road detention center awaiting his trial in March of next year.

Almost all drivers who are charged with drunk driving in Maryland are issued multiple citations, which can be confusing and stressful for someone with no experience dealing with this situation. In reality, the officers are taught to issue multiple citations, typically for DUI, DWI and DUI pe se (if the defendant tested over the limit), because they do not know which of the counts the State’s Attorney will be able to prove at trial. Regardless of the number of citations a driver receives in a drunk driving arrest, most will eventually be dismissed by the State at trial or pursuant to a plea. If a plea agreement is reached, the defendant typically admits to one of the citations and maybe two if the driving pattern is especially alarming to the State.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 19, 2022

Two Baltimore Men Guilty of Firearm Possession in School Zone

By Benjamin Herbst

One Baltimore man was sentenced and another recently pleaded guilty to the federal charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone. Both cases were prosecuted at the Baltimore City federal courthouse, and both defendants were originally chaeged in state court before the feds took over. The first defendant, a 22-year-old man, was arrested back in March of 2021 for possession with intent to distribute fentanyl and firearm charges. Law enforcement including the DEA recovered multiple firearms and upwards of 6 kilograms of fentanyl from a Pikesville stash house that was tied to the defendant. The defendant’s case was transferred from the District Court to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, but then was dismissed after the feds decided to prosecute. There is rarely one specific reason why the feds choose to pick up a state case, but when a defendant is arrested in the city with a combination of fentanyl and firearms its certainly going to attract their attention. Federal prosecutors have been focusing on fentanyl cases in the Baltimore and D.C. metro areas over the last couple of years, and had already been heavily involved in prosecuting illegal firearm possession. Any time both are present there is a good chance the case will be picked up by the U.S. Attorney’s Office. In this particular case the young man received a 9-year federal prison sentence for illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone and possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, which means he will likely serve close to 8 years behind bars. There is no parole in the federal criminal justice system, so early release can only be granted based on the defendant’s conduct and the availability of re-entry programs.

Shortly after the first defendant was sentenced, another Baltimore man pleaded guilty to the sole charge of illegal possession of a firearm in a school zone. This defendant, a 31-year-old man, was apparently riding around the city on his bicycle with a construction hat, orange safety vest and a loaded .40 caliber handgun sticking out of his waistband. A call for a potentially armed man was made to Baltimore Police, who were able to locate the suspect on city watch CCTV cameras a short time later. Officers then stopped the suspect for riding his bicycle on the sidewalk, which is violates a city ordinance. The man then allegedly tried to flee but was found a short time later knocking on the door of a random house. Upon detaining the suspect, police located the .40 handgun, which had an obliterated serial number and 15 rounds of ammunition. The suspect then uttered several spontaneous statements claiming ownership of the firearm. This case could easily have been prosecuted by the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office, but the feds likely picked up the case due to the defendant’s proximity to a school upon his arrest. The Gun Fee School Zones Act of 1990 made it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school, and despite being modified several times over the last few decades, the law is still very much intact. Violation of this provision is a felony punishable by up to 5 years in federal prison, which is significantly harsher than the 3-year penalty for wear, transport or carry a firearm under Maryland law. The defendant in this case negotiated a plea deal to serve two years in prison, so he is likely not a convicted felon or otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm.

The Blog will continue to follow all noteworthy drug and gun cases in Maryland, and will post on federal prosecution of traditional state charges. If you or a loved one is facing adult or juvenile criminal charges contact Maryland gun lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation at 410-207-2598. Benjamin specializes in charges involving possession with intent to distribute CDS such as heroin, fentanyl, cocaine and marijuana. He also has extensive experience defending clients facing probation violations and gun charges such as possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of a firearm in a federal facility. Contact Benjamin today to learn what defenses may be available in your state or federal case. Benjamin is also licensed to practice in Florida, where he has successfully defended clients in numerous offenses such as drug trafficking, carrying a concealed firearm and aggravated assault.

Continue reading →

Published on: November 10, 2022

Maryland Voters Approve Marijuana Legalization

By Benjamin Herbst

Ten years ago marijuana first became legal in parts of the United States after voters in Washington and Colorado approved recreational cannabis. Over the last decade an additional 17 states and the District of Columbia all followed suit and voted to legalize marijuana use for adults. Maryland lawmakers have been tracking these trends for years, but had been remained hesitant to make any drastic changes to cannabis policy. Rather, lawmakers have steadily been taking small bites at the apple including lowering the maximum punishment for marijuana possession, creating a medical marijuana program, and then eventually decriminalizing possession of small amounts of cannabis. This past year lawmakers in Annapolis finally proved ready to take the big plunge, though they decided to leave it up to the voters to legalize pot once and for all. Passage of the ballot measure was never really in doubt, as previous polls had revealed approximately 60 percent of Maryland voters favored marijuana legalization. A 60/40 split may not seem like a large margin, but in the election world it’s actually fairly wide. The margin however turned out to be even wider in the real vote, as the measure passed with a 65.6 percent approval. Close to 1 million voters said yes to the question of whether citizens 21 and older should be able legally use cannabis Maryland, while just over 500,000 voted no. This signaled a borderline landslide victory for the good guys.

Now that the ballot measure passed there are a few important things to remember, as it is definitely not legal so spark up a joint on the street or fire up the basement hydroponic grow room just yet. First off, cannabis will not be legalized for recreational use until July 1 of 2023. Starting July 1, 2023 possession of up to 1.5 ounces of pot will be fully legal for adults over the age of 21 while possession of 1.5 to 2.5 ounces will constitute a civil infraction. Possession of over 2.5 ounces will be a misdemeanor punishable by 6 months in jail. On January 1, 2023 possession of up to 1.5 ounces will be decriminalized though still illegal (much like possession under 10 grams is currently). On July 1, adults will be able to grow up to two cannabis plants on their property as long as the plants are away from public view and protected from access by minors. Unlawful distribution of marijuana and possession with intent to distribute will no longer be a felony starting on July 1, but will still retain a harsh sentence of up to 3 years in jail. Mandatory expungements for past pot offenses that are no longer crimes will begin next year as well, but there is not definite timetable when recreational sales will begin. Finally, smoking in public will remain illegal, and will be punishable by a civil fine of up to $250. It is unclear whether municipalities such as Ocean City may try to enact harsher punishments as they do with open containers of alcohol.

The Blog will continue to follow Maryland marijuana policy with a close eye, and will also monitor other states and potential federal policy changes. On election day five other states provided voters with the ability to determine whether recreational cannabis would be legal, though only Maryland and Missouri voters approved the measures. Voters in Arkansas, North Dakota and South Dakota all declined to legalize marijuana. South Dakota voters had previously passed legalization in 2020, but the vote was declared invalid by the state’s highest court. If you have a question about the new marijuana laws or a past CDS case feel free to call Maryland drug crime lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime at 410-207-2598. Benjamin specializes in manufacturing, possession with intent to distribute and drug trafficking charges such as large amount and importation. He also has extensive experience representing those charged with conspiracy and participation in a criminal gangs. Contact Benjamin to find out which defenses may be available in your state or federal drug case anytime, 7 days a week.

Published on: October 26, 2022

PG County Woman Indicted for Arson, Destructive Device

By Benjamin Herbst

A Charles County grand jury recently found probable cause to indict a 21-year-old woman from Upper Marlboro for two separate fire-bombing incidents that occurred just over one year ago. The first incident took place in Waldorf, where the Prince George’s County woman allegedly threw a Molotov cocktail or firebomb in a homeowner’s front yard. The fire bomb in this incident apparently did not properly ignite, and no damage was reported. However, the next night in St. Mary’s County, police were called to investigate another incident where three fire bombs were ignited and thrown just feet from a residence. The homeowner in this case reportedly heard noises outside, and upon opening the front door encountered a burning Molotov cocktail. The homeowner was able to extinguish the burning destructive device without anything catching fire, though he also found two more devices that had already burned out.

Local police from Charles County and St. Mary’s County, as well as the State Fire Marshal investigated the scene but were unable to develop suspects for several months. After about five months the Marshals honed in on the defendant after reviewing phone records and social media posts, and an arrest warrant was issued in March. The defendant was eventually arrested in May, and after being denied bail by the commissioner, was released by a Charles County District Court Judge on private home detention. The case then stayed in the District Court for several months before being indicted, which is not the norm for cases in Maryland. A defendant is typically indicted within 6 weeks of his or her arrest in a District Court case, though this defendant was indicted five months after her arrest.

The 21-year-old Prince George’s County woman is now facing five criminal charges in the Circuit Court for Charles County, including attempted arson in the first degree, malicious destruction of property and possession or manufacture of a destructive device for the first incident in Charles County. She is facing attempted arson in the second degree and destructive device charges for the second incident in St. Mary’s County, though both are charged in the same indictment. First degree arson is a serious felony offense that carries a maximum penalty of 30 years in prison. While the defendant was charged with misdemeanor attempted arson in the first degree, she would theoretically face the same 30-year maximum penalty upon conviction. In Maryland charges for attempt and conspiracy are both considered misdemeanor common law offenses, though the maximum penalties are the same as the underlying crime. First degree arson is charged for burning or attempting to burn a dwelling or an occupied structure, while second degree arson is charged for burning or attempting to burn a structure in general. Second degree arson still carries a harsh 20-year maximum penalty, though it scores significantly lower on the Maryland sentencing guidelines than arson 1.

Continue reading →

Published on: August 30, 2022

Thirteen PG County Police Officers Indicted

By Benjamin Herbst

According to a recent press release by the Prince George’s County Police Department, thirteen of its own officers have been indicted on charges of theft and misconduct in office. The indictment was revealed last week at the Prince George’s County Circuit Court in Upper Marlboro. The defendants in the indictment were mostly experienced members of the police force, as ten were Corporals and one has since retired. Based on the press release the department began an internal investigation after catching wind that several officers were working for a security company and receiving compensation while on duty at police officers. The company serviced more that 20 apartment complexes in the county from at least the end of 2019 until February 2021. The officers were suspended in April of 2021. Among other allegations, the officers allegedly provided false information to the apartment complexes in order to justify their continue employment. The total amount that the officers profited is alleged to be between $1,500 and $25,000, which means they are facing felony charges in addition to the misdemeanor charge for misconduct in office.

The department initiated the investigation after another high-ranking officer pleaded guilty to tax evasion several years ago. In an effort to make sure this type of conduct ends with this indictment, the department has instituted policy changes that began a few months after the officers were suspended. The policy changes include a blanket prohibition on officers working as security guards, as well as hiring a third-party software company to allow officers to clock out of work before beginning secondary employment. The internal affairs division of the department will also conduct site investigations of any secondary employment locations that employees disclose, and these site investigations will be conducted at random.

The officers are charged with theft based on the allegation that they were collecting taxpayer dollars while engaged in private employment. It’s true that the defendants did not physically steal anything, but their pay from the government was accepted under circumstances where the they were clearly double dipping. It is still an interesting and fairly uncommon means of charging a theft case, and if the cases go to trial, there may be some arguments that could sway a jury to acquit. Regardless, state prosecutors seem to be in good shape on the misconduct counts.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 17, 2022

Baltimore Man Pleads Guilty to Federal Robbery

By Benjamin Herbst

Yesterday the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Maryland announced the guilty plea of a 25-year-old Baltimore man who committed a robbery while on supervised release for another federal crime. According to facts presented in the guilty plea, back in January of this year the defendant attempted to rob a convenience store in Baltimore City. The store clerk refused to comply with the defendant’s demand for money, whereupon the defendant displayed a gun from within his waistband. Off-duty Maryland State Police officers responded to the scene shortly after the store manager called 911, and were joined by Baltimore City police officers minutes later. The defendant was detained by law enforcement officers, and search incident to arrest revealed a loaded 9mm handgun in the defendant’s waistband. Security cameras inside the store captured the entire incident on video, making the guilty plea the only reasonable choice for the defendant.

The 25-year-old defendant now faces up to 20 years in federal prison for the federal robbery charge, which is codified as attempting to interfere with interstate commerce by robbery. Robberies are generally prosecuted in state court, but the federal government can obtain jurisdiction over virtually any commercial robbery committed in the U.S. This most commonly plays out for bank robbery cases due to the fact that banks are insured by the FDIC, and also gun stores that are licensed to do business by the federal government with a FFL (federal firearms license). But the Commerce Clause allows the feds to obtain jurisdiction over other business that have a potential customer base from multiple states. The question is whether it’s possible – not likely that a local convenience store in Baltimore City is frequented by individuals from across the country.

Sentencing for the defendant in the federal robbery charge is set for September of this year, though he also must answer for the violation of supervised release. Supervised release is the federal term for probation, as there is virtually no difference between the two. Supervised release simply occurs after a defendant has been released from a term of incarceration. The federal justice system no longer uses suspended sentences; rather when a defendant violates probation or supervised released, he or she could face up the maximum remaining prison sentence upon a guilty finding of a violation. For example, a defendant sentenced to 5 years on a robbery charge could face up to 15 years upon if found in violation of supervised release. In Maryland state court, most judges impose suspended sentences to cap the amount of time that could be imposed in a violation of probation, but some judges simply suspend the maximum and decide an appropriate sentence should the defendant violate. Any defendant who receives a probation before judgement (PBJ) faces the maximum penalty upon a violation of probation. There are exceptions including whether the violation is considered non-technical or technical. In Maryland state court, technical violations have a presumptive non-binding cap of 15 days for a first violation. Technical violations include positive drug tests, failing to complete treatment or failing to pay restitution. Non-technical violations include missing more than one probation appointment and/or committing a new offense. Many defendants believe new arrests are the only non-technical violations but this is not true, as it is just as common for defendants accused of absconding to receive some or all of their back up time.

Continue reading →

Published on: June 10, 2022

New Yorker Arrested for DUI and Assault on Ocean City Officer

By Benjamin Herbst

Memorial Day weekend marks the unofficial start to the summer season in Maryland’s only beach town, but these days tourists from the region begin traveling to Ocean City to attend events and enjoy the night life as soon as the weather turns warm. With graduations completed and school about to let out, it’s safe to say that summer is now in full swing down at the ocean. This being a criminal law Blog we’re not here to report on the calendar of events in OCMD, but rather the host of new arrests and police activity that comes with the dramatic uptick in visitors. This week one notable arrest took place after a New York man was pulled over for multiple traffic infractions including aggressive driving, and traveling roughly twice the 35 miles per hour speed limit on the Philadelphia Ave. section of coastal highway. This area is one of the busiest and most heavily trafficked areas of Ocean City, so needless to say officers rushed to pull the vehicle over as soon as possible. It seems that the actual traffic stop was effectuated without much drama, but the defendant’s alleged actions that followed were anything but calm and collected.

According to an Ocean City Police Department press release, officers detected an odor of an alcoholic beverage upon approaching the defendant, and shortly thereafter determined that he was driving on a suspended out-of-state driver’s license. The defendant was then requested to complete standardized field sobriety exercises, and was arrested after becoming uncooperative during the tests. He was initially arrested for DUI, fleeing and eluding and disorderly conduct, but it turns out these charges only represented a fraction of what was yet to come. While the defendant was seated in the backseat of the patrol vehicle, he attempted to make a phone call from his smartwatch. Making unauthorized phone calls while in custody is a huge no-no with police and correctional officers, but the defendant was not happy about giving up his watch to the police. He allegedly became aggressive and kicked the arresting officer in the face chest and arms, and then kicked another officer who came over to offer assistance. Ocean City EMS arrived on scene to treat the defendant and the officer, and the defendant was taken to Atlantic General Hospital in Berlin for treatment. After receiving treatment for what the police deemed were minor injuries, he was taken to the police station and booked for a total of 5 criminal charges including two counts of assault on a law enforcement officer, disorderly conduct and obstructing and hindering. He also received 16 traffic citations for charges including DUI and driving under the influence of drugs. The defendant faces hefty fines and potential points for aggressive driving, reckless driving and negligent driving, and according to the charges the defendant’s license was already suspended in the state of Nevada.

The defendant was denied bail by the District Court Commissioner, but granted release on a $25,000 bail the following day when he went before a judge. He posted bail and now will return to court in July for his trial date. The Blog will continue to follow this case as it progresses through the court system, and we anticipate whichever judge hears this case will not be pleased with the defendant’s alleged conduct. Aggressive driving combined with driving under the influence is a dangerous combination, especially in a crowded area such as lower Ocean City. The driving behavior combined with the alleged assault on police officers made a bad situation even worse, though the defendant may be able to challenge many of the charges in court. He certainly is going to require a strong defense to avoid jail time and permanent convictions on his record.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 25, 2022

Montgomery County Alleged Murderer Transferred to Juvenile Court

By Benjamin Herbst

In a highly controversial decision at the Montgomery County Circuit Court in Rockville, a judge has ordered an alleged murder’s case to be transferred to juvenile court. The decision angered family members of the four victims, one of whom had died from gunshot wound injuries. The defendant was originally charged as an adult with one count of murder in the first degree and three counts of attempted first-degree murder in addition to various assault and firearm offenses for allegedly firing 16 rounds of ammunition into a crowd at a Germantown basketball court. The defendant, who is considered a respondent now that the case has been transferred, was accused to using a homemade polymer ghost gun to fire the shots. At the time of the incident he was just 14 years old, and now that the case has been transferred, he could be released from a secure juvenile facility in less than one year. The judge explained his opinion over the course of 30 minutes, and sided with the defense despite strenuous objection from the Office of the State’s Attorney.

While the families of the victims have every right to be outraged by the decision, the judge was bound to follow the rule of law in Maryland, which has changed drastically in the past year. Any juvenile who is charged as an adult may petition to transfer the case to juvenile court. This has become known as a reverse waiver hearing, and the judges are required to weigh five independent factors including age of the child, the child’s physical and mental condition, the child’s amenability to treatment in a juvenile facility or program, the nature of the offense and public safety. In the past too many judges have focused on the nature of the offense, and if it was especially violent the transfer would be denied in the name of public safety. Pursuant to what is now known as the Davis case, judges are no longer allowed to make these swift, allegation based decisions. The Court of Appeals in Davis reiterated that the controlling principal of the justice system is protection of the public, and that a juvenile delinquency program that is most effective at treating, educating and rehabilitating offenders will best protect the public in the long run. Amenability to treatment has become the determinative factor when considering transfer, and the other four factors ultimately lead up to amenability. Amenability in this context is best interpreted as whether a child would benefit from a juvenile program. If the answer is yes, then the case should be transferred regardless of the underlying nature of the charges.

The defendant was originally charged as an adult because Maryland juvenile courts do not have original jurisdiction over individuals 14 and over who are facing charges that carry life in jail. The first-degree murder and attempted murder charges all carry life in prison, which means the juvenile court did not have original jurisdiction over the defendant. In most other cases a juvenile must be at least 16 before being charged as an adult, but for life felonies the minimum age is 14. All defendants who are between 7 and 13 years old will be charged as juveniles, and can only be prosecuted in adult court if their case is waived up at a discretionary waiver hearing. If your child is facing charges in any Maryland court contact juvenile criminal defense lawyer Benjamin Herbst anytime for a free consultation. Benjamin has successfully argued for the transfer of numerous individuals to juvenile court, including a recent armed robbery case where the individual had already turned 18. He has represented clients in every county in Maryland and is also an experienced federal criminal defense lawyer who specializes in firearm offenses and white collar crimes such as theft of government property and fraud. Benjamin is available 7 days a week at 410-207-2598 to discuss the defenses that may be available in your case.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 8, 2022

Maryland Basketball Coach Suspended After Arrest

By Benjamin Herbst

An assistant basketball coach at the University of Maryland was suspended last month after being charged with prostitution back in October in Prince George’s County. The suspension is set to be completed this week, which means he could return to the sidelines as early as this Thursday when Iowa visits College Park. The University announced the suspension on January 12, so the more likely return for the coach would be for this weekend’s road tilt against Purdue. According to news reports from various outlets including the New York Post and the Baltimore Sun, the 40-year-old coach was arrested at a hotel in Largo after he reached out to an undercover detective posing as a prostitute. The police posted a fictitious online advertisement under the general category of “women seeking men”, and the coach agreed to meet at a neutral location. Upon arriving at the hotel, the coach and the undercover were in the room together when he allegedly requested sex in exchange for $80. As soon as the coach handed over the money, the undercover officer gave an arrest signal to the takedown team waiting in the next room.

The takedown team is typically a group of 2 to 4 officers in uniform or police tactical vests who are monitoring the undercover and the suspect by audio and sometimes video. While this type of surreptitious recording is typically illegal under Maryland and federal wiretapping laws, there are exceptions for law enforcement to monitor the safety of officers or confidential informants who are conducting investigative activities. As soon as the arrest signal is given, some or all of the takedown team enters the room and places the suspect under arrest. From there the police can actually choose to arrest the suspect on the spot, or take his or her information and issue a criminal summons at a later date. The charge of prostitution under 11-306 carries a maximum penalty of 1 year in jail, which means an officer is not permitted to issue a criminal citation. Criminal citations are generally only permitted for crimes that carry a maximum penalty of 90 days or less. In this particular case the coach was arrested and booked for one count of prostitution general. He was released by a District Court Commissioner a few hours later on his own recognizance, which is normal a standard misdemeanor solicitation charge.

This type of prostitution sting has been used by law enforcement for roughly the last decade, and while there have been hundreds if not thousands of arrests, it’s hard to measure the overall deterrent effect on the prostitution trade. It seems that those who wish to seek out prostitutes and those who wish to offer these services will continue to find a way to link up regardless of the threat of arrest. We expect that this type of law enforcement tactic will continue to be employed even as various websites have been shut down. While the large majority of defendants arrested for prostitution crimes are simply seeking sex without strings attached, the motivation for law enforcement’s continued efforts to stop prostitution is to ultimately crack down on human trafficking. The hope is that by eliminating the potential client base you can eventually eliminate the sex trafficking altogether, though the war on drugs has taught us this is more of a law enforcement money grab than a reality-based solution.

Continue reading →