Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog

Ocean City has seen a dramatic increase in violent crime since welcoming tourists over the past few weeks, and government officials are extremely concerned.  The most serious incidents seem to be clustered around the Boardwalk in the southern part of the 8-mile stretch of beach, but arrests are up throughout the city.  Two weekends ago, the Ocean City Police Department reported 129 arrests compared to 95 during the same time last year.  This increase is even more alarming considering there are fewer visitors this summer due to the Covid-19 pandemic.  In response to the rise in violence, the police department has committed to increasing law enforcement presence by as much as 25 percent around town and on the Boardwalk.  The department will have to hire new officers to keep up with the demand, which will come at a considerable expense to Maryland’s only beachfront town.  The process of hiring new officers will also have to be accelerated due to the immediate demand, but the mayor’s office is confident the city council will be supportive.

Crime spikes hardly come as a surprise in Ocean City during the summer months, as upwards of a quarter million tourists flock from D.C., Maryland, and neighboring states such as Pennsylvania and West Virginia to vacation.  But the crime spikes are typically related to traffic and non-violent offenses.  Underage drinking and open container citations are especially common in Ocean City, and those who receive these citations are often surprised to learn they can have criminal consequences.  Carrying an open container is a crime under the Ocean City municipal code, which makes it punishable by up to 90 days in jail.  DUI is also common, as well as other alcohol induced offenses such as disorderly conduct and trespassing.  Alcohol and peer pressure also motivates the younger crown to indulge in shoplifting and other theft crimes, and arrests for possession with intent to distribute marijuana and narcotics majorly spike to meet the demand of those heading to OCMD to party.  These offenses come with the territory of a popular summer vacation spot with a booming nightlife, and they are crimes the police and Worcester County judicial system can easily keep under control.  The problem lately is that a large number of recent arrests have been for extremely violent offenses such as first-degree assault involving knives and firearms, and the last thing city and county officials want is for their cash cow tourist industry to suffer as a result of the town being labeled as unsafe.

Five suspects were recently arrested for a felony assault and weapons charges stemming from a fight that broke out on the Boardwalk, and all are being held without bail at the Worcester County Detention Center.  They are all scheduled for preliminary hearings at the district courthouse in Ocean City, but their cases will eventually be forwarded to the circuit court in Snow Hill.  Portions of the brawl were caught on video, and the incident received media attention around the state.  Apparently, late night crime has become so common on the Boardwalk that some business owners have become increasingly concerned about staying open late.  Fed up bar and restaurant owners have already started closing earlier than in years past in response to the violence.

A 23-year old woman was arrested last week after she allegedly stole an ambulance from the West Annapolis Fire Station and then crashed it into a van.  The sole occupant of the van was flown to shock trauma with serious injuries, while the ambulance thief fled the scene of the accident on foot.  As a result of her fleeing the scene the young woman was not arrested until the next day, and is now out of custody after being released on her own recognizance.  She is facing charges for theft over $100,000, rogue and vagabond and motor vehicle theft.  Unlawful taking of a motor vehicle and theft over $100,000 are both district court felonies, and trial has been scheduled in October.  The woman has also been charged with reckless driving, negligent driving and driving without a license.  She may face additional charges for leaving the scene of an accident involving injury.  Reports did not offer an explanation of what prompted the woman to steal the ambulance as fire fighters were training when the vehicle was initially taken.  There is also no indication of what exactly caused the accident, though the woman did receive a citation for running a red light.  All told, this is a pretty bizarre scenario and whichever Anne Arundel County judge hears the case will likely not be too pleased with the defendant.

While the defendant does not appear to have a prior criminal record other than a drug possession case on STET, she may face an uphill battle in the fight to stay out of jail and keep her record free of a criminal conviction.  This is especially true if she ends up being charged with leaving the scene of an injury accident.  Despite being classified as a traffic offense and only carrying a 1-year maximum jail sentence, leaving the scene of an accident with bodily injury is an offense that prosecutors and judges take extremely seriously.  The defendant’s record of committing traffic offenses is lengthy, and she does not appear to have had a valid license recently.  There are numerous prior traffic cases in multiple different jurisdictions including Baltimore City, Prince George’s County and Anne Arundel County.  Ultimately her prior record of traffic convictions may come back to hurt her when her trial date comes around in the Fall.

The Blog will continue to follow this strange case, and may post a follow up article in the near future.  It is hard to think of a reasonable explanation why a person would steal an ambulance.  There may be valuable equipment in emergency vehicles, but we’re not talking about items you can simply sell at a pawn shop or trade at a local flea market.  Also, it is nearly impossible to elude law enforcement in a stolen ambulance, as they are easily recognizable and always GPS equipped.  There may in fact be more to this story but a logical explanation is unlikely.  As regular readers of our Blog are well aware, there are not always logical explanations to the behaviors of those leading up to an arrest.

A coalition of people including lawmakers and religious leaders recently filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging the Maryland governor’s stay at home order that has been in effect for several weeks.  The order required the shuttering of all non-essential businesses and banned gatherings of more than 10 people under all circumstances.  Even as talk of reopening the state has picked up steam, there is no firm end in sight and business owners are beyond restless.  The lawsuit, which was filed in the Baltimore City federal courthouse, challenges the constitutionality of the governor’s order.  This is not the first lawsuit of its kind, as federal judges in numerous other jurisdictions have heard similar motions.  There is no timetable as to when a ruling will come down in this particular motion, but the Attorney General’s Office is not backing down.  Reports indicate the AG submitted a memo of law citing prior decisions where federal courts have denied similar challenges to state executive orders.  Case law is pretty clear that governors have broad authority to act during public health emergencies, and at this point there is nothing in the Maryland order that seems reversible.

By the time a federal judge issues a ruling in this case the motion may be moot, as reports seem to indicate that the number of patients hospitalized with Covid-19 has plateaued in Maryland.  Still, we could be weeks away from a reopening that would satisfy the group that filed the motion.  The governor and other state officials recently introduced a three-phase plan that would begin with an opening of lower risk business and entities such as small shops, outdoor gym and fitness classes, outdoor recreation facilities, and limited attendance outdoor religious gatherings.  Phase two would include medium risk businesses and entities such as indoor gyms, childcare centers, restaurants and bars (with restrictions), indoor religious gatherings and elective medical procedures.  The final phase includes high risk activities such as entertainment venues, high capacity bars and restaurants and larger gatherings among people.

Anyone who reads through Maryland’s roadmap to recovery PDF will see that there is no mention of the judiciary or any courthouse guidelines.  The judiciary is an independent branch of government, and as such may not legally be able to be controlled by the governor’s office.  Thus far, the judiciary has been acting alongside the governor’s office in closing down to the public, but it will be interesting to see what happens in the coming weeks.  Maryland state courts are currently only operating on an emergency basis, and are closed to the public.  As of now the district and circuit courts around the state are scheduled to open to the public on June 7, but there is still a great deal of uncertainty whether this will actually happen.  If the courts do open on the first Monday in June there are also no firm details on what the courthouse experience will look like.  It certainly will not be business as usual, with packed courtrooms and long lines at security.  Many court clerks are still holding off on resetting cases that have been postponed, as some cases have been rescheduled numerous times due to fluid nature of the reopening date.

This past Friday planes equipped with high tech surveillance cameras began flying over Baltimore City as part of an experimental effort to solve violent crimes.  The planes will be in the air for up to 6 months, and the footage will be monitored on the ground by officers from the Baltimore Police Department.  City taxpayers are not footing the bill for the planes or the cameras, as a Texas based philanthropic organization has already pledged $3.7 million to conduct the pilot program.  The aerial surveillance system uses wide angle lenses that can allegedly monitor 90% of the city, though the planes will only fly during the daytime and the aerial cameras will be not be able to make out faces or read license plates.  The hope is that the aerial footage can be used to supplement Citywatch street cameras and other technology on the ground.  After a crime is reported an analyst will rewind footage to the location, and follow suspects or vehicles until a higher definition camera on the ground can communicate identifying information to police.

Despite the fact that people and cars will only appear as a pixel that reveals no personal identifying information, the ACLU tried to block the pilot program by filing for a restraining order in the United States District Court.  The ACLU argued that the program is unconstitutional, and has the power to track every private citizen in Baltimore as soon as they walk out their front door.  They also argued that continuous aerial surveillance infringes upon reasonable expectations of privacy regarding movements, that could result in warrantless searches, and compared the program to a police officer following every resident wherever they go.  Law enforcement and the company flying the planes have stated they have no intention of following any citizen unless it is in direct response to the occurrence of an egregious violent crime.  Specific crimes cited by BPD include murder, attempted murder, armed robbery, carjacking and shootings.  A federal judge unsurprisingly denied the request for restraining order, citing that federal courts have previously upheld greater government encroachment in the past.

The Blog will certainly continue to follow this story and will post a follow up article in the future as news develops.  The media, politicians and citizens will be waiting to see how effective the pilot program is at solving crime, but from a criminal law standpoint solving crime does not mean simply making an arrest.  In any case where aerial surveillance was used to capture a suspect there is a high likelihood that the defendant’s criminal defense lawyer will move to suppress the evidence.  As long as the police department follows the protocol and limits the surveillance to its intended purpose these motions likely will be unsuccessful.  It does not seem overly intrusive to have low definition cameras overhead, and there is a much lower expectation to privacy when a person is out in public.  On the other hand, the BPD has proven to be incapable at following rules in the past so there may be some angles for lawyers to explore.  If the program does have documented success there is every reason to believe we’ll start seeing planes fly in other smaller geographical areas with high crime rates such as St. Louis, Detroit, Memphis and the South Side of Chicago.