MARYLAND CRIMINAL LAWYER BLOG

DUI, should you worry about losing your job?

2010-06-10T15:47:51Z

In many cases of DUI or DWI where it is a subsequent offense, there is a potential for serving jail time. If you have a good job, therefore, you have concerns that you could lose your employment. In these situations your DUI or DWI attorney should look into in-house alcohol treatment instead of incarceration. Many of these facilities will allow you to seek treatment during the evening and work during the day. It is effective and serves the purpose of punishment and alcohol treatment while allowing a defendant to keep his job.

Another alternative is weekend jail time. Obviously, this gives the DUI or DWI defendant an opportunity to work during the week, but serve time during the weekend.

Judges have gotten tougher in recent years on sentences in light of certain politicians and state's attorneys offices pushing for harsher penalties. In some cases this is very ironic. Douglas F. Gansler, http://www.oag.state.md.us/bio.htm is a former State's Attorney for Montgomery County and now is the Maryland Attorney General. His office pushed for stiffer DUI sentences. Perhaps this was done simply for political gain. One has to believe this in light of the fact that the Sun Paper http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/anne-arundel/bs-md-ar-snowden-arrest-20100608,0,1079617.story just reported Gansler's Director of Civil Rights, Carl Snowden, was just arrested for his third DWI in the last eight years. Snowden is actually chairman of the Annapolis Housing Authority and Gansler appointed him in 2007, all the while knowing he had two prior DUI's, one in 2005 and one in 2002. You have to wonder, would someone hire you if you were arrested three times for DUI in eight years? Would you keep your job? This is your prior history, you might want to consider seeking a Maryland government job.

If you have any questions about your DUI/DWI case, call our Maryland DUI/DWI attorneys at Portner & Shure www.portnerandshure.com for a free consultation.

Charged with DUI / DWI? Know Your Judge

2010-06-10T15:12:51Z

A Judge in Maryland or Virginia will decide your sentence in a DUI offense. It amazes me, therefore, that countless attorneys will go before a Judge without knowing his or her tendencies. For example, some Judges on subsequent offenses will allow the sentence to be done on weekends, others will not. Weekend time may allow a defendant to keep his job. Further, with weekend time you are not placed with the general jail population (real bad guys). In most instances you serve two days of a weekend, but because you go in on a Friday night, you get credit for three days.

Additionally, some Judges will inquire as to the defendant's entire criminal history, where as others will just ask the State's recommendation. This could make a real difference at sentencing. A defendant with numerous prior drug convictions will not be viewed in the same manner as someone with none. Therefore, isn't it better if the prior drug convictions are not a matter of discussion? Lastly, most Judges like a defendant and an attorney who are prepared. Make sure you have been evaluated, completed most of the classes, and if its more than a first offense, have someone from the treatment facility there to speak on your behalf. I am amazed how few DUI attorneys take this last step. I think its imperative that someone from the Right Turn, http://www.rightturnmd.com/ for example, appear in Court with my DUI and DWI clients. It often shows the client has taken the matter seriously and gives the Court a better perspective as what the defendant has done with respect to treatment.

For a free consultation contact our Maryland and Virginia DUI/DWI attorneys at Portner & Shure, P.A. www.portnerandshure.com

Probation Before Judgment (PBJ). Always a good thing in a DUI/DWI case?

2010-06-10T15:00:05Z

Maryland's PBJ Statute provides that,

"[W]hen a defendant pleads guilty or nolo contendere or is found guilty of a crime, a court may stay the entering of judgment, defer further proceedings and place the defendant on probation subject to reasonable conditions if the defendant gives written consent after determination of guilt or acceptance of a nolo contendere plea. CP§220(b) (1).

A recent case, Motor Vehicle Administration vs. Jaigobin, No. 89, Sept. Term 2009, looked at whether a drivers commercial drivers license should still be suspended for one year after he was given a Probation Before Judgment (PBJ). The defendant Leonard Jaigobin was charged with driving while under the influence perse. He was found guilty, but was given a PBJ. Thereafter, he was issued a notice from the Motor Vehicle Administration http://www.mva.maryland.gov/ indicating his commercial drivers license would be disqualified for one year pursuant to TR 16-812. The issue was whether a PBJ is considered a "conviction" under the Transportation Code. Maryland's highest Court held that it was and Jaigobin's commercial license was disqualified for one year.

It is important to know all the ramifications of a PBJ. Many Maryland DUI/DWI attorneys do not. If you have any questions about whether a PBJ is the right deal for you in your DUI/DWI case, call our Maryland DUI/DWI attorneys at Portner & Shure www.portnerandshure.com for a free consultation.

Repeat Impaired Driver crashes with retired Montgomery County District Court Judge who spared him in 1998. Who will spare him now?

2010-04-26T19:44:44Z

Eleven years after the Honorable Edwin Collier spares repeat offender for driving under the influence for two DUI(s) within three months, he veers into the Judge's lane of travel and strikes his vehicle head on. Judge Collier and his wife, Ellen was driving in Gaithersburg when the head on collision occurred. Judge Collier suffered a broken leg and fractured ribs, and his wife, Ellen suffered a compound leg fracture, fractured hip, fractured ribs and a neck injury. It was determined that the repeat offender, Rene E. Fernandez who was tested after the accident, had more than two times the legal limit of alcohol in his system.

According to Montgomery County Circuit Court records, Mr. Fernandez was to plead guilty to one count of causing a life threatening injury, while intoxicated. The remaining charges would be dropped according to a plea agreement. The sentencing guidelines call for up to two years in prison. Mr. Fernandez is presently awaiting disposition from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County.

Judge Collier and his wife, Ellen were forced to move from their Bethesda home to a retirement community due to diminished mobility caused by Mr. Fernandez.

If you, a family member or someone you know has been involved in an automobile accident involving a drunk driver or you need more information on automobile accidents or drunk driving laws, please visit us on the web at http://www.portnerandshure.com or contact one of our experienced personal injury lawyers or DUI lawyers for a free consultation.

Maryland DUI/DWI, A New Penalty?

2010-03-12T19:44:52Z

Maryland lawmakers are considering following the lead of 12 other states which held that a first conviction for DUI results in mandatory use of an ignition breathalyzer. The proposed legislation faces fierce opposition from the American Beverage Institute. The restaurant trade association supports requiring the devices for repeat offenders, but believes it should be a judicial decision for first-time.

These breathalyzers, called ignition interlock devices, will not let the engine start until the driver breathes into a device. These devices are seen by advocates as an effective tool against drunk driving. The belief is that punishment does not work as evidenced by the high recidivism rate. Furthermore, most judges believe that someone who gets caught driving drunk has escaped detection many times.

Federal data compiled years ago showed that 25,120 Maryland drivers had three or more drunken-driving convictions, almost 4,000 had five or more and nearly 70 had more than 10. In the District, 34 drivers had more than three convictions.

If you, a family member or someone you know has been convicted of driving under the influence or if you would like more information on automobile accidents, please visit us on the web at http://portnerandshure.com

Traffic Stop and Permissible Search

2010-02-04T17:41:50Z

An officer can find countless reasons to make a legal traffic stop. The law, however, does restrict the officer's right to search the vehicle. One exception to the search restrictions is whatever the officer sees in his "plain view." In other words, the officer can peak in the car and if he suspects any criminal activity the officer can then search the vehicle further. This occurs frequently in drug cases. For example, a man was just arrested after a deputy saw suspected marijuana in his vehicle during a traffic stop on Mount Zion Road in Frederick County, Maryland. After seeing what he suspected was marijuana, deputies searched the vehicle and found smoking devices. The driver was charged with possession of marijuana and paraphernalia.

If you, a family member or someone you know has been charged with possession of a drug or if you would like more information on car accidents, please visit us on the web at http://portnerandshure.com

Robbery and the Juvenile Plea

2010-02-04T17:37:23Z

Serious criminal charges, like robbery, bring serious sentences with years of possible jail time. Consequently, defendants under 18 often ask that their charges be moved to Juvenile Court. The decision to transfer is often up to the Judge. The request can be made up until the defendants 18^th birthday. Obviously, juvenile sentences are far more lenient that adult sentences, so this is often a worthwhile tactic.

Such as a case in a recent robbery charge in Frederick County, Maryland. Kevin Concalves, an alleged gang member, is charges with the robbery of Philly's Cheesesteak Factory on Urbana Pike, and the Kerrigans Corner Deli in Point of Rocks. Goncalves was 17 at the time of the incidents so he has requested his case be heard in Juvenile Court.

If you, a family member, or someone you know is being charges with robbery or if you would like more information on car accidents please visit us on the web at http://portnerandshure.com

Vehicle searched after being pulled over for seat belt violation

2010-01-25T19:40:45Z

On January 19, 2010 while on patrol on westbound I-70, east of Maryland Route 85 in Frederick County, Maryland, a state trooper saw two people in a Nissan Maxima who were not wearing their seat belts. The officer stopped the car and smelled marijuana. Even though the original stop was just for a seat belt violation, under these circumstances the law allows the officer to search the driver and the passenger for suspected drugs. This is called a search incident to arrest. A search of the passenger uncovered marijuana in his pocket. Next the officer arrested the passenger and then had the right to search the car. A search of the car revealed two pounds of marijuana in two zip lock bags inside a duffle bag. Wear your seat belts.

If you, a family member, or someone you know has been charged with a crime or if you would like more information on car accidents, please visit us on the web at http://www.portnerandshure.com

Violation of Probation, Beware

2010-01-25T19:35:55Z

Defendants are often released from jail, or given suspended jail time and placed on probation to the Court. When they are given the terms of the probation, they are instructed if they violate any of those terms they may receive all the underlying jail time. The penalties for a violation often depend on how the Judge who did the underlying sentence views a violation. Many judges automatically impose the underlying jail time because they view probation itself as a second chance.

An example of a harsh sentence for a violation is reflected in a recent case rendered by Judge Tisdale in the Circuit Court of Frederick County. In 2006, Colin Johnson stabbed his girlfriend. He was found guilty of first degree assault and sentenced to serve 5 years of a 20 year sentence. After being released, the defendant sent a text message to the victim. The text was not threatening or inflammatory. In fact, it read "sorry about all this. Call me when you get a chance." The victim and the defendant had a child together. Nevertheless, the Court imposed the entire fifteen years for the violation.

If you, a family member, or someone you know has been accused of violating probation or if you would like more information on car accidents, please visit us on the web at http://www.portnerandshure.com

A LOOK AT MIRANDA

2010-01-19T13:52:17Z

The Maryland Court of Appeals www.courts.state.md.us/coappeals/index.html recently took a look at what is an interrogation for purposes of a suspects right to a Miranda warning. The law in this area states that if a person is being held for an interrogation he must be read his Miranda rights.

In Prioleau vs. State, CA No. 40 Sept. Term 2008, the Court held that a police officer did not violate a suspect's Miranda rights by asking him "what's up". Specifically, the Court held that it was not reasonable to expect the words "what's up" to elicit an incriminating response. As a result, it was not necessary to read the defendant his Miranda rights.

GOOD NEWS ABOUT DRUNK DRIVING IN MARYLAND

2009-12-09T18:57:09Z

In an era when most headline news is bad, or tabloid trash, new statistics concerning drunk driving in Maryland is encouraging. Deaths from drunk driving fell in Maryland last year. In fact, the state is now among the 10 with the lowest rate of fatalities, according to the National Traffic Safety Administration www.nhtsa.dot.gov.

The raw numbers reveal deaths in 2007 were 178 and last year were 152. Marylands fatality rate declined 12.5 percent surpassing the nationwide decrease of 7 percent. Reasons for the decline Include: (1) increase education on this danger (education is focused heavily on males ages 20 to 34 since they are the highest risk group); (2) stepped up enforcement (60,000 motorists were stopped at check points last year); (3) alcohol treatment; and (4) more vigilant Judges (more Judges have imposed interlock devices for repeat offenders)

The figures were released to kick-off a nationwide crackdown on drunken driving over the holiday season. Alcohol impairment accounts for about one-third of highway deaths in the United States. In contrast in Maryland last year, just 26% of the 591 deaths were alcohol related.

Speed Cameras: Public Safety or Public Nuisance?

2009-10-09T13:37:40Z

On October 1st, the City of Baltimore installed new speed cameras in 51 locations city wide. Vehicles caught exceeding the speed limit by 12 miles per hour or more will be sent warning notices for the first full month after installation of the speed cameras. On November 1st, violators will be issued speeding tickets accompanied by $40 fines. People receiving tickets will not be at risk of having points issued against their licenses, and will have the right to request a hearing in the Baltimore City District Court.

The trend toward the use of cameras to enforce traffic laws has gained momentum in Maryland over the past several years. Red light cameras have been installed in a number of locations across the state for quite some time. Speed cameras have been in use in Montgomerty County since 2007. Like Baltimore City, Baltimore and Frederick Counties installed speed cameras on October 1st.

Proponents for the use of cameras in enforcing traffic laws argue that the measures are necessary to improve public safety. The overall results of the red light camera program have yielded a steady decline in violations in locations where the cameras are installed. However, the reason for the drop in tickets issued for red light violations may be a result of drivers learning of and avoiding intersections where cameras are present. The more plausible and likely explanation for the installation of red light and speed cameras is the potential to generate new revenue. Baltimore City expects to collect $7.1 million in fines in 2010 from the newly installed speed cameras. Fines from the speed cameras used in Montgomery County have generated $18 million in fines since 2007.

I am opposed to the use of cameras in enforcement of traffic laws because it appears to lessen the burden of proof needed to assess penalties. The evidence used in all traffic camera cases are photographs of a person's car committing a traffic violation. The person that ultimately is punished in these cases is the owner of the vehicle. My issue with this process is that car owners are issued fines without any evidence that they personally were operating their vehicle at the time of the violation. The violator could be any number of people who are driving the vehicle with the permission of the car owner. In many cases, a car owner can essentially be punished for violations that they did not commit, and I believe that is manifestly unjust.

If you have been issued a traffic citation for any reason and believe that the charges against you are erroneous, contact us at www.portnerandshure.com. Our attorneys have many years of experience practicing in Maryland, Virginia and Texas, and believe in providing aggressive representation to all of their clients.

Alert: State Legislature Stiffens Penalties for DUI and Underage Drinking Offenses

2009-09-25T16:09:55Z

Starting October 1st, the State of Maryland will begin to impose new penalties against DUI and underage drinking offenders.

The new DUI penalties are aimed at levying heavier punishment against repeat drunk driving offenders. Specifically, any individual who is convicted of driving while impaired for a second time within a period of 5 years will be subjected to a mandatory 1 year suspension of their license. The legislature has also increased what is referred to as the 'look back' period for repeat offenders. In the past, Maryland Courts would consider a jail sentence in lieu of probation for any offender who had a prior DUI conviction over the past 5 years. Under the new legislation, however, the 'look back' period has extended review for a prior DUI conviction to the past 10 years.

The State legislature has also imposed new penalties for violators of underage drinking laws. The heaviest penalties under the new laws are saved for those who supply alcohol to individuals under the age of 21. People convicted of unlawfully supplying alcohol to minors under the age of 21 will face a possible fine of up to $2,500. Minors convicted of consuming alcohol when under the age of 21 face a possible fine of up to $500.

Those that have been charged with a DUI or underage drinking offense need to be aware that a more serious punishment awaits them if convicted. The law firm of Portner & Shure has experience in Maryland, Virginia and Texas and can help if you have been charged with an alcohol-related offense. If you have been charged with an alcohol-related offense and are looking for a free consultation, please visit us at www.portnerandshure.com.

Criminal Law: Considerations in Determining Whether a Stop and Frisk is Permissible

2009-09-21T13:40:30Z

If you believe that your arrest may have been the result of an illegal stop or frisk by law enforcement officials, please visit us at www.portnerandshure.com.

A Defendant's right to know the identity of witnesses who may testify against him

2009-09-03T14:58:47Z

Whether you are accused of a crime in Maryland, Virginia, or Texas, the same rules apply, in most instances the State must inform you, and your attorney, the identity of who will be testifying against you. A recent article in the Daily Record http://www.mddailyrecord.com/ on August 27, 2009, wrote about this Maryland case, State v. Lancaster http://www.mddailyrecord.com/article.cfm?id=12272&type=UTTM and looked at this issue.

In Lancaster, the Defendant was allegedly in a group of armed men who robbed an Olney home after one of its residents used a counterfeit $100 bill to buy drugs from Lancaster's girlfriend. Before trial the Judge granted the State's request to bar Lancaster's lawyer from sharing the names of the State's witnesses with him. The Court reasoned that the substantial risk of harm to the witnesses outweighed Lancaster's right to know their names before trial.

While looking more closely at the rights of a Defendant, Maryland's highest Court reached a different outcome. The Court found that prosecutors failed to present evidence of "specific threats" from Lancaster against the witnesses. Further, since he was in jail pending trial, the State needed to show how Lancaster had the means to carry out the threat. More importantly, the Court indicated that Lancaster's right of cross-examination was critical, since the witnesses knew each other, and cross could reveal a motive to testify falsely. Motives cannot be explored without thorough cross-examination. As the State acknowledged in this case, seeking protective orders that shield the names of the witnesses from defendant's should be an extraordinary measure.

If you or a family member has been charged with a crime, please do not hesitate to give us a call or visit us on the web at www.portnerandshure.com