Appellate Court Rulings

The Importance of Clear, Accurate, and Unambiguous Jury Instructions in Your Maryland Assault Case

November 15, 2024 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

A criminal trial includes many elements. An error by the court in any one of these can make the difference between a fair trial and injustice, between conviction and acquittal. Ensuring you get justice means safeguarding your rights at each of these steps. The best way to ensure that your rights are protected throughout your criminal trial is to retain the services of an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer.

A felony assault case from Montgomery County shows how even a seemingly subtle error can make all the difference.

The accused, W.L., was on trial following an altercation with another man outside the other man’s Takoma Park home. The other man received multiple knife wounds following a shouting match between the men. The state charged the suspect with first-degree assault.

Suspicious Bulges, Reasonable Suspicion, and the Boundaries of a Permissible ‘Stop and Frisk’ Under Maryland Law

September 12, 2024 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In 1968, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Terry v. Ohio, which declared that police officers can stop and frisk targets without violating that person’s Fourth /amendment rights if the officer has reasonable suspicion for making the stop and conducting the frisk. Today, police officers frequently obtain incriminating evidence from these stop-and-frisk interactions… but they sometimes do so without the necessary probable cause. As a criminal suspect or a person accused of a crime, getting justice via dismissal or an acquittal can mean disproving the presence of reasonable suspicion and obtaining a court order excluding the illegally obtained evidence from your case. Doing so successfully can be nuanced and complicated, so it pays to have an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer representing you.

Law enforcement officers sometimes use relatively broad bases for conducting a “Terry stop” (a/k/a stopping and frisking a person.) These foundations include vague things like a “suspicious bulge,” “furtive movements,” an “uncooperative demeanor,” or presence in a “high crime area.”

Courts in Maryland have noticed that allegedly suspicious bulges often aren’t… and that the law often requires more than just an officer’s observation that a suspect had a bulge the officer considered questionable. A recent gun case originating in Prince George’s County underscores this.

A New Maryland Supreme Court Ruling Addresses the Circumstances Where the Defense’s Proposed Voir Dire Questions are Mandatory

August 16, 2024 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Putting forward a criminal defense involves much more than simply making a trial presentation. Criminal cases may be functionally won or lost before either side makes its opening argument to the jury. Processes like the jury selection process are crucial, as removing jurors with biases may be vital to getting a fair trial. That is especially true in cases involving emotionally charged subject matter, like sex crimes, crimes against minors, and especially child sexual abuse. Whatever crimes you face, you need to do everything you can to ensure you get a fair chance and a level playing field. That starts with retaining an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer.

The jury selection process in Maryland criminal trials involves the judge asking potential jurors several questions. This process, voir dire, is intended to draw out potential jurors’ prejudices that might affect their ability to decide the case impartially. Counsel for the accused and the state can ask the court to exclude potential jurors based on the voir dire answers given. (The law also allows the two sides to exclude potential jurors for no reason, but prohibits using those “peremptory challenges” based on discriminatory motives.)

Voir dire — and when a proposed question is (or is not) mandatory — was at the center of a major new ruling from the Maryland Supreme Court released earlier this month. This decision further strengthens the tools the defense has available for unearthing juror biases.

How ‘Imperfect’ Self-Defense Applies to Criminal Cases in Maryland

July 17, 2024 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Most people are aware of the legal defense of “self-defense.” Most people do not know, however, that the law recognizes more than one type of self-defense. Depending on the facts of a case, the accused may be entitled to assert what the law calls “perfect” or “imperfect” self-defense. Each offers its own ways of helping an accused person. When facing a serious criminal matter, you should talk to an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer, who can provide insight into the affirmative defenses available under this state’s laws, including self-defense.

In Maryland, “perfect” self-defense requires an accused person to prove that he had an actual fear of “immediate or imminent… bodily harm,” and that this belief was objectively reasonable. “Imperfect” self-defense requires proving that the accused acted on an actual fear of immediate or imminent bodily harm, even if that belief was unreasonable. Perfect self-defense is a complete defense and, when proven, entitles an accused person to an acquittal. Imperfect self-defense negates the element of malice, allowing, for example, a person facing a murder charge to receive a conviction for the lesser crime of voluntary manslaughter.

Recently, the Appellate Court of Maryland weighed in regarding when an accused person is entitled to demand that his jury receive an instruction regarding imperfect self-defense.

No ‘Experts in Credibility’: What Maryland Law Says About Witnesses Opining About Whether Another Witness Should Be Believed

April 9, 2024 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In many criminal matters that make it to trial, the difference between an acquittal and a conviction is which side’s witnesses the jury finds more believable. To ensure you have the benefit of a fair trial, the law forbids the prosecution from doing or saying certain things that would tend to bolster unfairly the credibility of its witnesses. Keeping out this kind of inadmissible evidence often requires a well-stated and well-timed objection, which one reason why is any accused person’s case can benefit from the services of a skilled Maryland criminal defense lawyer.

The prosecution of E.C. in Montgomery County is a prime example of this sort of inadmissible evidence.

In April 2022, the accused man stood trial in a multi-count sex crime case. The state’s central witness was the alleged victim. In addition to the alleged victim, the prosecution also presented a physician who spoke to the alleged victim. The physician testified that the alleged victim’s comments and statements were “credible.”

What Happens When You’re Arrested in Maryland Based on a ‘Bad’ Warrant and a Lack of Probable Cause

December 8, 2023 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

“A violation of your Fourth Amendment rights.” People often associate this phrase with an impermissible search without a warrant, but that’s not the only scenario. An arrest itself can be a constitutional violation if the foundation underlying the arrest warrant isn’t adequate to establish probable cause. Whether you’re under suspicion or under arrest, don’t delay in retaining an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer to provide you with the skillful representation you need.

A homicide case from Prince George’s County is a real-life example of how an arrest warrant can be fatally flawed. The case flowed from an unsolved 2005 murder in which 2-3 armed intruders entered an apartment in Landover, tied up one man, and fatally shot a second man inside the unit.

In late December 2017, a detective filed an application for a statement of charges in connection with that murder.

What Maryland Law Says About the Admissibility of an Accused Person’s Prior Bad Acts

November 30, 2023 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

In a Maryland criminal trial, a jury should only convict the accused if the prosecution has presented evidence proving the accused’s commission of that specific crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Often, the people on trial are folks without spotless records; they may have had multiple prior encounters with the criminal judicial system. Those facts alone don’t make them guilty, though those facts might tempt a jury to find that defendant guilty simply because the jurors decide they dislike the accused. If you’re someone with a criminal past who is on trial again, it is crucial to ensure that you get inadmissible evidence of your past excluded from your case. This is just one of many areas where it pays to have representation from an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer.

These limitations on what the prosecution can do are necessary to avoid confusing jurors, prejudicing them against the accused, and predisposing them to believe the accused is guilty. In other words, the evidence might lead the jury to convict just because they think the accused is a bad person, not because the state offered sufficient proof of the crime charged.

As an example, there’s the Maryland Supreme Court’s recent ruling in the case of F.B., a Baltimore man on trial for felony child abuse.

A Maryland Man Accused of Murder is Granted a New Trial… for the Second Time

September 29, 2023 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

When you’re accused of a crime, achieving a successful result may involve many procedural steps. These could include things like pretrial motions (such as a motion to suppress illegally obtained evidence,) in-trial objections (such as opposing the admission of inadmissible hearsay evidence,) post-trial motions, and appeals. To ensure that your rights are protected to the fullest, you need to be sure you have representation from a Maryland criminal defense lawyer with the skills and experience to handle these procedural elements effectively.

A murder case from Montgomery County is a good example. The defendant, H.A.Z., stood accused of killing his married lover’s husband. The state also charged the woman with the murder.

The prosecution chose to try the two together. The Maryland rules allow for this kind of trial if the two defendants are “alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses.” Sometimes, though, a joint trial would result in unfair prejudice to one or both defendants, in which case the defendants should be tried separately.

What the ‘Statement Against Interest’ Hearsay Exception Does — and Doesn’t — Allow in a Maryland Criminal Trial

July 27, 2023 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

The rules of evidence say that a party may not use hearsay to prove their case (or disprove the other side’s case,) unless that hearsay evidence falls within one or more of several exceptions laid out in the rules. Parsing these exceptions — and keeping potentially harmful
evidence that falls outside these exceptions out of your trial — is a place where having an experienced Maryland criminal defense lawyer can be vital. Because any criminal trial can come down to what the jury hears — and what they don’t — winning these battles is crucial.

One of those exceptions is something called a “statement against interest.” Maryland Rule 5-804(b)(3) says that hearsay may be admissible if it “so tended to subject the declarant to civil or criminal liability, . . . that a reasonable person in the declarant’s position would not have made the statement unless the person believed it to be true.”

That exception was at the center of a recent drug case from Salisbury. In that case, the Wicomico County Sheriff’s Office raided a home in the early morning hours and recovered 69 bags of suspected crack cocaine, 98 suspected bags of heroin, 17 rounds of .40-caliber ammunition, a digital scale, and six cell phones.

The Maryland Supreme Court Just Put Some Important New Limits on Ballistics Expert Evidence in Criminal Trials

June 23, 2023 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Earlier this week, Maryland’s highest court issued a new opinion that made national headlines. The decision imposes necessary new standards on how prosecutors in this state can (and cannot) use ballistics experts. This ruling potentially represents a major aid for people in Maryland who stand accused of crimes involving guns. Whether or not your case involves firearms, a skilled Maryland criminal defense lawyer with fully up-to-date knowledge can be crucial to getting the best possible outcome.

The origin of the case was a murder in Riverdale. Police found the victim dead, having suffered five gunshot wounds, including one to the back of the head. A few days earlier, the police had responded to a disturbance at the same property. The police testified that the accused appeared to be “agitated” and “very aggressive,” and that the other man seemed “terrified.”

After the shooting, the police seized both of the guns belonging to the victim’s roommate — a Glock and a .38 Special. At the roommate’s murder trial, an examiner with the police department’s Firearms Examination Unit testified that, based on markings found on the bullets recovered from the crime scene, the bullets came from the exact .38 that the accused owned.