Maryland Criminal & Immigration Lawyer Blog

How Battered Spouse Syndrome Evidence May Help You in Your Murder or Manslaughter Trial in Maryland

December 12, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

35 years ago, the TV movie The Burning Bed brought spousal abuse and domestic violence into the front of the public consciousness. The famous Farrah Fawcett film and a 1980 book of the same name were based on a 1970s case where a Michigan woman doused a bed in gasoline and set it on fire with her husband still sleeping on it. A jury eventually found the woman was temporarily insane at the time, after having heard evidence of the husband’s alleged 13 years of abusing the wife.

Since 1991, Maryland law has allowed defendants to submit evidence of the domestic abuse they’ve suffered as part of their defense in a criminal trial. Despite some of the terminology used related to this issue (“Battered Woman’s Syndrome”, “Battered Spouse Syndrome,” etc.,) you do not, in Maryland, have to be a spouse or be a woman to use this evidence in your defense. If you are on trial and you were the victim of abuse, especially if your abuser was the victim of your alleged crime, then it is vitally important that you have a knowledgeable Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side to give you the maximum protection and best defense possible.

A woman recently on trial here in Maryland alleged that she was one of those abuse victims. The deceased, M.H., was the accused’s boyfriend. During a fight between the two, the woman yelled at the man to stop putting his hands on her, then went to the kitchen and got a knife. Eventually, the man received a stab wound to the chest, which punctured his aorta and killed him.

What Constitutes an Unconstitutional Search or Seizure, as Opposed to a ‘Consensual’ Interaction With Police in Maryland?

December 9, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Both the U.S. and Maryland courts include protections against law enforcement officers conducting unreasonable searches and seizures. Maryland law also has some clear guideposts about the circumstances that do (or do not) constitute a search or seizure, and they include some scenarios you might not necessarily have associated with illegal searches unless you were keenly familiar with the law.

That’s why you need a knowledgeable Maryland criminal defense attorney handling your case. Your knowledgeable attorney does have that kind of extremely in-depth knowledge of search-and-seizure law, in addition to many other essential aspects of Maryland criminal law.

The situation that led to K.C.’s trial is a good example of what we mean. While Maryland Transit Authority officers were performing a sweep looking for fare dodgers aboard a light rail train, one passenger, K.C., informed an officer that he had no ticket to ride. The officer ordered K.C. to exit the train and sit on a bench. The MTA officers began running a check on K.C. for outstanding warrants. While officers ran that warrants check, K.C. tried to escape and three officers tackled him. During that interaction, one officer discovered a gun and another subsequently searched K.C., finding multiple bags of cocaine.

What the Right of a Maryland Defendant to ‘Be Present at all Stages of a Criminal Trial’ Means and How that Right Can Help

November 6, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

A criminal defendant has many rights under the U.S. and Maryland constitutions. Article 5 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights says that a criminal defendant has the right to be physically present at every stage of his trial. This right is very important because, sometimes, a judge will misconstrue, forget, overlook or ignore this rule and engage in something that qualifies as a “stage” of the trial outside the accused person’s presence.

When that happens, that’s often considered a violation of the accused person’s fundamental rights and may often trigger a right to a new trial. Of course, utilizing your rights (and sometimes the violations of them) to your maximum benefit requires in-depth knowledge of the law, so it pays to have an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney on your side.

To see how this can work to an accused person’s benefit, look at the case of K.M. In the summer of 2016, two Baltimore police officers investigated a tip about a man and a handgun. The officers spotted K.M., and began following him and his girlfriend. Eventually they stopped the couple and, inside a diaper bag, the officers found a loaded Glock 19 with live rounds inside it, along with an additional magazine.

How a Prosecutor’s Misstatement of the Law in Closing Arguments Got One Maryland Man a New Trial

October 23, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

There may be certain things that you may know about criminal trials and criminal law. You may understand what hearsay is and that the prosecution can’t use most kinds of hearsay evidence against you. You may know that the prosecution can’t use irrelevant evidence or (in most situations) force your attorney (or past attorney) to testify against you.

However, giving yourself a truly complete defense goes well beyond that. There are many things that the law says that the state cannot do and, if one or more of those things does happen in your trial, you may be entitled to certain remedies as a result, such as a new trial. To make sure you have that kind of vigorous and complete protection, be sure you have retained an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney.

As noted above, some issues are more subtle and nuanced than, say, a prosecutor’s attempt to admit something that’s obviously irrelevant. For example, take the case of J.R., who was on trial for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. In the case, the marijuana in question had been found inside a backpack that was in the trunk of J.R.’s car.

What You Do — and Don’t — Have to Say to Invoke Your Right to Legal Counsel in Maryland

October 11, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

It is that moment that is so common to TV police-and-prosecutors shows… and so very frustrating to those fictional law enforcement officers. It happens when the suspect the police are questioning looks the officers in the eyes and says, “I’m not talking without my lawyer here.”

If you are facing police questioning as a potential suspect in a criminal case, one of the most important things you, just like that fictional suspect, can do to help yourself is to bring that questioning to a temporary halt by invoking your right to counsel. Law enforcement officers are trained professionals skilled at manipulating suspects into giving them the answers they want to hear. Your knowledgeable Maryland criminal defense attorney is familiar with all of these techniques and with how to protect you in an interrogation setting.

Your right to counsel is one of the strongest rights provided to you by the Constitution. On TV, suspects often make clear requests to the effect of “I want a lawyer.” In real life, suspects may feel nervous, intimidated, overwhelmed, or scared and often speak less clearly. As a recent case demonstrates, even if you don’t speak with the precision and clarity of an Ivy League law professor (or a trained Hollywood actor,) that lack of plainness does not take away the effectiveness of an invocation of your rights.

What You Need to Get Evidence Seized in a Police Checkpoint Thrown Out in Your Maryland Criminal Case

September 24, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

For many people, traffic checkpoints operated by police trigger feelings of frustration and annoyance. For others, then can be a source of stress and anxiety. If you are arrested during a police checkpoint, there may still be cause for hope. The law in Maryland imposes some restrictions on what does or does not qualify as a valid checkpoint in terms of complying with the Fourth Amendment. If your checkpoint doesn’t pass that test, then the evidence secured as a result of that checkpoint may be excluded from your criminal case. To find out more about what you can do in your case that arose from a checkpoint, be sure to talk to an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney.

C.J. was a man ensnared in something he viewed as a checkpoint. He was driving through downtown Baltimore and, while he sat at the red light, the police initiated a traffic stop. The reason for the stop was that C.J. wasn’t wearing his seat belt. While the police performed their investigation of C.J., they discovered an outstanding warrant and a loaded handgun under the driver’s seat of the vehicle, and they arrested him.

The state charged C.J. with several weapons-related crimes, on top of driving a vehicle without wearing a seat belt. The driver asked the court to throw out the evidence of the gun, arguing that the police discovered the gun as a result of an illegal traffic checkpoint.

When a Statement is — and is Not — Admissible Against You in Maryland as an ‘Excited Utterance’

September 9, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

If you’re watching your favorite courtroom drama show, you may hear a lawyer say to a judge, “Objection! Hearsay!” That’s because, most of the time, hearsay evidence is inadmissible at trial. The law considers general hearsay to be lacking the degree of reliability needed for admissible evidence in a court of law. Some hearsay is admissible, though. That’s the hearsay that falls into one of the exceptions carved out by the law. An “excited utterance,” for example, is one of the exceptions in Maryland.

In your criminal trial, the difference between success and defeat may be your ability to win an admissibility argument about one or more pieces of hearsay evidence. To be sure you have the best chance of winning these and other arguments against the prosecution, be sure you have an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney protecting you.

An excited utterance is an immediate statement made in a state of shock or extreme excitement due to a “startling event or condition.” The idea is that the speaker is so stressed that she is speaking spontaneously and sincerely, and her words “may be taken as particularly trustworthy.” A recent case originating in Baltimore shines a light on just how far the boundaries of “excited utterance” do – and do not – go.

An Important New Ruling from Maryland’s Highest Court Says that the Odor of Marijuana Alone Doesn’t Give the Police Cause for a Warrantless Search

August 26, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Many times, changes in the law are reflections of changes in society. That can be true both in case law and in statutory law. The landmark 2015 U.S. Supreme Court decision that said that all same-sex couples have a fundamental right to marry is an example of the former. The significant changes many states, including Maryland, have made to their statutes regarding the decriminalization of marijuana are examples of the latter.

Today, possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana is not a crime in Maryland. Some of the benefits of that are very obvious. There are, however, other collateral benefits of this change in the law that are less obvious, but no less important. This change in the legal status of marijuana may impact your criminal case, whether or not drug charges were involved, as one very important Court of Appeals ruling recently illustrated. There are many things you can take away from this new case, but one of the main ones is: if you were arrested and drug-related evidence obtained based on a warrantless search, be sure to contact an experienced Maryland drug crime attorney about your rights and your options within the legal system.

In Maryland, the federal and state constitutions contain protections that safeguard you against warrantless searches and seizures. In order for the police to conduct a search without a warrant, they generally need probable cause for the search. That means they need a reasonable suspicion that the subject of the search was involved in a crime.

If Your Pat-Down Search Was Illegal, That May Entitle You to Suppression of Evidence in Your Maryland Criminal Trial

August 8, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

Most police officers are ethical people who try to uphold the law within the confines of the rules that the constitution and the law have created. However, whether an officer is a “good” cop or a “bad” cop, the officer has the potential to make mistakes, to go outside the boundaries of the law and to engage in conduct that violates a person’s constitutional rights.

When that happens and an arrest results, the accused person has certain rights. This includes things like having the unconstitutionally acquired item(s) excluded from the evidence that a jury may consider at trial. Getting that item or items excluded, which may be the difference between acquittal and conviction, often requires a detailed knowledge of the law and of courtroom procedural rules. For that and for the overall advocacy you need, be sure you have an experienced Maryland criminal defense attorney working for you.

What does this type of constitutional violation look like? T.T.’s case is a good example. Officers K.S. and J.Z., using an unmarked car, were patrolling a particularly high drug-crime area in Baltimore on New Year’s Day in 2017. As they patrolled, they spotted a silver Cadillac parked illegally (it was pointed the wrong way.) They turned on the police car’s lights and approached the occupant.

How an Inadequate Waiver of Your Right to a Jury Trial Can Get You a New Trial in Maryland

July 23, 2019 | by Anthony A. Fatemi, LLC

A criminal defendant’s right to a trial by a jury of his peers is a very fundamental constitutional right in Maryland and the rest of the United States. To make sure that this right is protected, Maryland law has established some very specific processes that must be completed before a defendant’s right to a jury trial will be considered to have been waived and the case decided by a judge. If you did not get a jury trial despite having never entered a valid waiver of your rights, then you may be entitled to a new trial. For advice and counsel on these and other criminal law issues, be sure to retain an experienced Maryland criminal law attorney.

As an example of this right in action, there’s the case of S.H. S.H. was accused of having committed a series of 25 thefts in Calvert County over a six-week period. After much delay, the accused man’s case reached a plea hearing. At that hearing, the defendant indicated that he wanted a jury trial. Later that day, at a different hearing in front of a different judge, the two sides informed the judge that they’d agreed to try the case without a jury. The case proceeded and the judge found S.H. guilty on all but two charges. Sentencing immediately followed.

The accused man appealed his conviction and was able to obtain a new trial. The success was one that resulted from the very strict procedural requirements that exist for trying a criminal defendant without a jury. Specifically, the law requires that a defendant must do more than just say, “I waive my right to a jury trial.” Instead, the defendant must waive that right in such a way that it is proven to have been a knowing and voluntary waiver of rights, and the judge must make a finding that is included in the case’s record that says that the waiver was knowing and voluntary.