Posted on April 14, 2009 in Criminal Defense

As a Maryland Criminal Attorney, I often represent people charged with Internet crimes such as solicitation of a minor for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity. I was recently retained in such a case in Baltimore County Circuit Court wherein my client is charged not with soliciting a minor on the Internet, but instead with soliciting an undercover detective posing as a minor. These types of cases have become priorities for state and federal authorities in recent years and are taken very seriously. My client has been offered a plea bargain wherein the state would seek five years in prison. My client has been advised that if he fails to accept this plea agreement he will be indicted federally where he will face a mandatory 10 year, non-parolable sentence if convicted. To further complicate matters, my client is a foreign national who is married to an American citizen and has two American born children. Although he does have a green card, he never bothered to become an American citizen and is thus subject to deportation should he be convicted.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 26, 2009 in Personal Injury

When representing a client who my have a potential claim for personal injury against the State of Maryland, Maryland personal Injury lawyers must place the state on proper notice within six months of the incident. Failure to do so could bar any recovery under Maryland law.

Although the doctrine of sovereign immunity generally precludes an action for damages against the State of Maryland, its agencies, or officials, the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA) provides for waiver of that immunity in cases of “tortuous acts or omissions committed within the scope of the public duties of state personnel, and committed without malice or gross negligence.”

The MTCA requires that the injured individual “may not institute an action . . . unless: (1) the claimant submits a written claim to the Treasurer or a designee of the Treasurer within 1 year after the injury to the person . . . ; (2) the Treasurer or designee denies the claim finally; and (3) the action is filed within 3 years after the cause of action arises.” MD. CODE ANN., STATE GOV’T § 12-102
In addition, the notice requirement provides the State with early notice of a potential claim, which allows the Treasurer, upon receipt of timely notice, to . . . consider[] the fiscal consequences of the claim, and then decide[] which of several options to pursue. As a result of the early notice required under the MTCA, the Treasurer also has “the opportunity to investigate the claims while the facts are fresh and memories vivid, and, where appropriate, settle them at the earliest possible time.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 13, 2009 in Personal Injury

The Baltimore Sun is reporting a man driving a Lexus crashed into the rear of a slow moving van this morning on Interstate 97 near Crownsville. The crash sparked a fire that consumed both vehicles. One person was killed.

The driver of the Lexus, Joseph Romano and his passenger were able to escape their vehicle. Only one of the occupants of the Chevrolet van was able to escape. The survivors were transported to Maryland Shock Trauma Center for treatment for not life-threatening injuries. Police have not disclosed the name of the person pronounced dead at the scene.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 10, 2009 in Criminal Defense

As a Maryland criminal defense lawyer, I am often asked by parents whether they can be held financially responsible for the crimes of their children. The answer is YES. MAryland Juvenile Courts have the authority to order up to $10,000.00 in restitution to victims as part of any disposition. If the court finds, for example, that a person’s property was damaged, stolen or destroyed because of a minors delinquent act, the minor and the parents can be held on the hook for up to $10,000.00. This award may include other types of restitution such as the victim’s medical bills in an assault or battery case, or even funeral expenses.

For more information, please contact our criminal lawyers for a complimentary consultation.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 10, 2009 in Criminal Defense

In Maryland Juvenile Court, in an effort to "soften" the blow to minors. Different terms are used to describe the process. In juvenile criminal court, a defendant is a "respondent". The Charging document is a "petition" not an "indictment". Juveniles do not get tried, rather they have an "adjudicatory hearing". If found guilty, the minor is not convicted of a crime but rather is "found delinquent".

If a child is found delinquent, the child is either supervised for a probation period, or committed (not incarcerated) to the department of Juvenile Services. Because the term incarceration is taboo in the juvenile system, the commitment is reviewed regularly by a judge.

For more information, or a free consultation, please contact the Maryland criminal lawyers of Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White, LLC. or call Steve Silverman at 410-385-2226.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 10, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Maryland’s Juvenile Courts handle cases involving most minors-youths who are under age 18. The court has jurisdiction even if the youth turns 18 before the case is adjudicated, and jurisdiction continues until the age of 21. In some instances, cases can start in adult criminal court and wind up in juvenile court. Cases involving children 16 years old or older charged only with traffic violations that do not carry a possible penalty of incarceration are not heard in Juvenile Court. These cases are heard on the regular traffic docket in District Court. Cases involving children 14 or older who are charged with an offense that if committed by an adult is punishable by death or life imprisonment go directly to criminal court. These cases are heard on the regular Circuit Court docket.

Certain cases involving serious charges against children 16 and older, including murder, rape, kidnapping, armed robbery, carjacking, certain hangun violations and certain sexual offenses, also go to criminal court. Such cases can be transferred from criminal to Juvenile Court, and there are also provisions to allow certain juvenile cases to be transferred to criminal court.

Cases in Juvenile Court fall primarily within these categories:

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 10, 2009 in Criminal Defense

Maryland Criminal Attorney Brian Thompson successfully defends client charged with Possession with Intent to Distribute Cocaine. The issue in this case was whether or not the police can conduct a strip search on a person who is arrested for a traffic violation. In Maryland, the police have the discretion to arrest or to simply issue citations and release people who are charged with incarcerable traffic violation such as Driving Under the Influence or Impaired by Alcohol, Driving While Suspended, Driving Without Insurance, Hit and Run, etc., In most instances, so long as the person is able to be conclusively identified, the officer with cite and release
However, in cases where the police are unable to conclusively identify a person because the person does not have proper identification or in situations where the police want the excuse to search the person’s vehicle, they will arrest for these violations. My recent case falls into the latter category. Here are the facts:

My client was driving a vehicle in the Essex area of Baltimore County one afternoon this past summer. He drove by a police officer who knew him and believed him to have a suspended license. The officer confirmed this information through dispatch and pulled my client over. Suspecting that my client was "riding dirty" (was in possession of drugs) the officer placed him under arrest for the violation and conducted a search incident to the arrest of both my client’s person and the vehicle. This is all perfectly proper and legal for the police to do but did not result in the recovery of any contraband.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 10, 2009 in Personal Injury

A skateboarder’s failure to yield when entering a highway contributed to his own demise and bars his widow and estate from recovering against the driver whose vehicle struck and killed him, the Court of Special Appeals has held. A recent article in the Maryland Daily Record discusses the Court’s determination that a skateboarder is a "vehicle" and therefore subject to the boulevard rule. Thousands of Marylanders are injured every year while riding on skateboards, bicycles and other recreational vehicles. An experienced accident attorney can help injured victims recover compensation for their injuries under the law.

Under Maryland law, a favored driver has the right of way under the boulevard rule. For years, the law was unclear as to what status skateboarders, cyclists and pedestrians held under this rule. This latest decision by the Court holds a skateboarder to a higher standard of care under the law with regards to the contributory negligence rule. An experienced Maryland Accident Attorney is well-versed in this law and can accurately and effectively advise injured victims on how best to proceed with their case. If you or someone you know is injured while riding on a skateboard, bicycle or any other type of recreational vehicle contact the personal injury experts.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 06, 2009 in Medical Malpractice

Maryland has enacted significant limitations on the ability of Plaintiffs to use expert witnesses in Maryalnd medical malpractice cases. In 1976, the Maryland Health Claims Arbitration Act was enacted to help address a perceived medical malpractice insurance crisis. In 1986, the legislature further amended the Act to include a certificate of qualified expert requirement. As proposed in Senate Bill 559, an expert only would be qualified to sign a certificate if he or she did not receive 50 percent or more income from testimony and other activities related to personal injury claims. That language was amended to become the 20 Percent Rule; i.e., in order to qualify, a certifying expert cannot devote more than 20 percent of his or her professional activities to activities directly involving testimony in personal injury claims. The dichotomy that the General Assembly sought to reconcile was the desire, on the one hand, to exclude certain "professional witnesses" from the "pool of eligible experts" available to sign certificates of merit, while on the other, it did not want to "shrink" the size of that pool so as to "deny the parties the ability to pursue and defend these [malpractice] claims." This balance was achieved by the aforementioned language changes which "keyed the critical numerical measurement to time, instead of income," and narrowing the activities described as "related to" personal injury claims to the more circumscribed world of activities "directly involving testimony in personal injury claims."

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 06, 2009 in Medical Malpractice

When most people think of a medical malpractice case, they think about the kind of case in which the plaintiff (the party bringing the case) claims that a doctor of hosptial has acted below the standard of care and caused significnat injury in a patient. Another type of medcial malpractice case, however, inolves what is called "informed consent." In the seminal case of Sard v. Hardy, the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the doctrine of informed consent follows logically from the universally recognized rule that a physician treating a mentally competent adult under non-emergency circumstances, cannot properly undertake to perform surgery or administer other therapy without the prior consent of his patient. The fountainhead of the doctrine of informed consent is the patient’s right to exercise control of his own body. In order for the patient’s consent to be effective and "informed," it must have been one that is given after the patient received a fair and reasonable explanation of the contemplated treatment or procedure.

Continue Reading ››