State and Local Government Law Commons^™

Recent Development: Counts V. State: Absent The Defendant's Consent, The State May Not Amend The Charging Document If The Amendment Changes The Character Of The Offense, Kristin E. Shields

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that amending a charge from theft of property “with a value of less than $1,000” to theft of property “with a value of at least $1,000 but less than $10,000” without the defendant’s consent changed the character of the offense. Counts v. State, 444 Md. 52, 55, 118 A.3d 894, 895 (2015). Therefore, the court held that such action was prejudicial per se because it interfered with the defendant’s right to defend himself by not giving notice of the exact charges against him, thereby violating Maryland Rule 4-204.

Recent Development: State V. Waine: A Court May Reopen A Closed Post Conviction Proceeding To Address A Challenge To An Advisory Only Jury Instruction, Ashley N. Nelson-Raut

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that advisory only jury instructions are not harmless error and the Unger v. State precedent should be applied retroactively. State v. Waine, 444 Md. 692, 122 A.3d 294 (2015). In addition, the court held that a defendant’s motion to reopen his or her post-conviction case after the Unger decision met the “interests of justice” standard required for reconsideration of the constitutionality of the defendant’s conviction.

Comment: Maryland State Bank: The Responsible Solution For Fostering The Growth Of Maryland's Medical Cannabis Program, David Bronfein

University of Baltimore Law Forum

In 2013, Maryland passed its initial medical cannabis law.1 Although seemingly a success in the medical cannabis reform movement, the law only allowed for “academic medical centers” to participate in the program.2 In essence, an academic medical center could dispense medical cannabis to patients who met the criteria for participation in their research program.3 The success of this type of program structure was a concern for medical cannabis advocates,4 and the concerns were validated when no academic medical centers decided to participate.5 As a result of this lackluster program, the General Assembly responded by passing a bill6 during the 2014 …

Recent Development: Williams V. State: A Confession Is Voluntary Unless The Defendant Unambiguously Invokes His Constitutional Right To Remain Silent Or The Confession Is Obtained Through Coercion Or Inducement, Pascale Cadelien

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that “I don’t want to say nothing. I don’t know,” is an ambiguous invocation of the right to remain silent. Williams v. State, 445 Md. 452, 455, 128 A.3d 30, 32 (2015). The court reasoned that the defendant’s addition of “I don’t know” to his initial assertion “I don’t want to say nothing” created uncertainty about whether he intended to invoke his right to remain silent. Id. at 477, A.3d at 44. This allowed a reasonable officer to interpret his statement as an “ambiguous request to remain silent.” Id. Furthermore, the officers’ implication …

Comment: De Facto Parents In Maryland: When Will The Law Recognize Their Rights?, Michelle E. Kelly

University of Baltimore Law Forum

Rachel and Allison were in a committed same-sex relationship beginning in 1990. Although they never legally married, the couple decided to manifest their love by having a child in 2001. Rachel and Allison both agreed that Rachel would carry the child by way of an anonymous sperm donor. Their child, Kevin, was born on September 3, 2002. Allison was present in the delivery room and even cut the umbilical cord. From the time Kevin was born until the summer of 2009 when Rachel and Allison ended their relationship, the couple equally raised and cared for Kevin, sharing all major and …

Recent Development: Preston V. State: Reasonable Protective Housing Provided To A State's Witness Is Not A "Benefit" Within The Meaning Of Maryland Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 3:13, Andrew Middleman

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a “benefit,” as used in Maryland Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 3:13, is “something akin to” a direct, quid pro quo exchange for a State’s witness’s testimony. Preston v. State, 444 Md. 67, 85, 118 A.3d 902, 913 (2015). The court of appeals further held that reasonable protective housing provided to a State’s witness, by itself, is not a “benefit.” Id. at 85, 104, 118 A.3d at 913, 924. The court also concluded that moving a State’s witness into protective housing, at State expense, was “not unreasonable.” Id. Accordingly, the court affirmed the …

Recent Development: Scarfield V. Muntjan: A Jury Demand In An Amended Complaint, Which Is Dismissed For Failure To State A Claim, Does Not Revive A Previously Waived Jury Demand For Counts In The Original Complaint, Thomas Andrew Barnes

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that, while a waived jury trial may be revived by an amended complaint in which new and substantive issues are raised, the dismissal of a new count raised in an amended complaint will not revive the originally waived demand for jury trial.

Baltimore Law Clubs: A Tradition Promoting The Integrity Of The Bar Through Scholarship And Congeniality, Stuart R. Berger, Bryant S. Green

University of Baltimore Law Forum

Since before the civil war, lawyers and judges in Baltimore have had a tendency to organize informal, intimate, and exclusive clubs for the purpose of promoting congeniality and scholarship.1 Although this Anglo-American tradition traces back to as early as the sixteenth century,2 the institution of law clubs in the United States appears to have been a unique, local phenomenon until the 1960s and 1970s.3 Today, this tradition continues in Baltimore City, which currently plays host to no fewer than eight individual law clubs, with many more existing throughout the state. These law clubs offer their members the opportunity to pursue …

Recent Development: Jackson V. State: Successive Post-Conviction Petitions Are Not Barred By The Doctrine Of Res Judicata Or Maryland Rule 4-704; A Petition For Dna Testing Will Be Denied If The Evidentiary Threshold For A Wrongful Conviction Claim Is Not Met., Kayla M. Dinuccio

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the doctrine of res judicata and Maryland Rule 4-704 do not bar successive DNA petitions. Jackson v. State, 448 Md. 387, 406, 139 A.3d 976, 987 (2016). The court further held that denying Jackson’s petition for DNA testing without a hearing under Maryland Rule 4-709 was proper, because none of his assertions would have produced exculpatory evidence. Id. at 411, 139 A.3d at 990.

Whose Bright Idea Was This Anyway? The Origins Of Judicial Elections In Maryland, Yosef Kuperman

University of Baltimore Law Forum

This paper describes how Maryland switched from the life-tenured appointed judiciary under its original Constitution to an elected judiciary. It traces the history of judicial selection from the appointments after 1776 through the Ripper Bills of the early nineteenth century to the eventual adoption of judicial elections in 1850. It finds that the supporters of judicial elections had numerous complex motives that boiled down to trying to make the Judiciary less political but more publically accountable. At the end of the day, Marylanders trusted elections more than politicians.

Recent Development: Peterson V. State: Limitations On Defense Cross-Examination Are Permitted When The Testimony Lacks A Factual Foundation, Is Overly Prejudicial, Or Has Not Been Adequately Preserved, Meghan E. Ellis

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the defendant’s right to confrontation was not violated when the defense was precluded from cross-examining a witness about hallucinations and his potential sentence prior to entering into a plea agreement. Peterson v. State, 444 Md. 105, 153-54, 118 A.3d 925, 952-53 (2015). The court found that the defendant failed to preserve the issue of a witness’s expectation of benefit with respect to pending charges, and failed to show sufficient factual foundation for a cross-examination regarding the expectation. Id. at 138-39, 118 A.3d at 944. In addition, the court found that, although not …

Recent Development: Sibug V. State: When A Defendant Is Found Incompetent, A Retrial Does Not Renew His Responsibility To Raise The Issue Of Competency; A Judicial Determination Of Competency Is Required Upon Retrial, Allison Terry

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a defendant who was previously found incompetent must be given a new competency hearing at retrial. Sibug v. State, 445 Md. 265, 319, 126 A.3d 86, 116 (2015). In addition, the defendant does not have to raise the issue of competency anew.

Recent Development: Toms V. Calvary Assembly Of God, Inc.: Noise Resulting From Legally Permissable Fireworks Does Not Constitute An Abnormally Dangerous Activity, And The Application Of Strict Liability Is Inappropriate., Jason C. Parkins

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that noise emitted from a lawful fireworks display did not constitute an abnormally dangerous activity; therefore, the parties were not subject to strict liability. Toms v. Calvary Assembly of God, Inc., 446 Md. 543, 569, 132 A.3d 866, 881 (2016).

Recent Development: A Guy Named Moe, Llc V. Chipotle Mexican Grill Of Colo., Llc: A Foreign Limited Liability Company Lacking Compliance With State Registration Requirements May Maintain Suit After Infirmity Is Cured; The Company Must Also Meet The "Person Aggrieved" Requirement Of Standing., Alicia M. Kuhns

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a foreign limited liability company, though unregistered at the time of filing, could resolve its lack of compliance and maintain its action for judicial review. A Guy Named Moe, LLC v. Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colo., LLC, 447 Md. 425, 447, 135 A.3d 492, 505 (2016). The court further held that one does not have standing as a “person aggrieved” based solely on the desire to eliminate business competition. Id. at 453, 135 A.3d at 508.

Out Of Cite, Out Of Mind: Navigating The Labyrinth That Is State Appellate Courts' Unpublished Opinion Practices, Lauren S. Wood

University of Baltimore Law Review

Imagine that you are an attorney, litigating an appellate case with an atypical fact pattern. You are familiar with the law; however, its application to your client's circumstances is entirely unclear. After endless hours of research, you finally find it: a factually apposite case with a favorable outcome. Elated, you grab your legal pad to scribble down the case citation. But then you see it-that dreaded text at the top of the opinion: "NOT SELECTED FOR PUBLICATION." This is an unpublished opinion. Perturbed and exhausted, your mind starts racing: "What's that rule again? Can I use this? I think that …

Banking Without Guarantees? Public Policy Considerations Concerning Insurance Company Retained Asset Accounts, Jill M. Bisco, Chad G. Marzen

University of Baltimore Law Review

During a child’s early years, many lessons are learned about the way the world operates. There are many lessons about language— schoolchildren learn how to write cursive, to write paragraphs, and also how to spell. There are lessons about the various continents and countries around the world, the various cultures, and the various careers one can pursue after entering into adulthood. Amidst these lessons, many will receive a piggy bank for the first time to learn the value of saving money. Over time, the value of the money in a piggy bank sometimes yields a surprise. Around a person’s teenage …

Building Community, Still Thirsty For Justice: Supporting Community Development Efforts In Baltimore, Renee Hatcher, Jaime Alison Lee

All Faculty Scholarship

Baltimore is a city of many challenges, but it possesses true communitybased strength. The city’s residents and community organizations are its greatest assets. This article highlights some of the community’s work and how the Community Development Clinic at the University of Baltimore School of Law (CDC) supports this work through its experiential learning curriculum.

The challenges facing Baltimore’s communities (systemic disinvestment, structural racism, vacant buildings, unemployment, and the criminalization of poverty, to name a few) existed long before the national media coverage and uprising surrounding the death of Freddie Gray, an unarmed Black man who suffered a fatal spinal injury …

Recent Developments: Sharp V. State: Despite Not Formally Objecting, Defense Counsel Properly Preserved The Issue Of Whether The Circuit Court Inappropriately Weighed Defendant's Decision Not To Plead Guilty At Sentencing; The Circuit Court Did Not Impermissibly Consider Defendant's Rejection Of The Plea Offer At Sentencing., Colin Campbell

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that defense counsel’s statements conveyed an objection to the circuit court’s perceived consideration of the defendant’s decision not to plead guilty at sentencing. Sharp v. State, 446 Md. 669, 113 A.3d 1089 (2016). As a result, the court held that defense counsel sufficiently preserved the issue for appellate review. Id. at 684, 113 A.3d at 1098. Ultimately, though, the circuit court’s statements at sentencing did not give rise to the inference of an impermissible consideration. Id. at 701, 113 A.3d at 1108.

Maryland's Family Divisions Are A Model For Change, Barbara A. Babb, Gloria Danziger, Michele H. Hong-Polansky

All Faculty Scholarship

In fiscal year 2014, 43 percent of all cases filed in Maryland’s trial court of general jurisdiction (the circuit court) were family law cases (Court Operations Department, 2014: CC-5). Historically, Maryland courts, like many states’ family justice systems, lacked a uniform structure to consolidate family law issues for an individual family. As a result, families often faced multiple hearings before different judges in different courtrooms to address a variety of issues, such as divorce, domestic violence, delinquency, and child abuse/neglect. This system created tremendous hardship for families (particularly low-income families, many of whom were self-represented litigants) and resulted in fragmented …

How The Right To Speedy Trial Can Reduce Mass Pretrial Incarceration, Zina Makar

All Faculty Scholarship

Kenny Johnson1 was thirty-two years old when he was released from a Baltimore City jail— almost three years after his arrest in October 2012. Johnson was not serving a sentence, but these three years were spent under pretrial detention. He had been denied bail. Johnson’s case was a rollercoaster of delays and uncertainty, particularly towards the end of his pretrial incarceration. The need for certainty convinced Johnson to plead guilty—he could not stand knowing that his pretrial incarceration could be indefinite and he wanted to be sure he was going home, guilty or not guilty.

Between the time he was …

Recent Development: Hailes V. State: The State May Appeal A Trial Court's Ruling Excluding A Dying Declaration; The Length Of Time Between A Declarant's Statement And Death Is Irrelevant In A Dying Declaration Analysis; The Confrontation Clause Is Inapplicable To Dying Declarations, Lauren A. Panfile

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the State may appeal a trial court’s suppression of a victim’s dying declaration based on the legislative intent of Section 12-302(c)(4)(i) of the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Procedure Article (“section 12-302(c)(4)(i)”). Hailes v. State, 442 Md. 488, 497-98, 113 A.3d 608, 613-14 (2015). The court further held that a victim’s statement, made while on life support, was a dying declaration regardless of the fact that the victim died two years after making the statement. Id. at 506, 113 A.3d at 618. Finally, the court held that the Confrontation Clause of the …

Recent Development: Sublet V. State: Authentication Of Evidence From Social Networking Websites Requires A Trial Judge To Find Sufficient Proof From Which A Reasonable Juror Could Conclude That The Evidence Is What The Proponent Claims It To Be, Denise A. Blake

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland, in three consolidated cases, held that a trial judge must determine that evidence from a social networking website meets the “reasonable juror” standard of authentication as a condition precedent to admissibility. Sublet v. State, 442 Md. 632, 678, 113 A.3d 695, 722 (2015). This standard requires a preliminary determination by the trial judge that a reasonable juror could find the evidence is what the proponent claims it to be.

Recent Development: Espina V. Jackson: The Local Government Tort Claims Act Limits Local Government's Liability For Constitutional Tort Claims Committed By Its Employees; Local Government Employees Acting With Actual Malice Are Liable For Their Own Torts; And Multiple Wrongful Death Actions Arising From The Same Underlying Conduct May Be Aggregated For Purposes Of The Damages Cap, Kristin E. Shields

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the damages cap of the Local Government Tort Claims Act (“LGTCA”) limits a local government’s liability for damages caused by an employee’s tortious act in violation of the state constitution. Espina v. Jackson, 442 Md. 311, 317, 112 A.3d 442, 446 (2015). The court also held that this limitation does not contradict the supremacy of the state constitution. Id. at 335, 112 A.3d at 456. Furthermore, the court held the LGTCA damages cap is not an unreasonable restriction on the right to remedy under Article 19 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights. …

Recent Development: State V. Hunt: A Petitioner Who Files For A Writ Of Actual Innocence Has The Right To A Hearing Based On Newly Discovered Evidence When The Pleading Substantially Complies With Md. Crim. Proc. § 8-301 And Md. Rule 4-332, Daniel M. Weir

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the trial court erred in denying a hearing on a petition for a writ of actual innocence based on newly discovered evidence, when petitioners substantially complied with the pleading requirements under Section 8-301 of the Maryland Code, Criminal Procedure Article (“section 8-301”) and Maryland Rule 4-332.

Recent Development: Antonio V. Ssa Sec., Inc.: Upon Exhausting All Other Tools Of Statutory Interpretation, Policy Considerations Revealed That The Maryland Legislature Did Not Intend To Abrogate The Common Law Doctrine Of Respondeat Superior Through The Enactment Of § 19-501 Of The Maryland Security Guards Act, David Bronfein

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the Maryland Security Guards Act, Section 19-501 of the Maryland Code, Business Occupations and Professions Article (“section 19-501”) does not expand a security guard agency’s liability for unauthorized employee conduct; rather, the statute remains consistent with the liability prescribed by Maryland’s common law doctrine of respondeat superior. Antonio v. SSA Sec., Inc., 442 Md. 67, 90, 110 A.3d 654, 667 (2015). Finding the plain language, context, and legislative history of the statute to be ambiguous and unconvincing, the court was ultimately persuaded by policy considerations behind upholding the common law doctrine of …

Recent Development: State V. Yancey: Denial Of A Defendant's Request To Be Present During A Voir Dire Bench Conference With A Juror Who Is Later Selected To Serve Is Not A Harmless Error, Shannon A. Stern

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the denial of a defendant’s request to be present at voir dire bench conferences is not harmless error when a prospective juror disclosed information of potential bias and was selected to sit on the jury without input from the defendant. State v. Yancey, 442 Md. 616, 617, 113 A.3d 685, 686 (2015). The court determined that the State did not meet its burden of proving the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

Recent Development: Garner V. State: The Unit Of Prosecution For Use Of A Handgun In The Commission Of A Crime Of Violence Is The Crime Of Violence, Not The Victim Or Criminal Transaction; The Evidence Corroborated Two Separate Handgun Convictions; And The Trial Court's One-Year Sentence For The Second Use Of A Handgun Conviction Was Illegal, Ashlyn J. Campos

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that the unit of prosecution for Section 4-204 of the Maryland Code, Criminal Law Article (“section 4-204”) is the individual crime of violence, not the victim or criminal transaction. Garner v. State, 442 Md. 226, 230, 112 A.3d 392, 394 (2015). The court of appeals further held that separate handgun convictions are permitted when evidence supports multiple crimes or felonies. Id. at 244, 112 A.3d at 402. Finally, the court held that a trial court does not possess the discretion to impose a sentence less than the mandatory five year minimum prescribed by …

Recent Development: In Re Tyrell A.: Trial Courts Generally May Not Order Restitution To An Individual Whose Voluntary Participation In A Crime Or Delinquent Act Results In Injury, Andrew Middleman

University of Baltimore Law Forum

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that Sections 11-601(j) and 11- 603(a) of the Maryland Code, Criminal Procedure Article, do not authorize trial courts to order restitution to an individual who suffers an injury while voluntarily participating in a crime or delinquent act, “absent exceptional circumstances.” In re Tyrell A., 442 Md. 354, 383, 112 A.3d 468, 485 (2015). Accordingly, the court of appeals vacated a juvenile court’s restitution order to an individual who suffered nasal injuries while participating in the common law offense of affray.

The Greening Of Public Private Partnerships: What Design Professionals And Contractors Need To Know For Green Building's Next Legal Frontier, Tracy L. Steedman, Stephen Del Percio, Matthew L. Kimball

University of Baltimore Journal of Land and Development

America is at a pivotal moment in maintaining and modernizing its public infrastructure. Our nation's roads, bridges, water systems and energy networks have long been in poor repair. Much of the country's public infrastructure was put into place over fifty years ago, and many of these systems are simply overwhelmed or worn out. Infrastructure that is in poor condition or disrepair is mostly a hidden problem until it inconveniently stops working or worse, when ghastly consequences ensue from catastrophic failures.

A Reasonable Expectation Of Privacy Online: "Do Not Track" Legislation, Alicia Shelton

University of Baltimore Law Forum

This year marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the World Wide Web (“Web”), and more than 81% of Americans are now using the internet on a regular basis. Yet, despite the fact that key pieces of personally identifying information—name, address, phone number, email address, and birthday—and sensitive personal data—political opinions, racial or ethnic origin, religious beliefs, and health—can be learned through tracking an individual’s online activity, there continues to be a void of federal legislation protecting the privacy of internet users. In the absence of federal action, state legislatures are tasked with regulating electronic surveillance by both private companies and the …