Tuesday, March 5, 2013
The Maryland Court of Appeals rules that people convicted of sex crimes prior to 2009 do not have to register with the state.
Some people convicted of sex crimes prior to the existence of the state's sex offender registry may no longer have to register with the state Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, according to a ruling by the Maryland Court of Appeals. The split decision, issued Monday, struck a registry requirement, imposed upon the defendant by legislation passed later, on the basis that it violated a clause in the Maryland Declaration of Rights prohibiting retroactive laws. [A copy of the ruling is attached to this story.] "Registration was imposed, over twenty years later in 2009, under the sex offender registration statute as a direct consequence of petitioner’s commission and conviction for his sex crime. The application of the …
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Bills in the House of Delegates and Senate would create a new standard where all dog owners are presumed liable for dog attacks, regardless of the breed of the animal.
Legislation overriding a Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that made landlords liable for pit bull attacks, and put owners at risk of being evicted or having to give up their dogs, will be heard Wednesday by the House Judiciary Committee. Identical House and Senate bills seek to create a new standard where all dog owners in civil action cases, regardless of the dog’s breed, are presumed liable for attacks unless owners can prove they did everything possible to avoid the attack, said Sen. Brian Frosh, sponsor of the Senate bill. It would also reverse the strict liability on landlords. “The interest groups: pet owners, landlords, and animal rights groups are pleased with it,” said Frosh, a Montgomery County Democrat who is also chairman of …
Friday, November 9, 2012
Baltimore County State Sens. Jim Brochin and Delores Kelley and two other lawsuits challenged that the maps were not legally drawn.
The state's highest court has upheld state legislative redistricting maps drawn earlier this year. The one-page ruling does state that the court "determined that the Governor’s plan is consistent with the requirements of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Maryland." Details behind the courts decision will be provided at a later date, according to the court ruling. Sens. Jim Brochin and Delores Kelley were involved in one of three suits against the redistricting plan on which the court heard arguments on Wednesday. The Democrats claim the new districts violate the Maryland Constitution and a 2002 Court of Appeals ruling that governs redistricting. The suit alleges that Gov. Martin O'Malley and the General Assembly…
Tuesday, August 21, 2012
Court removes references to pit bull mixes while leaving owners and landlords responsible for injuries caused by pure-bred dogs.
UPDATED (4:27 p.m.)—The Maryland Court of Appeals will not reconsider an April decision in which it ruled that pit bull dogs are"inherently dangerous." Judge Alan Wilner, in a nine-page decision issued Tuesday, denied the motion for reconsideration with one caveat. (The full decision is attached to this story.) "That said, having re-read the briefs, relevant portions of the record extract, and the dissent, I am now convinced that, on the record before us, the application of the Court’s holding of strict liability to cross-bred pit bulls was both gratuitous and erroneous," wrote Wilner. "I would grant the motion for reconsideration, in part, to delete any reference to cross-bred pit bulls, so that the Court’s holding would apply only to pit…
Monday, July 30, 2012
Four-page opinion hints that justices will likely overturn Maryland ruling involving the collection of samples from people charged with felonies.
UPDATED (6:00 p.m.)—U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts continued a stay in the Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that had stopped police departments in Maryland from collecting DNA samples from some arrestees. With the delay continued, police in Maryland can continue to collect the samples until the Supreme Court issues an opinion. Roberts, in a four-page order, wrote that there is a reasonable chance that Maryland could win its appeal and overturn the Court of Appeals ruling. "[The Maryland Court of Appeals] decision conflicts with decisions of the U. S. Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits as well as the Virginia Supreme Court, which have upheld statutes similar to Maryland’s DNA Collection Act," Roberts wrote. …
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Collection resumed at 6 p.m., just one day after Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts stayed a Maryland Court of Appeals ruling.
UPDATED (6:45 p.m.)—Baltimore County police have resumed collection of DNA samples from people arrested on felony charges. County Police Chief Jim Johnson announced the decision late Thursday afternoon. Johnson, in a statement, ordered the resumption of DNA collections beginning at 6 p.m. The decision to once again collect the samples comes one day after Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issues a stay on a Maryland Court of Appeals ruling banning the practice. County officials initially said Wednesday, following Roberts' order, that police would likely wait to resume collecting the samples until after opponents had an opportunity to file a response with Roberts. State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger said he changed his mind after he …
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
Chief Justice John Roberts stays Maryland Court of Appeals ruling striking down the collection of DNA samples from people arrested for felonies.
UPDATED (6:21 p.m.)—Baltimore County State's Attorney Scott Shellenberger said a Supreme Court order Wednesday will not result in the immediate resumption of collecting DNA samples from people arrested for certain crimes. "I'm not prepared to tell county police to start collecting DNA from arrestees," Shellenberger said. "I think we need something a little more solid before we start changing procedures." Chief Justice John Roberts' order stayed an April Maryland Court of Appeals ruling that barred law enforcement from collecting DNA samples from people arrested and charged with felonies. The Court of Appeals made the 5-2 ruling in the case of Alonzo King who was arrested in 2009. Wicomico County collected King's DNA at the time of his …
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
Protestors argued that pit bulls are being unfairly targeted by the Maryland Court of Appeals.
Annapolis resident Stehle Harris is afraid she won't have a home. As the owner of a bull terrier, Harris said the recent Maryland Court of Appeals opinion that pit bulls and pit bull crossbreeds are dangerous could lead to a slippery slope. The opinion also states that landlords can prohibit the dogs from their properties. "I think pit bulls capacity to do damage is no greater than a chihuahua," she said. "I'm more apprehensive about smaller dogs." Harris was one of a group of Marylanders protesting the court's opinion at Lawyer's Mall in Annapolis on Tuesday afternoon. Erin Harty, of Baltimore, said Harris' fears aren't unfounded. As a volunteer at Baltimore Animal Rescue and Care Shelter, she said the center is already being …
Monday, April 30, 2012
The Maryland Court of Appeals has ruled that owners of pit bulls are liable for damages caused by attacks by the breed.
If your pit bull attacks someone, don't expect much sympathy in court. An opinion recently released by the Maryland Court of Appeals states that you should have already known the breed was dangerous. Maryland pit bull owners are now facing increased liability in attack cases, following a ruling in Tracey v. Solesky. The case involved a pit bull named Clifford that attacked a minor, causing life-threatening injuries. "When an attack involves pit bulls, it is no longer necessary to prove that the particular pit bull or pit bulls are dangerous," wrote Judge Dale R. Cathell in the opinion. Cathell also stated that landlords have the right to prohibit pit bulls or pit bull cross-breeds from their property. A PDF of the opinion is attached in …
Friday, April 27, 2012
The immediate shift in policy comes just days after the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the practice was unconstitutional.
Baltimore County police said they have, effective immediately, stopped collecting DNA samples from suspects arrested and charged with certain violent crimes. The policy switch comes after Maryland Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that part of a state law that allows law enforcement to collect DNA from anyone arrested for a crime of violence is unconstitutional. The case overturned a rape conviction and life sentence. The court ruled in a 5-2 vote that Wicomico County police violated Fourth Amendment rights, restricting unreasonable searches, when Alonzo J. King Jr. was arrested in 2009 and police took a sample of his DNA, according to court documents. Despite the move by the Baltimore County police, Chief James Johnson, along with many other…
Chuck Burton
10:24 am on Thursday, March 14, 2013
If I had the wherewithall, and were a bit younger, I probably would. The trouble is just about every nation today is fascist or socialist to some degree. There is no libertarian country to my knowlege. more ›