Every state, including Maryland, requires certain sex offenders to comply with registration requirements. Whether or not one must register and under what conditions depends on the sex crime that the individual was convicted of.
The recent arrest of a University of Maryland assistant basketball coach sheds light on the ways in which the very suspicion of guilt can affect those who are accused of criminal infractions.
We have been periodically updating Maryland readers on an important drug crimes case that recently went before the U.S. Supreme Court. A nightclub owner in Washington, D.C. was originally convicted of drug conspiracy and sentenced to life in prison after police placed a GPS tracking device on his car to track his movements and surveil his activities for a period of four weeks.
In a post last week, we wrote about a rather unusual occurrence related to criminal defense in Maryland. A Howard County judge recently dismissed DUI charges against a 22-year-old defendant based on evidence that they may have been related to an illegal police quota.
Last month, we wrote that Maryland police would be increasing DUI enforcement efforts over the holidays, particularly around the New Year's Eve weekend. Every year, this increased enforcement period usually yields a high number of traffic stops, DUI arrests and citations for other traffic offenses.
Many Maryland drivers who get pulled over feel that they have been unfairly singled out. Whether it is a traffic stop related to speeding or suspicion of DUI, it is tempting to assume that the police officer is eager to write tickets simply to fulfill a quota.
Earlier this week, we wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court has been asked to consider an important case regarding whether the use of a drug-sniffing police dog outside of a home violated the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights.
In November, we wrote that the U.S. Supreme Court was preparing to hear arguments in a drug trafficking case with Maryland connections. This and other cases recently heard by the Court have focused on whether use of new tracking technology by police is a violation of Fourth Amendment rights.