The Court of Appeals in IN RE J.W. (DEL-1326-12) decided on October 9, 2014, vacated and reversed J.W.’s conviction for “possession of implements of crime.” J.W. and another juvenile were seen near a Vespa scooter chained to a fence. J.W. was wearing a black ski pants with a black ski mask on top of his head loitering around the scooter while carrying a two foot-long bolt cutter. He was arrested and charged with — a statute that prohibits the possession of “any instrument, tool, or implement for picking locks or pockets, with the intent to use such instrument, tool, or
Read More
Archives for dc criminal lawyer
D.C. Marijuana Legalization Initiative 71
D.C., Marijuana Legalization, Initiative 71 is on the ballot for the November elections and it is anticipated that it would get enough votes to pass. However the passage of the initiative is not tantamount to legalization. The initiative would need congressional approval, which is very unlikely. Federal laws still criminalize use and possession of the substance and US Congress would not approve a measure in the Nation’s Capitol no less that is in direct conflict with the Federal laws. The overwhelming approval of the measure by the city voters however will force the city legislative to go beyond the Decriminalization
Read More
BEARING AND CARRYING HANDGUN IN THE DISTRICT: DC GUN CRIMES LAWYER
The District Court Senior Judge Scullin on July 24, 2014, enjoined the District from enforcing both the handgun registration for home-use only provision as well as the statute criminalizing carrying handgun in public. Specifically the court ordered: ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees and all persons in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this Memorandum- Decision and Order, are permanently enjoined from enforcing D.C. Code § 7-2502.02(a)(4) to ban registration of handguns to be carried in public for self-defense by law-abiding citizens; and Court further ORDERS that Defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees,
Read More
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS DECISION: STATUTORY DEFINITION, CARRYING A DANGEROUS WEAPON:
The Court of Appeals on July 31, 2014, in IN RE D.R. (No. 11-FS-1320), both reversed a conviction for insufficiently of evidence and also remanded the case to the trial court. Appellant, D.R., was convicted at trial of four criminal offenses including a conviction for Carrying a Dangerous Weapon (CDW). The Court remanded for trial finding on ineffective assistance of counsel claim, however, focused significantly on the statutory construction and language of CDW and ended revering the conviction consistent with the opinion. Factually, D.R., a fourteen year old, was found at trial to have brandished a machete/sword type knife about
Read More
COURT OF APPEALS REVERSES ON 4TH AMENDMENT GROUNDS
In the recent Court of Appeals case: In re D.M. (11-FS—1125) decided on July 10, 2014, the Court reversed the lower court conviction for second- degree burglary, felony destruction of property, and second-degree theft based on 4th amendment violations. Essentially DM and other juveniles were indentified breaking into a property and removing items from the home. DM was seen at the scene by an eyewitness and a look out was broadcasted. Subsequently DM was located and held by the detective pending a show up by the eyewitness. The Court justified in reversing the convictions and holding that there was an
Read More
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS RULING REVERSING TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS (TPR) —
In the recent opinion issued by the Court of Appeals in IN RE D.M.; T.M., (March 13, 2014), the Court once again articulated that when a biological parent is unable to care for his or her child, her choice of a fit custodian must be given a weighty articulated consideration by the trial court. T.M., the biological mother of D.M., appealed successfully her termination of parental rights by the trial court. She argued on appeal that the lower court erred by “failing to give weighty consideration to the third-party custodial arrangement” she set forth as a placement option and in
Read More
DC MARIJUNA USE/POSSESSION LAWS AND THE PROPOSED/ENACTED BILL:
Currently the criminal Statute in the District penalizes simple possession of marijuana and the imposed penalties are maximum 180 days/$1000 fine, specifically: “It is unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to possess a controlled substance unless the substance was obtained directly from, or pursuant to, a valid prescription or order of a practitioner while acting in the course of his or her professional practice … any person who violates this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor…” Incidentally the possession with intent to distribute marijuana on the first offense carries the same penalty as long as the amount is less
Read More
RECENT COURT OF APPEALS REMAND ON THE DOCTRINE OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL
The recent Court of Appeals decision in Thomas v. United States on October 24, 2013, reiterates the doctrine of collateral estoppel. The issue in the case was whether a retrial on certain counts was barred due to collateral estoppel. Thomas was charged initially with five counts. The first trial resulted in the jury acquitting Thomas of ADW (assault with deadly weapon) and PFCV (possession of firearm during crime of violence), but hung on CPWL (carrying a pistol without a license) and UA (unlawful possession of ammunition). The trial court declared a mistrial on those counts as well as the fifth
Read More
DC COURT OF APPEALS REVERSES FINDING OF NEGLECT
The Court of Appeals on July 25, 2013 in IN RE ANG.P. & AND.P.; (Nos. 11-FS-1584 & 11-FS-1585), reversed the lower court finding of neglect against a biological mother who was charged with neglecting her children by leaving them without proper parenting, care and control. The legal standard specifically provides: a child is neglected if he or she “is without proper parental care or control, subsistence, education as required by law, or other care necessary for his or her physical, mental or emotional health, and the deprivation is not due to the lack of financial means of his or her
Read More
RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISION LEGALIZING DNA SWAP UPON ARREST
The US Supreme Court on June 3, 2013 in Maryland v. King (No. 12–207) and in a 5-4 narrow decision legalized taking the arrestee’s DNA sample along with the fingerprinting and mug shots. The case was initiated in the MD State court from the collection of DNA in 2009 from Alonzo Jay King Jr. after his arrest on assault charges in Wicomico County, Md. King’s DNA sample collected by swabbing of his cheek, positive matched evidence from a 2003 rape case, and he was convicted of that crime which was unresolved. The MD Court of Appeals ruled that the State
Read More