Posted on August 09, 2011 in Uncategorized

As Experienced and Aggressive Criminal Attorneys we often represent people charged with Possession with the Intent to Distribute Controlled Dangerous Substances such as Cocaine, Marijuana and Prescription Drugs. In these types of cases there are typically 2 categories of defenses that can be pursued – factual and legal defensese with legal defenses being more common. A factual defense usually involve claims that the person was not in fact in possession of the substance, that the substance was not in fact the illegal substance claimed by the police or that the amount is insufficient to be for the purpose of distribution.

Legal defenses involve claims that the police violated the defendant’s Constitutional rights while investigating the crime. Usually these claims relate to illegal search and seizure but sometime involve illegally obtained confessions. These claims are often referred to as “loopholes”. I successfully defended a defendant charged with possession over 10 pounds of marijuana in the Baltimore County Circuit Court. The case involved several hearings and dragged on for well over a year before we finally prevailed and had all charges dismissed. Here are the facts:

On October 12, 2010, Detective Seabolt was conducting stationary surveillance at the Milford Mill Shopping Center. The Defendant was standing near a silver Mazda. The Defendant entered the driver’s seat. Suspect 1 exited the passenger side of a black Honda and entered the passenger side of the Mazda. Twenty seconds later, Supsect 1 exited the Mazda and re-entered the Honda. Supsect 1 then exited the Honda and re-entered the Mazda. Detective Seabolt believed a drug deal was occurring and marked patrol units pulled behind both vehicles. Officer Cohan approached the Mazda and identified the driver as the Defendant. Officer Cohan observed a blue plastic bag on the center console between Defendant and Supsect 1. Officer Cohan could see the bag contained marijuana. When asked what was in the bag, the Defendant stated, “weed.” Currency in the amount of $2214 was also removed from the Defendant. A scale was also located in the trunk of the vehicle. The Defendant was arrested. Thereafter, on October 13, 2010, detectives from Baltimore County executed a search and seizure warrant at the Defendant’s residence, 25 Caraway Road in Reisterstown, Maryland. The Affidavit in support of the search and seizure warrant details the traffic stop and the Defendant’s subsequent statement that he is renting a room in the basement of the address and there is “10 pounds of weed in a brown cardboard box underneath of a chair in the room he rents.”

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 21, 2011 in Infection Malpractice

When Myles Massey was born on September 1, 2007, along with his brother, Henry, a medical mystery began to unfold. The twin boys were born prematurely in a Washington state hospital, but it was only Myles who exhibited signs that something was wrong. It took years, but Myles’ family has finally determined the cause of the bacterial infection that overtook his small body, leaving him unable to walk or talk, while sparing his brother who developed normally.

The Massey’s initial medical malpractice suit filed in 2009, which named the doctor’s and hospital that treated Myles at the time of his birth for his contraction of the rare bacteria, cited poor infection control practices as the cause of his systematic decline. However, despite numerous tests, investigators were never able to link the bacteria to any of the doctors or the hospital.

In early 2011, a company by the name of Triad Group became the subject of an FDA investigation which found that the alcohol prep pads they were manufacturing and distributing were contaminated with the bacteria. It was then that the Massey’s mystery was solved. The hospital where Myles was born confirmed that their neonatal intensive care unit used the Triad alcohol wipes. It’s not clear why Myles was affected by this bacterium while his brother and other infants in the NICU were not, but the alcohol prep pads have been almost conclusively deemed the source of the bacteria found in Myles’ bloodstream. The Massey’s lawsuit, now amended, includes the manufacturers and distributors of the alcohol prep pads.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 20, 2011 in Dr. Mark Midei and St. Joseph Hospital - Stent Malpractice

Almost one year after being charged with violating the Medical Practice Act and engaging in medical malpractice in Towson, Maryland, former St. Joseph’s Medical Center cardiologist Dr. Mark G. Midei has had his license revoked by the Maryland State Board of Physicians. This case has proven to be instructive as to the steps the Board takes when determining appropriate sanctions for misbehaving doctors.

In one of the most talked-about medical malpractice cases in the Baltimore-area, Dr. Midei was accused of implanting unnecessary cardiac stent in many patients. Specifically, the Board found that Dr. Midei falsified blockage percentages in five patients’ coronary arteries and unnecessarily implanted cardiac stents in four of those patients.
The formal findings of the Board were as follows:
• that Dr. Midei committed unprofessional conduct by failing to deal honestly with patients and colleagues;
• that Dr. Midei made intentional, non-accidental and non-inadvertent false reports;
• that Dr. Midei over-utilized health care services;
• that Dr. Midei violated the standard of quality care; and • that Dr. Midei failed to keep adequate medical records.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 13, 2011 in Dr. Mark Midei and St. Joseph Hospital - Stent Malpractice

Dr. Mark Midei’s medical license was revoked today by the Maryland Board of Physicians. A copy of the Final Decision and Order can be found here. As set forth in decision, the Board found that Dr. Midei engaged in “unprofessional conduct” and “blatant falsehood.” It found that he is guilty of “failing to deal honestly with patients and colleagues,” that he created “willfully false reports,” and that he unnecessary implanted people with cardiac stents. The Board stated that it found Dr. Midei’s testimony “not credible.” The Board also indicated that Dr. Midei had economic motivation for his misconduct.

In the 11 page decision, other phrases that were used to describe Dr. Midei included the following: “implanted cardiac stents unnecessary”; “falsified the extent of blockage of the patients’ coronary arteries by reporting that it was 80% when it was in reality lower – and in most cases much lower”; in three of the patients, he also falsely reported that they suffered from unstable angina when in fact they did not”; “violated the standard of quality care”; “falsely reported”; “intentional, non-accidental and non-inadvertent false reports that exaggerated the degree of coronary stenosis”; willfully false reports”; “overutilized health care”; “implanted stents unnecessarily, documented clinical indications inaccurately, exaggerated the extent of stenosis and failed to consider more optimal therapies”; “blatant falsehood”; “willfully false nature of some of Dr. Midei’s reports”; “Dr. Midei’s violations were repeated and serious”; “unnecessary stents exposed patients to the risk of harm”; “Dr. Midei’s willful creation of false percentage numbers for the degree of occlusion of coronary arteries is indefensible and amounts to a deliberate and willful fabrication of medical records”; “false findings used to justify unnecessary stent insertions”; “Dr. Midei acted in bad faith.”

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 11, 2011 in Medical Malpractice Law in Maryland

A study published in June 2011 provided a somewhat unexpected result – doctor’s offices and hospitals are equally as likely to be sued for medical malpractice. This finding is surprising because the majority of patient safety initiatives focus on inpatient care at hospitals. The finding of this study, however, indicates a need for the focus to shift to outpatient settings as well. The Journal of the American Medical Association study can be found here.

In 2009, of approximately 11,000 medical malpractice payments made on behalf of physicians, close to half stemmed from errors occurring in doctor’s offices. The study revealed that while hospitals and doctor’s offices are equally as likely to face medical malpractice suits – the error or negligence behind those suits differ. In hospitals, malpractice most often results from unsuccessful surgery giving rise to negative outcomes. In doctor’s offices, on the other hand, incorrect diagnosis is most often to blame. While this indicates the necessity that doctor’s offices adopt the same kind of checklists and systems that have been in place in hospitals for many years, it also demonstrates how essential it is that outpatient care standards become a greater focus in the medical community.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 11, 2011 in Controlled Dangerous Substances (CDS)

As an Aggressive Maryland Criminal Attorney, I represent people charged with violations of the controlled dangerous substance laws virtually every day in Maryland courts. I have blogged many times in the past about the importance of hiring an experienced full time criminal attorney if one finds him or herself charged in a criminal case. As I have noted in the past, I witness far too many instances in which accident or divorce lawyers represent (or should I say misrepresent) people in criminal cases and it usually doesn’t work out very well for the person charged.

I had an a case today in Baltimore County Circuit Court that was an excellent example of a person realizing before it was too late that her attorney was not really qualified to represent her. This is unusual. More often than not, people don’t figure it out until they suffer a very bad result. Here are the facts of the case.

My client was sitting in front of her home in her car arguing with her boyfriend. A Baltimore County Police Officer drove by and decided this situation warranted investigating. He turned his car around and parked behind my client’s car. He did not utilize his emergency equipment and did not draw his weapon. Instead he simply walked up to the window of the vehicle to speak with the occupants. This is known as a “mere encounter” in legal parlance and does not require probable cause.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 01, 2011 in Divorce

In our June 28, 2011 blog we discussed how Courts in Maryland seem to be divided on whether same sex couples legally married in other states should be granted a divorce in Maryland. To confuse matters even more, as reported by the Maryland Daily Record on June 24, 2011, a criminal Judge has ruled that same sex couples are permitted to assert their spousal privilege in criminal matters. So while some family law Judges may not recognize same sex couples as spouses, it appears that some criminal Judges are. In the Washington County case, the lesbian partners were married in Washington D.C. Recently, one has threatened the other with violence, and therefore was charged with assault. However, in criminal matters spouses can invoke their right not to testify against their spouse. In this case, the victim of the alleged threat has asked to assert her privilege not to testify against her partner. The Judge has recognized the partners as spouses and allowed her to do so. The Judge specifically ruled that “Maryland generally recognizes a marriage as valid as long as it was valid in the jurisdiction in which it took place.”

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 30, 2011 in Constitutional Violations

This week, a judge sitting in the Circuit Court for Harford County, Maryland ruled after a lengthy motion’s hearing that the prosecutor violated my client’s due process rights. The result was that all charges including attempted murder and first degree assault were dismissed. This case involved some unique facts and circumstances that if appealed, may garner some attention by the appellate courts.

Pertinent Facts:

On May 22, 2009, a district court charging document was issued by the Harford County police charging the Defendant with assaulting his wife on May 20, 2009 and charging him with the attempted murder of his brother in law on May 21, 2009. The Defendant was held without bail from May 22, 2009 until June 10, 2009 when bail was set at $25,000. The Defendant paid a bondsman and was released. On that date, the charges with respect to the incident with his brother-in-law were dismissed. At that time, the State dismissed the charges because the brother-in-law was on active duty and soon to be deployed out of the country. Thereafter, in October, 2009, the Defendant’s wife invoked her marital privilege and the Defendant was found not guilty of assaulting her.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 30, 2011 in Medical Malpractice Law in Maryland

A recurring controversy in the military is a legal doctrine – called the “Feres Doctrine” – which forbids any active-duty personnel from filing a medical malpractice case against military doctors. In the past, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear any challenges to the doctrine, but that might change as soon as this week. The Supreme Court decision of whether the Justices will hear a case could come as early as this week.

The Feres Doctrine was created from a consolidation of three cases in the 1950’s that netted the practical effect of barring military personnel from collecting damages for any personal injuries from the United States Government. The Feres Doctrine also prohibits family members of these of service men and women from filing wrongful death or loss of consortium actions when a service member is killed or injured due to medical malpractice.

The theory behind the doctrine is that there are other ways military members are compensated for their injuries or death. An example is the Veteran’s Administration. If a military member is injured while serving, they are referred to this organization for medical care and other services.
The case that’s instituting this potential second-look at the long standing doctrine is being brought by the family of an airman in Sacramento. The man, who was diagnosed with acute appendicitis, was left in a persistent vegetative state allegedly due to medical malpractice. The family argues that they should not be denied the ability to bring a medical malpractice action because the man survived the surgery; it was the subsequent breathing complications that arose and ultimately led to his current condition when a nurse negligently put a breathing tube into his trachea instead of his esophagus.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 28, 2011 in Same-Sex Marriage

On June 24, 2011 New York passed the law allowing same sex couples to wed in their state. New York is the sixth state to allow same-sex couples to wed, following Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont and Washington D.C. Like the bill that was proposed, but failed, earlier in Maryland this year, the law in New York will call for religious exemptions, meaning that there will be strong protections in place for religious groups that oppose gay marriages. New York does not have a residency requirement for marriage, so commencing July 24, 2011 it is predicted the state will see a lot of same sex couple weddings.

For more information, contact Monica Scherer, Esq. at 410-625-4740

Continue Reading ››