Posted on November 29, 2010 in Child Custody

As a follow up to our June 30, 2010 and July 8, 2010 blogs on Facebook evidence in Maryland family law proceedings, we have compiled a top five do’s and don’ts for Facebook for parents in the midst of custody litigation.

1. Do disable your Facebook account. If you can’t bring yourself to do it, make your presence on Facebook as minimal as possible, and we mean minimal.

2. Do set your Facebook page to private so only those who are your friends can view your page, and while you are at it do a “spring cleaning” of your friend list, eliminating those who are unnecessary. Friends should only be those who have no connection with your ex or your ex’s family and/or friends. You never know who is viewing/printing information from your account and passing it along.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 19, 2010 in Child Support

In my November 16, 2010 blog I briefly mentioned the concept of voluntary impoverishment. Maryland law describes voluntary impoverishment as freely, or an act by choice, to reduce oneself to poverty or deprive oneself of resources with the intention of avoiding child support, John O. v. Jane O. 90 Md. App. 406 (1992). Our case law has further explained voluntary impoverishment as whenever an individual has made the free and conscious choice, not compelled by factors beyond his or her control, to render himself or herself without adequate resources or income, Gordon v. Gordon, 174 Md. App. 583, 923 A.2d 149 (2007). Income is a factor in child support matters, divorce matters involving alimony, and a factor when deciding whether or not to award a party attorney’s fees.

In order to calculate child support in a Maryland child support case both parties’ incomes are needed. Maryland Code Family Law, § 12-201(h) defines income as (1) actual income of a parent, if the parent is employed to full capacity; or (2) potential income of a parent, if the parent is voluntarily impoverished. Before a Judge can impute a party a potential income for the purpose of calculating child support they must find that the party is in fact voluntarily impoverishing themselves. Oftentimes, establishing voluntary impoverishment is not a cut and dry as it may seem. To assist the Court in making a determination if a parent is voluntarily impoverished for purposes of calculating a child support obligation, several factors as to the parent are considered, including, but not limited to: (1) his or her current physical condition; (2) his or her respective level of education; (3) the timing of any change in employment or financial circumstances relative to the divorce proceedings; (4) the relationship of the parties prior to the divorce proceedings; (5) his or her efforts to find and retain employment; (6) his or her efforts to secure retraining if that is needed; (7) whether he or she has ever withheld support; (8) his or her past work history; (9) the area in which the parties live and the status of the job market there; and (10) any other considerations presented by either party. Gordon v. Gordon, 174 Md. App. 583, 923 A.2d 149 (2007); Stull v. Stull, 144 Md. App. 237, 797 A.2d 809 (2002).

Income, and in turn voluntary impoverishment in some case, also come into play in divorce matters involving alimony. For more information on how alimony is calculated see our October 2, 2009 blog. A court may determine that a party can pay alimony based on voluntary impoverishment when they find that that party has voluntarily impoverished him or herself in an effort to fraudulently deprive their spouse of alimony. Colburn v. Colburn, 15 Md.App. 503 (1972). Conversely, a court may find that a party should not be awarded alimony based on the fact that they are voluntarily impoverishing themselves.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 18, 2010 in Child Custody

1. Well in advance of each holiday, refer to your existing Court Order, Separation Agreement, and/or Judgment of Absolute Divorce to determine what your Order and/or Agreement sets forth for each holiday.

2. Communicate to the other parent, (preferably in writing via e-mail or text), your interpretation of the existing Order and/or written Agreement. Specifically spell out who has the child(ren) on which day or part of the day, the times and where exchanges are to take place. Ask the parent to confirm that is their understanding.

3. If there is not an existing Order and/or written Agreement, again, well in advance of the holiday, contact the other parent (preferably in writing) and set forth your specific proposal and ask them for there thoughts and comments.

4. Put your child(ren) first, not yourself. Understand that the child(ren) should have the opportunity to spend part of the holiday which each parent and their respective families, regardless of your feelings for the other parent. Do not be selfish, it will come back to haunt you.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 17, 2010 in Child Custody

With the holidays approaching many clients may be facing uncertainty or conflicts as to where their child(ren) will be spending the holiday. We always advise clients to plan holidays far in advance so a schedule can be arranged that is best for the child(ren). It is important to develop a schedule that is not too overwhelming for children, so they can enjoy the holiday without exchanges at inopportune times, such as midnight on Christmas Eve, or too many exchanges in one day. It is also important to remember not to make plans for your child(ren) on the holiday until you know what the schedule will be. Lastly, for your child’s sake, explain to them how the holiday schedule will go, do not seek their input or place a guilt trip on your child(ren) for not being with you for the holiday or a portion of the holiday, and be flexible and accommodating to making the holiday work for everyone. Everyone does include the other parent and his or her family.

If you are unable to reach a holiday arrangement with your child’s parent you may turn to what many practitioners refer to as “holiday court”. Most Circuit Courts throughout the State of Maryland implement a specific protocol for what is known as “holiday court,” or the process that takes place in order to resolve these holiday access disputes. We have collected information from the nearby Circuit Courts to find out how they will be handling this year’s holiday disputes.

Anne Arundel County Circuit Court

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 16, 2010 in Child Custody

I recently tried a custody matter in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, in which I represented the father of the minor child. The father came to our office in January 2010, after he had arranged for his minor child to reside with him upon learning that the child’s mother was not properly caring for him. The minor child had resided with his mother for nine years, but she had recently changed residences, which our client had great concerns about. Prior to January 2010, our client, who resides in a neighboring state, was visiting with the child every other weekend, when the parties were on good terms. After our client made arrangements for his son to live with him, the mother filed a Complaint for an Emergency Hearing, which was scheduled for March 2010 at the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. Due to a heavy docket we were sent to mediation and a hearing was not held. We were able to negotiate a temporary schedule which granted our client temporary sole physical and legal custody and allowed the mother visitation with the minor child.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 10, 2010 in Bail

As a Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorney, I often represent people in Bail Review Hearings both in the District and in the Circuit Court. Very often when someone gets arrested, friends or family members fail to act quickly enough to get an experienced criminal defense attorney involved in the case prior to the initial bail review in the District Court which typically takes place on the next business day.

It is understandable given how quickly these events transpire that attorneys are often not contacted until after the person’s bail review has occurred. It is also often a very big mistake. In many cases the absence of effective representation at the bail review can be the difference between the defendant going home or remaining incarcerated. The District Court Judge often sets the bail much higher than he or she otherwise would have had the person had an advocate there on their behalf. This is the point when many people pick up the phone to call an attorney for the first time. I had two cases where the events unfolded in this manner this past week in Baltimore County Circuit Court. Here is what happened:

Both clients were arrested on Friday of the preceding week. One was charged with Second Degree Burglary for allegedly breaking into storage units. While this is certainly not the crime of the century, he was nonetheless ordered by the Court Commissioner to be held without bail because he has a pending charge of a similar nature. The second case involved an allegation of Domestic Assault. This individual was also ordered by the Commissioner to be held without bail as he was also pending another charge, in his case another assault with the same alleged victim.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 04, 2010 in Repeat Offenders

As an Aggressive Baltimore Maryland DUI/DWI Attorney I have represented hundreds of people who were charged with their second, third or even fourth DUI or DWI. These individuals are known in the legal system as repeat DUI/DWI offenders. These are very serious matters in which the defendant faces the very real possibility of incarceration even for a second offense. For instance, I wrote about a case in Baltimore City recently where a defendant, who was represented by an attorney who does not appear in criminal court on a daily basis, received a sentence of four months in jail for a second offense. And this was a case in which there was no accident and the defendant’s prior conviction occurred more than 10 years prior to this case.

Needless to say, repeat DUI/DWI offenders need to take these matters very seriously and make sure that they are represented by an attorney who specializes in these matters. There is a very easy way to do this and that is by checking your attorney out on Maryland Judiciary Case search. http://casesearch.courts.state.md.us/inquiry/inquiry-index.jsp. On this web site an attorney’s court record can be researched to determine whether or not that attorney regularly handles these cases.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 29, 2010 in Juvenile Causes

I have a current case that highlights the significant fork in the criminal justice road when juveniles are charged as adults. Zachary Watson (17) and Emmanuel Miller (16) are the 2 juveniles who were with alleged Neo-Nazi Calvin Lockner when he attacked an elderly black fisherman in Baltimore city this year. It was reported widely in the national media as a hate crime. Lockner, age 28, has already pled to 31 years in adult court.

Both Watson and Miller asked to be waived back to Juvenile Court. I represented Miller and requested his case be transferred to juvenile court. Watson made the same request. After a hearing, Miller’s request was granted and Watson’s denied. Since that time, Watson has been stabbed in prison and is constantly harassed by guards and inmates while awaiting trial. He is likely to get a significant sentence on 1/25/11 in adult court. The odds against Watson leading a productive life after prison are not favorable to say the least.

Miller, on the other hand, is a star in the juvenile system. Unlike the adult system, the juvenile system focuses on rehabilitation. He has been given 3 successful weekend furloughs from commitment. He has earned his GED while committed, plays on the football team and has received glowing reports from his teachers and counselors. By every indication, the judge who presides over his rehabilitation is so happy with his progress he is going to release Miller on probation next month.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 29, 2010 in Repeat Offenders

Experienced Baltimore Maryland DUI/DWI Attorney discusses Probation Before Judgment under Maryland Law. For those who are not familiar with the term “probation before judgment” or PBJ, it is a sentencing alternative that the trial judge may utilize in DUI and DWI cases, typically in cases where a person is a first offender. Probation Before Judgment is found in the Criminal Procedure Article (Sect. 6-220) and allows a judge who has found a defendant guilty of a crime, in this case DUI or DWI, to strike that guilty finding and allow a person to serve a period of probation without the conviction on his or her record.

So long as the person does not violate his or her probation the conviction will never go on their record. This disposition is particularly valuable in DUI cases as it spares the defendant the 8 or 12 points that would accrue on the person’s record as a result of the conviction which invariable leads to action, including possible suspension or revocation of a person’s driver’s license, by the Motor Vehicle Administration.

One of the most common misunderstandings about probation before judgment in DUI/DWI cases is that, contrary to popular belief, a defendant is NOT entitled to have the DUI or DWI expunged from his record after completing the period of probation. In criminal cases and in most other serious traffic offenses, a defendant is entitled to have the entire matter expunged from his or her record after a period of time if that person is not subsequently charged with another offense. In criminal cases that period of time is 3 years.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 26, 2010 in Sexual Offender Registration

Changes in the Maryland Sex Offender Registration laws are, as a Maryland Criminal Defense Attorney something I have to be aware of. I have represented many defendants over the years who have been charged with sex offenses. In these cases the defendant faces not only the prospect of criminal punishment of his conduct but also the possibility of being required to register as a sex offender. On October 1, 2010 the Maryland Sex Offender Registration Statute, (Criminal Procedure Code Ann, Section 11-704) which was rewritten to bring in line with the comparable Federal Statute, went into effect. The new rules now require those convicted of fourth degree sex offenses to register. The issue and the reason for this blog is that the new statute was specifically designed to apply retroactively.

This retroactive application is legally problematic and possibly Unconstitutional in my view in certain instances. The Court of Appeals has already approved retroactive increases in the term of registration in the case of Young v. State. The Court ruled that sexual offender registration did not expose the defendant to to a greater penalty but was instead a remedial requirement for the protection of the public.

Continue Reading ››