Suspended License Maryland Attorneys Baltimore Highway Code 16-303
Suspended License Maryland Attorneys Baltimore Highway Code 16-303
James v. State
Facts:
On defendant’s appeal from a conviction for driving with a suspended license under Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 16-303(c) (2002), the United States District Court for the District of Maryland certified a question of law as to the meaning of “used by the public” in Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 11-127 (2002), defining “highway,” and Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 21-101.1(b)(1) (2002), the private property provision.
If you are facing a traffic case in Baltimore, Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
Speeding Maryland Lawyers Montgomery Fine Driving Under Influence Code 21-801.1
Holdings:
The Maryland Court made the following holding:
- The Code defines “highways” as the entire width between the boundary lines of any way or thoroughfare of which any part is used by the public for vehicular travel, whether or not the way or thoroughfare has been dedicated to the public and accepted by any proper authority. Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 11-127 (2002).
- The applicable test for determining whether a thoroughfare, roadway, or other property is “used by the public” in conformity with the requirements of either Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 11-127 (2002) or Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 21-101.1(b)(1) (2002) is a factual inquiry regarding the nature and extent of the use of the thoroughfare, roadway or property by the public. Whether the public’s access to or use of the thoroughfare or roadway is restricted in any way by the owner is of no consideration to this inquiry.
- The phrase “used by the public,” found in the definition of “highway” contained in Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 11-127 (2002) and in the private property provision contained in Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 21-101.1(b)(1) (2002) does not require the unrestricted right of the public to the use of the highway or private property in order to render the highway or private property subject to the requirements of Md. Code Ann., Transp. § 16-303 (2002).
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland. We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
The SRIS Law Group Maryland lawyers will do their best to help you with your case. Contact a Maryland lawyer from our firm to discuss your case.
A Maryland lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your case in Maryland and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Rockville (Montgomery County) & Baltimore.
Courts we cover in Baltimore, Maryland
Baltimore County Circuit Court
County Courts Building
401 Bosley Avenue
Towson, MD 21204
Baltimore County District Court
120 E. Chesapeake Avenue
Towson, MD 21286-5307
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Maryland Baltimore Lawyers Possession Cocaine Intent Distribute
Maryland Baltimore Lawyers Possession Cocaine Intent Distribute
Charles v. State
Facts:
Defendant challenged his conviction following a jury trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County (Maryland) of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, as well as related weapons and traffic offenses.
If you are facing a criminal case in Baltimore, Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
Maryland Baltimore Lawyers Possession Cocaine Intent Distribute
Holdings:
The Maryland Court made the following holding:
- Maryland case law, while not requiring a trial court to permit a defendant to call a witness before a jury, with the expectation that the witness will invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, does not forbid a trial court from doing so.
- Md. R. 4-325(e) requires that a party wishing to assign as error the giving of a jury instruction must distinctly state the matter to which the party objects and the grounds of the objection.
We have client meeting locations in Montgomery County (Rockville) & Baltimore, Maryland
We will do our absolute best to help you get the best result possible based on the facts of your case. Our law firm has the necessary experience to assist you with this matter.
The SRIS Law Group Maryland lawyers will do their best to help you with your case. Contact a Maryland lawyer from our firm to discuss your case.
A Maryland lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your case in Maryland and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Rockville (Montgomery County) & Baltimore.
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Baltimore Divorce Lawyer Maryland Pay Alimony Separation Adultery
Baltimore Divorce Lawyer Maryland Pay Alimony Separation Adultery
Emilio v Emilio
Facts:
Appellant husband challenged the judgment of the Circuit Court of Baltimore (Maryland), which ordered him to pay alimony and child support to appellee wife. The husband had filed a complaint for limited divorce on the basis of a one-year voluntary separation. In turn, the wife counter-complained for an absolute divorce, or in the alternative, for a limited divorce, based on adultery and abandonment.
If you are facing a divorce case in Baltimore, Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Baltimore Divorce Lawyer Maryland
Holdings:
The Maryland Court made the following holding:
- If by the cruel or immoral conduct of the husband the wife cannot with safety and in decency consort with him, then she may upon the ground of such ill-treatment come into a Court of Equity and have a separate maintenance assigned to her out of her husband’s estate. That is the definition of alimony which has been recognized and followed through all of the Maryland decisions down to the present. The right is founded on the common law obligation of the husband to give support to his wife
- Ever since the adoption of the Maryland Alimony Act in 1980, Md. Ann. Code art. 16, §§ 1 -5 (1957, 1981 Repl. Vol.), alimony may be awarded either for a fixed term, often called rehabilitative alimony, or for an indefinite term. When alimony is awarded, the law prefers that the award be for a fixed term. The court has discretion, however, to award indefinite alimony in exceptional cases.
The SRIS Law Group Maryland lawyers will do their best to help you with your case. Contact a Maryland lawyer from our firm to discuss your case.
A Maryland lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your case in Maryland and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Rockville (Montgomery County) & Baltimore.
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Baltimore Attorneys Assault Battery Malicious Destruction
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Baltimore Attorneys Assault BatteryMalicious Destruction
Patrick v. State
Facts:
Defendant filed a writ of certiorari to review the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals (Maryland), which convicted defendant of reckless endangerment, assault and battery, and malicious destruction of property and sentenced him to 10 years in prison in a case brought by the State of Maryland.
If you are facing Criminal case in Baltimore, Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Baltimore Attorneys
Holdings:
- The right to a fair trial is a fundamental liberty secured by the U.S. Const. amend. XIV. The presumption of innocence, although not articulated in the Constitution, is a basic component of a fair trial under our system of criminal justice. Compelling a defendant to stand trial in identifiable prison attire impairs that presumption because it serves as a constant reminder that the accused is in custody, and presents an unacceptable risk that the jury will consider that fact in rendering its verdict. In addition to running afoul of the fair trial requirement of the Fourteenth Amendment, compelling a defendant to stand trial in prison attire is repugnant to the concept of equal justice embodied in the Fourteenth Amendment, in that usually only those who cannot afford to post bail prior to trial are so compelled. The presumption of innocence, however, is not impermissibly impaired every time a defendant stands trial before a jury in prison attire. Essential to a finding of a constitutional violation is the element of compulsion. That is, the particular evil proscribed is compelling a defendant, against his will, to be tried in jail attire.
The SRIS Law Group Maryland lawyers will do their best to help you with your case. Contact a Maryland lawyer from our firm to discuss your case.
A Maryland lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your case in Maryland and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Rockville (Montgomery County) & Baltimore.
Article written by A Sris
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Prince Georges Attorney Death Negligent Law 3-204
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Prince Georges Attorney Death Negligent Law 3-204
Swann v State
Facts:
Defendants, employees of the Department of Juvenile Services, were charged with reckless endangerment, under Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 3-204(a)(1) (2002), for failing to contact emergency services to assist a person in their custody. The trial court dismissed the charge pursuant to Md. R. 4-252, and the Court of Special Appeals (Maryland) affirmed. The State’s petition for a writ of certiorari was granted.
If you are facing a criminal case in Prince Georges, Maryland, contact a SRIS Law Group lawyer for help. You can reach us at 888-437-7747
Reckless Endangerment Maryland Prince Georges Attorney
Holdings:
- The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires the state to provide medical care to injured persons who are in the custody of state agents. When the state by the affirmative exercise of its power so restrains an individual’s liberty that it renders him unable to care for himself, and at the same time fails to provide for his basic human needs – e.g., food, clothing, shelter, medical care, and reasonable safety – it transgresses the substantive limits on state action set by the Eighth Amendment and the due process clause.
- A reckless endangerment resulting in death will constitute either a grossly negligent involuntary manslaughter or a depraved-heart second-degree murder. In either event, the reckless endangerment will merge into the greater inclusive criminal homicide.
The SRIS Law Group Maryland lawyers will do their best to help you with your case. Contact a Maryland lawyer from our firm to discuss your case.
A Maryland lawyer from our firm will talk with you about your case in Maryland and advise you about your options. You can count on a lawyer from our firm to try their best to help you obtain the best result possible based on the facts of your case.
We have client meeting locations in Rockville (Montgomery County) & Baltimore.
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm’s unofficial views of the Justices’ opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content.
Maryland Lawyer
