WHAT’S GOING ON AROUND HERE?? Tow Truck Driver Wrote Tickets Using Montgomery County Police Officer’s Book

While parking spaces reserved for guests sit empty, residents of the Fenshire Farms Town home community in Gaithersburg have to park a half mile away to avoid being ticketed or towed.

Cliff Rehder’s stepdad was nabbed.

“He had to go bail out his car and pay a couple hundred dollars for parking across the street from his house,” Rehder says.

Residents say they feel like a local towing company is stalking them, lying in wait to catch unsuspecting residents.

“They are always waiting across the street, searching every 15 minutes, ” Muzoffgur Nay says. It cost him $300 to get his towed car back.

Montgomery County Police have confirmed that one of their officers, Jennifer Phoenix, gave her ticket book to a tow truck operator at G and G towing in Rockville. That driver wrote $50 dollar tickets and the company also towed several cars.

Police Spokesman Lt. Paul Starks says Phoenix wasn’t authorized to give her ticket book to anyone.

“No, she wasn’t,” Starks says. “Internal Affairs looked into it and has taken action. We can’t discuss details since it’s a personnel matter. But she is an officer in good standing in this department. She has not resigned.”

Officer Phoenix has only been on the force four years, but this isn’t the first time she’s been accused of wrongdoing. She’s one of four Montgomery County police officers being sued by a local woman who says she was beaten and tasered while handcuffed.”

“I’ve lost so much. I’ll never been the same,” Melissa Dents told 9NEWS NOW.

In pictures taken the day after the October 2006 incident, Dent has swollen eyes, and 13 taser marks on her back and body.Her lawyer, Dennis Ettlin says they’ve filed a $6.4 million dollar civil suit against Officer Phoenix and three others.

The owner of G & G Towing, Glen Caid would not talk with 9News.

We tried to find out what happened to the tow truck driver– his boss wouldn’t talk to us.

“It’s kind of scary,” resident Amanda Mettler says. I assume people are paying those tickets, since that’s what law abiding citizens do. They have to look into this.”

There is some good news. Police say anyone who paid one of the bogus tickets will get their money back.

County police apologize after officer lends ticket book to tow-truck driver

Tower issued tickets in Gaithersburg neighborhood

Montgomery County Police are voiding parking tickets and apologizing to residents of the Fernshire Farms neighborhood in Gaithersburg after a four-year officer gave her book of parking tickets to a tow-truck driver who issued them last month.

Residents who received tickets say the tow-truck driver identified himself as a police officer working on behalf of their homeowners association.

After a private meeting of the HOA, residents who attended said police told them the tow truck driver has been fired and the police officer has tendered her resignation.

A “limited number” of tickets were issued to vehicles in Fernshire Farms, a 342-townhome community near Quince Orchard Road and Great Seneca Highway, said Lt. Paul Starks, director of the department’s media division.

After an internal investigation, the officer and tow-truck driver are not expected to face criminal charges, he said. On Tuesday, police spokesman Cpl. Stephen Galloza confirmed that the officer was Jennifer Phoenix, a four-year county officer at the 6th District station in Gaithersburg. She could not be reached.

“This is a community where there are some legitimate parking issues,” Starks said. “This officer made some poor decisions. While we do encourage officers to work with the community, there was poor decision-making on the part of this officer … Whatever, if any, personnel action that would be taking place has taken place.”

An officer from the 6th District station apologized to residents at the Fernshire Farms HOA meeting Monday and confirmed that the man who issued the tickets has been fired from the towing company, said Larry Seeger, president of the Fernshire Farms Homeowners Association.

After The Gazette expressed interest in attending Monday’s meeting, the HOA board closed the meeting to non-homeowners on “advice from counsel and property management,” Seeger said.

Several residents leaving the meeting said that police told them that the officer had submitted her resignation, effective July 5. Galloza declined to discuss personnel matters Tuesday.

Phoenix is one of four county officers named in a $6.4 million civil lawsuit filed in federal court by a Montgomery Village woman, who alleges that the officers beat, kicked and stunned her with Tasers in her living room in 2006 after she had been handcuffed.

That lawsuit is in discovery stages in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt.

Two of the $50 parking tickets were issued to the Kawczynski family, residents of Beacon Hill Terrace for nearly 20 years.

Mark Kawczynski got his ticket May 8. Four days later, his son Nick Kawczynski — who had parked over the curb while he loaded his Buick LeSabre for the drive back to the University of South Carolina — was cited shortly after 8 a.m. May 12.

In both cases, Mark and Nancy Kawczynski said, the man identified himself as a Montgomery County police officer.

Both times the man said he was “acting on behalf of the HOA,” they said. And both tickets that he issued are signed with the surname “Phoenix.”

County parking tickets say that the signature is made “under penalty of perjury.” Starks said that the internal investigation “did not rise to that” level.

The investigation also focused on the person who issued the tickets, whom residents said police later determined was a driver for G&G Towing of Rockville.

“That matter was looked into by our Internal Affairs. They’re not moving forward at this point with criminal charges,” Galloza said.

Glen Caid, G&G’s owner, did not return calls from The Gazette.

Fernshire Farm’s property manager, Sandra Ewing of Vanguard Management Associates Inc. of Germantown, had no comment.

The Kawczynskis and other Fernshire residents interviewed Monday night said the ticketing is a case of suburban cul-de-sac parking woes gone haywire.

They traced it back to the HOA’s decision four years ago to only allow guests to park in 21 spaces on Beacon Hill Terrace, one of dozens of cul-de-sacs near Quince Orchard High School.

“Who knows what the motive was. How ridiculous,” Nancy Kawczynski said.

LOS ANGELES – Michael Jackson, defined in equal parts as the world’s greatest entertainer and perhaps its most enigmatic figure, was about to attempt one of the greatest comebacks of all time. Then his life was cut shockingly — and so far, mysteriously — short.

The 50-year-old musical superstar died Thursday, just as he was preparing for what would be a series of 50 concerts starting July 13 at London’s famed 02 arena. Jackson had been spending hours and hours toiling with a team of dancers for a performance he and his fans hoped would restore his tarnished legacy to its proper place in pop.

An autopsy was planned for Friday, though results were not likely to be final until toxicology tests could be completed, a process that could take several days and sometimes weeks. However, if a cause can be determined by the autopsy, they will announce the results, said Los Angeles County Coroner Investigator Jerry McKibben.

Police said they were investigating, standard procedure in high-profile cases.

Jackson died at UCLA Medical Center after being stricken at his rented home in the posh Los Angeles neighborhood of Holmby Hills. Paramedics tried to resuscitate him at his home for nearly three-quarters of an hour, then rushed him to the hospital, where doctors continued to work on him.

“It is believed he suffered cardiac arrest in his home. However, the cause of his death is unknown until results of the autopsy are known,” his brother Jermaine said.

Cardiac arrest is an abnormal heart rhythm that stops the heart from pumping blood to the body. It can occur after a heart attack or be caused by other heart problems.

Jackson’s death brought a tragic end to a long, bizarre, sometimes farcical decline from his peak in the 1980s, when he was popular music’s premier all-around performer, a uniter of black and white music who shattered the race barrier on MTV, dominated the charts and dazzled even more on stage.

His 1982 album “Thriller” — which included the blockbuster hits “Beat It,” “Billie Jean” and “Thriller” — is the best-selling album of all time, with an estimated 50 million copies sold worldwide.

As word of his death spread, MTV switched its programming to play videos from Jackson’s heyday. Radio stations began playing marathons of his hits. Hundreds of people gathered outside the hospital. In New York’s Times Square, a low groan went up in the crowd when a screen flashed that Jackson had died, and people began relaying the news to friends by cell phone.

“No joke. King of Pop is no more. Wow,” Michael Harris, 36, of New York City, read from a text message a friend had sent him. “It’s like when Kennedy was assassinated. I will always remember being in Times Square when Michael Jackson died.”

The public first knew him as a boy in the late 1960s, when he was the precocious, spinning lead singer of theJackson 5, the singing group he formed with his four older brothers out of Gary, Ind. Among their No. 1 hits were “I Want You Back,” “ABC” and “I’ll Be There.”

He was perhaps the most exciting performer of his generation, known for his backward-gliding moonwalk, his feverish, crotch-grabbing dance moves and his high-pitched singing, punctuated with squeals and titters. His single sequined glove, tight, military-style jacket and aviator sunglasses were trademarks, as was his ever-changing, surgically altered appearance.

“For Michael to be taken away from us so suddenly at such a young age, I just don’t have the words,” saidQuincy Jones, who produced “Thriller.” “He was the consummate entertainer and his contributions and legacy will be felt upon the world forever. I’ve lost my little brother today, and part of my soul has gone with him.”

Jackson ranked alongside Elvis Presley and the Beatles as the biggest pop sensations of all time. He united two of music’s biggest names when he was briefly married to Presley’s daughter, Lisa Marie. Jackson’s sudden death immediately evoked comparisons to that of Presley himself, who died at age 42 in 1977.

“I am so very sad and confused with every emotion possible,” Lisa Marie Presley said in a statement. “I am heartbroken for his children who I know were everything to him and for his family. This is such a massive loss on so many levels, words fail me.”

As years went by, Jackson became an increasingly freakish figure — a middle-aged man-child weirdly out of touch with grown-up life. His skin became lighter, his nose narrower, and he spoke in a breathy, girlish voice. He often wore a germ mask while traveling, kept a pet chimpanzee named Bubbles as one of his closest companions and surrounded himself with children at his Neverland ranch, a storybook playland filled with toys, rides and animals. The tabloids dubbed him “Wacko Jacko.”

“It seemed to me that his internal essence was at war with the norms of the world. It’s as if he was trying to defy gravity,” said Michael Levine, a Hollywood publicist who represented Jackson in the early 1990s. He called Jackson a “disciple of P.T. Barnum” and said the star appeared fragile at the time but was “much more cunning and shrewd about the industry than anyone knew.”

Jackson caused a furor in 2002 when he playfully dangled his infant son, Prince Michael II, over a hotel balcony in Berlin while a throng of fans watched from below.

In 2005, he was cleared of charges that he molested a 13-year-old cancer survivor at Neverland in 2003. He had been accused of plying the boy with alcohol and groping him, and of engaging in strange and inappropriate behavior with other children.

The case followed years of rumors about Jackson and young boys. In a TV documentary, he acknowledged sharing his bed with children, a practice he described as sweet and not at all sexual.

Despite the acquittal, the lurid allegations that came out in court took a fearsome toll on his career and image, and he fell into serious financial trouble.

Michael Joseph Jackson was born Aug. 29, 1958, in Gary. He was 4 years old when he began singing with his brothers — Marlon, Jermaine, Jackie and Tito — in the Jackson 5. After his early success with bubblegum soul, he struck out on his own, generating innovative, explosive, unstoppable music.

The album “Thriller” alone mixed the dark, serpentine bass and drums and synthesizer approach of “Billie Jean,” the grinding Eddie Van Halen guitar solo on “Beat It,” and the hiccups and falsettos on “Wanna Be Startin’ Somethin‘.”

The peak may have come in 1983, when Motown celebrated its 25th anniversary with an all-star televised concert and Jackson moonwalked off with the show, joining his brothers for a medley of old hits and then leaving them behind with a pointing, crouching, high-kicking, splay-footed, crotch-grabbing run through “Billie Jean.”

The audience stood and roared. Jackson raised his fist.

During production of a 1984 Pepsi commercial, Jackson’s scalp sustains burns when an explosion sets his hair on fire.

He had strong follow-up albums with 1987’s “Bad” and 1991’s “Dangerous,” but his career began to collapse in 1993 after he was accused of molesting a boy who often stayed at his home. The singer denied any wrongdoing, reached a settlement with the boy’s family, reported to be $20 million, and criminal charges were never filed.

Jackson’s expressed anger over the allegations on the 1995 album “HIStory,” which sold more than 2.4 million copies, but by then, the popularity of Jackson’s music was clearly waning even as public fascination with his increasingly erratic behavior was growing.

Jackson married Lisa Marie Presley in 1994, and they divorced in 1996. Later that year, Jackson married Deborah Rowe, a former nurse for his dermatologist. They had two children together: Michael Joseph Jackson Jr., known as Prince Michael, now 12; and Paris Michael Katherine Jackson, 11. Rowe filed for divorce in 1999.

Jackson also had a third child, Prince Michael II. Now 7, Jackson said the boy nicknamed Blanket as a baby was his biological child born from a surrogate mother.

Billboard magazine editorial director Bill Werde said Jackson’s star power was unmatched. “The world just lost the biggest pop star in history, no matter how you cut it,” Werde said. “He’s literally the king of pop.”

Jackson’s 13 No. 1 one hits on the Billboard charts put him behind only Presley, the Beatles and Mariah Carey, Werde said.

“He was on the eve of potentially redeeming his career a little bit,” he said. “People might have started to think of him again in a different light.”

"YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT. ANYTHING YOU SAY COULD AND WOULD BE USED AGAINST YOU IN A COURT OF LAW, IF IN FACT YOU ARE ACTUALLY HEADED TO ONE. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO SIGN A CONFESSION. IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE YOUR HANDS ARE SMASHED WITH HAMMERS, YOU CAN JUST HOLD THE PEN WITH YOUR TEETH AND MAKE A LITTLE "X" OR SOMETHING"

YOUR CASE WILL NOT BE DISMISSED JUST BECAUSE YOUR “MIRANDA” RIGHTS WERE NOT READ! YOU’RE WATCHING TOO MUCH TV!

 The case of Miranda v. Arizona was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, handed down on June 13, 1966, which outlined the rights of individuals in regard to interrogation while in police custody. In particular, it prescribed the admissibility of evidence gained from persons who have not been advised of their rights relating to the 5^th and 6^th Amendments to the US Constitution.  Essentially, the Court held that if a suspect has not been advised of these rights, prior to being interrogated, than any evidence derived against them in that case cannot be used against them in a court of law. This ruling provides that anything a person says can be used against them, but again, only if the person has been informed of their right to consult with an attorney and of the right against self-incrimination. It must be demonstrated that an individual understood those rights and that he or she also voluntarily waived their rights if a statement was given.  It is of paramount importance to understand that at all times any person reserves the right to remain silent – and should assert that right!  It is also important to understand that the Miranda litany is not required to be given post arrest – it is only required if a person is in custody and is going to be interrogated!  Thus, the lacks of advise after an arrest that does not involve questioning about the events that took place is not a relevant Constitutional issue.

 The right against self-incrimination was already in effect before the Miranda decision, since the Fifth Amendment guarantee has long been in place. But the Miranda decision does clarify and solidify pre-existing Constitutional Rights. In 2004, the Supreme Court also upheld state “Stop and Identify” laws, which do allow police to ask certain standard information, like name, birth date and address, without arresting the person.

The Court did not specify the exact wording the warning should take, but instead provided a set of guidelines, which must be followed. Those guidelines stated:

 “…The person in custody, prior to interrogation, must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to remain silent, and that anything the person says may be used against that person in court; the person must be clearly informed that he or she has the right to consult with an attorney and to have that attorney present during questioning, and that, if he or she is indigent, an attorney will be provided at no cost to represent him or her.” A judge or jury is prohibited from drawing negative inferences from a suspect’s refusal to answer questions.

Any interrogation must be suspended when a suspect invokes their Miranda rights.

The common term “Miranda rights” pays homage to the defendant in the Miranda case, Ernest A. Miranda. Miranda claimed he was convicted of rape and robbery without due process, since he was deprived of the advice of legal counsel. Miranda was also forced to sign a confession, pre-typed and read to him, in which he was made to state that he was making this confession voluntarily, a paper that was put in front of him less than 2 hours after his arrest. The title of this document stated his rights to refrain from self-incrimination, but he was shown to be of limited mental capacity and possessed of only an 8th grade education. He was never advised of his right to remain silent; he was not timely warned that anything he did say could be used against him. The case was an appeal of his conviction to the Supreme Court, since it so clearly violated Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and the right to counsel. The landmark case has entered the popular mindset, and is commonly known, even though it is often completely misunderstood.

Miranda was later retried, and the illegally gained confession was excluded. His conviction was upheld in 1967 on the basis of witnesses and other evidence. He was sentenced to serve 20 to 30 years, and paroled in 1972.

The Fifth Amendment provides that a person does not have to give information that supports any criminal accusations against them. This is also known as the right against self-incrimination. The term “Mirandize,” meaning to read a suspect their rights, has become more commonly known in modern culture because of its routine use in television crime dramas. Citizens commonly believe that the Miranda warning is automatically used in any circumstance involving police detainment. This is not accurate, since the police must warn an individual only when they are subjected to a custodial interrogation (a suspect is considered ‘in custody’ when they are deprived of free movement) in a police station, in a police vehicle, or otherwise detained. Individuals may be arrested without questioning, and need not receive a Miranda warning in that case. If the police change their mind and institute questioning at a later time, then the warning is required.

There is a difference between ‘detention’ and ‘arrest’ — police are not required to put the warning in place until a person is actually arrested for a crime. In that case, it’s important to realize that any statements made during detention and even while an arrest is in progress (before the warning is given) are generally admissible. The Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination does not prevent police from taking blood without a warrant from individuals suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol, since this kind of inquiry may incriminate the individual but cannot be said to be ‘self-incriminatory.’ In addition, the Miranda rule does not cover such things as giving handwriting, DNA, or voice samples, fingerprints, hair samples or dental impressions, since they do not involve the suspect giving actual testimony against themselves.

It is unclear whether an individual already in jail for one crime is protected by Miranda rights granted in that case, if the person is charged with other crimes while still in custody. Miranda rights should be offered in each and every different case.

Police are often given special training designed to induce persons to waive their Miranda rights. For example, the interrogator may ask specifically if the rights are understood and the individual wishes to talk. The officer may speak at length about the evidence already collected, and then ask the suspect if they wish to talk, with the objective of getting the suspect to talk in order to refute that evidence. Interrogators may employ the tactic of not asking any questions at all, simply to sit down across from the suspect and silently do paperwork, with the unstated intention of inducing the suspect to begin to talk on their own. These deceptive tactics, designed to get around the prohibition of compelling testimony, have been upheld in court as valid and lawful.

For the Miranda rule to apply, six factors must be fulfilled. First, the suspect must actually give testimony; even a non-verbal communication, such as nodding the head ‘yes’ when asked if they committed the crime is construed to be testimony. Such testimony must be elicited in a custodial situation, where the suspect is actually arrested or detained so that their freedom of movement is curtailed. Miranda does not apply to questioning a motorist at the side of the road, or a person briefly detained on the street. A person who voluntarily comes to the police station for questioning is not entitled to the Miranda warning, since they are not under arrest and are free to leave.

The fourth factor requiring Miranda warning requires the evidence collected to be a result of actual interrogation. A statement volunteered by a suspect in custody is not protected by the Miranda ruling. The Supreme Court has defined interrogation to include “any actions that the police should know are reasonably likely to elicit an incriminating response from the suspect.” Confrontations of incriminating evidence therefore also amount to interrogation and should be protected by the Miranda ruling.

However, “unforeseeable results of police words or actions” do not count as interrogation. So routine statements made during the administration of sobriety tests for example would not trigger the need for the Miranda warning. A statement by a possibly impaired driver that he or she ‘wouldn’t be able to walk a straight line or put their finger to their nose if they were sober’ would be considered allowable, if incriminating evidence, and would not be protected under the Miranda ruling. Spontaneous statements by an impaired individual usually come in response to questioning by the investigating officer, and such questions, such as ‘How much have you had to drink?’ ‘Do you know where you are?’ are so typical that most police departments print a list of such questions in their arrest report forms. The question of when the Miranda ruling comes into play is often obscured by this questioning behavior; spontaneous statements and answers to these questions can end up being used as evidence against a DUI suspect.

The fifth condition that must be met in order for the Miranda ruling to be in effect is that the confession or evidence must be gathered by obvious “state-agents” such as police officers. Any confession or evidence gained by interrogation by undercover agents or paid informants doe not violate Miranda, since the suspect has no idea they are being questioned by police. In this case, the requirement that the suspect be in custody is waived. Security guards and private police are not considered “state-agents” unless they are off-duty police officers, since a police officer is always considered “on duty.”

Finally, the sixth condition to trigger Miranda is that the evidence must be offered during a criminal proceeding. That means that the results of the endeavor can lead to punishment. So a commitment hearing, in cases of mental competency, does not trigger Miranda, nor do probation hearings, since no new punishment is being contemplated.

So, if all six conditions are present, evidence given in the absence of the Miranda warning must be suppressed and may not be used to convict an individual of a crime.

This Supreme Court ruling protects individuals from answering questions that will impair their legal defense. The ordinary person’s first instinct, when confronted by police questioning, is to be cooperative and try to show a willingness to be helpful and remain in good standing with the police. While this is a noble stance, saying too much in order to appear cooperative can go against your case should it ever appear in court. It is always best to remain silent (this is your basic right) in responding to questions that might require the assistance of an attorney.

It is important to be forthcoming in answering purely administrative questions, such as name, birth date, and address. It is fine to give answers to questions that have no bearing on your potential case, such as your height and weight, since they will not affect your case and have the effect of making you appear to be helpful and willing to cooperate. The rule of thumb is this: if answering any question could has the potential of helping law enforcement make a case against you, then you should be Mirandized first. Except in the area of administrative questioning, questions that might help law enforcement convict you are best left unanswered.

 Your right to remain silent is yours. USE IT!

By: David Zwanetz, Associate Attorney

BAD BOYS BAD BOYS WHAT YA GONNA DO-OOO!

Laurel police report felonies, arrests and property crimes. Howard County police report major crimes, break-ins and car thefts. Prince George’s County police report violent crimes and property crimes.

Howard County

Savage/North Laurel:

Freestate Drive, 8800 block, 8:32 p.m. June 15. A 2004 BMW X5 car was being unloaded from a carrier at Carmax when it was stolen.

Evening Primrose, 9700 block, 6:12 p.m. June 15. A cappuccino 2006 Buick sport utility vehicle stolen.

Sandal Wood Court, 8400 block, between 10 p.m. June 14 and 12 p.m. June 15. Shed entered. Brush cutter stolen. No forced entry observed.

Traders Crossing, 9200 block, 6:54 p.m. June 12. A 1999 Dodge Caravan stolen.

Bridle Path Lane, 9200 block, 9:41 a.m. June 12. A 2004 Nissan Maxima stolen.

Washington Boulevard, 10100 block, between 3:30 p.m. June 12 and 6:30 a.m. June 13. Room at Valencia Motel broken into by breaking the window. Gaming system stolen.

Dorsey Run Road, 8400 block, 9:29 a.m. June 11. A 24-foot 1999 International box truck stolen.

Barrell House Road, 9600 block, 9:24 a.m. June 11. A 2006 Yamaha motorcycle stolen.

Moonshine Hollow, 9100 block, 7:27 a.m. June 11. A 1999 Dodge Caravan burglarized.

Washington Boulevard, 9900 block, between 1:30 p.m. June 7 and 6:06 p.m. June 8. Gray 2003 Dodge Intrepid stolen.

Cardinal Forest Circle, 8700 block, 10 p.m. June 4. White 1995 Acura Integra stolen. Recovered on Storch Woods Drive after tires were stripped from it.

City of Laurel

Fifth Street, 800 block, June 12. Whisper watt generator stolen from a construction site.

Ashford Place, 14800 block, June 11. Green 1997 Lincoln Continental, 4 door, with Maryland tags 1EKY79 stolen.

Montrose Avenue, 300 block, June 11. Tom Tom GPS system and a computer case stolen from a parked car.

Montrose Avenue, 300 block, June 11. Twenty books stolen from a display at Books-A- Million.

Montgomery Street, 700 block, June 10. Cannon Power Shot G6 camera stolen from a parked car.

Harvest Bend Lane, 8200 block, June 10. Four tires and rims stolen off a parked car.

Laurelton Drive, 15400 block, June 10. Garmin GPS system, iPod and a Bluetooth charger stolen from a parked car.

Baltimore Avenue, 14800 block, June 10. White 2004 Jeep Cherokee truck with Maryland tags 921M430 stolen.

Sandy Spring Road, 7200 block, June 10. Entry gained through a basement door. Black watch box, Breitling watch, Seiko watch and a cup of coins stolen.

Baltimore Avenue, 14800 block, June 9. Victim was walking through the parking lot at Laurel Mall when two men approached him, struck him and attacked him with a box cutter while he was lying on the ground. The men fled with the victim’s money and cell phone. The victim was treated for abrasions and several lacerations and released from the hospital

Main Street, 100 block, June 9. Silver 2009 Mazda 3 sedan, with Maryland tags 8CZH83 stolen.

Baltimore Avenue, 13900 block, June 8. Vizio plasma television stolen from a business.

Baltimore Avenue, 14700 block, June 7. Cash stolen from the Laurel Boys and Girls Club at Jolly Shows Carnival after the carnival closed.

Briston Street, 14000 block, June 6. Four tires and rims stolen from a parked car.

Fourth Street, 14800 block, June 5. Four tires and rims stolen from a parked car.

Fourth Street, 14700 block, June 1. Silver 2006 Honda CBR-1000 motorcycle with North Carolina tag 2Y2203 stolen.

Prince George’s County

Spruce Hill Drive, 8300 block, June 14. Fight.

Intersection of Contee Road and Laurel-Bowie Road, June 14. Assault.

Deerfield Road, 13300 block, June 14. Theft from auto.

Baltimore Avenue, 10000 block, June 13. Stolen vehicle.

Baltimore Avenue, 10100 block, June 13. Stolen vehicle.

Contee Road, 8770 block, June 12. Breaking and entering.

Contee Road, 8770 block, June 12. Breaking and entering.

Laurel-Bowie Road, 13340 block, June 12. Theft from auto.

Bowie Road, 14810 block, June 12. Robbery.

Avebury Drive, 13600 block, June 12. Stolen vehicle.

Mistletoe Spring Road, 13000 block, June 11. Break-in.

Attleboro Court, 13500 block, June 11. Theft from auto.

Finsbury Court, 13300 block, June 10. Breaking and entering.

Horton Road, 8900 block, June 10. Robbery.

Hartford Avenue, 4500 block, June 9. Break-in.

Baltimore Avenue, 13400 block, June 9. Theft from auto.

Sweitzer Lane, 6300 block, June 9. Theft from auto.

Sweitzer Lane, 14840 block, June 9. Theft from auto.

Sweitzer Lane, 14880 block, June 9. Theft from auto.

Stanmore Drive, 7700 block, June 8. Theft from auto.

Amblewood Drive, 12210 block, June 8. Break-in.

Finsbury Court, 13300 block, June 8. Breaking and entering.

Two men were indicted by a Howard County grand jury Wednesday on assault, handgun and other charges relating to an attack on a uniformed security guard in Columbia May 13.

Rick Delon Britton, 20, of Odenton, and Derrod Alfonso Peterson, 18, of Columbia,  were indicted on counts of first- and second-degree assault, use of a handgun in the commission of a violent crime, theft of less than $500 and conspiracy to commit second-degree assault. All the charges are related to a May 13 incident in which a security guard near the Long Reach Village Center was shot at and robbed by a group of young men, according to police.

Britton was ordered held without bond. Peterson is being held on $100,000 bond, according to a copy of the indictment.

A third individual, Darnell Rasheen Furby, 16, of Columbia, was indicted in May on counts of first- and second-degree assault, theft of less than $500, use of a handgun in the commission of a violent crime, and conspiracy to commit second-degree assault, according to a copy of the indictment.

Police called to apartments in the 8800 block of Flowerstock Row at about 9 p.m. on May 13 were told by the guard that he had been attacked by three men and punched in the face, and that one of the men had fired multiple gunshots at him but missed.

When the guard fled, the suspects stole money from his security vehicle, police said.

The three were arrested at various residences, not their own, without incident, police said.

No court date has been scheduled for any of the men, according to a spokesman for Howard County State’s Attorney Dario Broccolino.

JUST READ IT!

We wish you all safe and happy weekend!

David Zwanetz, Esq.

CLICK HERE TO IF YOU DONT GET IT!

DON'T LET EM BREAK OUT THE BIG GUNS!

By: David Zwanetz, Esq.

First off, it is imperative to know that the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution secures the “right of all people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,” and mandates that that right “shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or thing to be seized.” 

That being said, one must understand that there are a number of exceptions to the warrant requirement that allow police to search and seize people and items without a written warrant.  To that effect, many courts, including the Supreme, have held that the sniff of a trained police dog dog not even constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment.

The purpose of this article is to discuss some of the more important aspects of search and seizure law as it specifically relates to police dogs.  Logic flows that if a police dog sniff is not a search than police would bring dogs to the scene of any suspicious stop to check for drugs, even if they otherwise have no probable cause for a warrant to search.  This is exactly what the Howard County police have begun to do.  The question is, is this legal/Constitutional?  The short answer is, as it usually is, that it depends.  The point of this article is to give a brief overview of the legality of the k-9 search, enough so that the average person can be at least slightly informed of his or her rights.  After all, our lives in this country are guided by the US Constitutional and its Amendments.  However, very few people, outside of the legal community, have a grasp on any of its provisions. As a Howard County criminal lawyer, it is my goal to change that.

Police dogs are a valuable asset for today’s law enforcement agencies.  Recent efforts to combat narcotics in growing rural areas like Howard County have led to an even greater role for the police dog.  Generally, courts have embraced the use of police dogs. As mentioned above, the Supreme Court has held that a dog sniff is not a search that requires probable cause.  In determining that the canine sniff is not a search under the Fourth Amendment, the Court relied upon the extremely limited nature of the intrusion and the fact that there is no expectation of privacy in the air or in an odor.  Courts have also noted that there is no actual physical intrusion in the area or article sniffed.  Nontneless, minimal physical contact between the dog and the article will not escalate the sniff to a Fourth Amendment “seizure.”

“A CANINE SNIFF IS NOT A SEARCH OR SEIZURE UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT”

The principal that a police dog may sniff an area or article without a search warrant is considered analogous to the plain-view doctrine (which is essentially the idea that if the police see contraband in plain view they can seize it without a warrant) and has become known as the “plain-smell doctrine.”  The use of a dog’s keener sense of smell to detect odors is comparable to the use of an officer’s flashlight to enhance the officer’s perception of that which is already in plain view.

However, and most importantly, in order to utilize this plain-smell doctrine, the police must legitimately be at the location where the sniff occurs or legitimately detaining the article sniffed.  This brings me back to the idea of an officer calling a k-9 unit when he or she senses something suspicions during a routine traffic stop.  In order for the police to be considered “legally where they are,” during a traffic stop they must not hold a suspect during that traffic stop any longer than it would take an ordinary prudent officer to issue a citation for the underlying traffic offense.  Think of it this way.  The Fourth Amendment veil is like an iron curtain that opens only when probable cause or a warrant exists.  During a traffic stop the curtain opens so that the officer can issue a citation for whatever offense was committed (i.e., speeding, tail light out, running a stop sign, etc.). However, the curtain closes immediately upon the issuance of the citation or at the time when the citation should have been issued. 

Thus, if an officer is able to have a k-9 unit do a perimeter search of one’s car during the small amount of time that it takes to issue a citation, the Fourth Amendment has been complied with. However, if an officer calls a k-9 unit upon suspicion and holds a suspect even one minute longer than the ordinary time to issue a citation waiting for that k-9 unit to arrive, the Fourth Amendment has been violated.  A violation of the Fourth Amendment will not stop an arrest from taking place, but it can and should lead to the suppression of evidence in court.  Additionally, there is nothing at all wrong with a suspect being issued a traffic citation refusing to wait for a  k-9 officer to arrive and do a random search – believe it or not that happens all the time.  This is essentially a person volunteering to wait to have his or her rights violated. 

If your have been the subject of a K-9 search and you feel your rights have been violated, call the Howard County Criminal Attorneys at the law firm Shapiro & Mack for a free and immediate consultation. 

This article was written by David Zwanetz, Esq. David Z., also trains and competes in Brazilian Jiu Jitsu at Baltimore MMA school, Crazy 88 Brazilian Jiu Jitsu.

Feel free to ask specific questions related to this topic in the comments section below and David Zwanetz, Esq. will respond personally.