Today in Baltimore City bail reviews: Judge Sampson is presiding. Sounds like no defendants will be present.
Todd Oppenheim from OPD making a statement to be applied to all their cases on this docket. He’s addressing the factors in Judge Barbera’s order.
He notes the nationwide resurgence of COVID. Says trial dates in MD are “aspirational,” and defendants are not getting effective assistance of counsel.
Infections among inmates and staff in Maryland are at least 1096 with at least 8 inmate deaths, though he points out reporting is spotty.
He notes Black people are likelier to die from COVID and says a quick look at casesearch indicates all today’s defendants are Black.
People are being held in dirty, crowded conditions, and some of them are making masks for the community outside while only being given one each themselves.
He reminds the court of the presumption of innocence. Here Judge Sampson interrupts time complain the statement isn’t “brief.” Oppenheim goes on to mention the delays with the home detention program through the jail and the expense of private home detention.
Judge Sampson says he will consider the outbreak but “public safety is paramount to the court.” (COVID *is* a public safety issue!)
It now sounds like some defendants are present today by videoconference from booking.
First case: a man who is seeking release from pretrial incarceration to inpatient treatment. Some confusion about case numbers/whether this should be on this docket.
The ASA says the state does not oppose release, and notes that all the charges are for drugs (why has our allegedly anti-drug-war state’s attorney allowed this man to spend any time in jail in the first place?). Judge Sampson ordering release to the treatment facility.
Next: a father of a young daughter who was working two jobs before his arrest. He’s been in jail over a year. There’s no direct evidence against him and no witnesses identify him.
In fact one eyewitness says it was not this man who committed the offense. He is on the jail’s vulnerable list and his medical conditions are worsening at Central Booking. He can’t receive in-person medical visits there due to COVID.
The ASA is reciting BPD’s story as fact and citing known pseudoscience to support the state’s request for HWOB. Pretrial recommending HWOB. Judge Sampson ordering HWOB.
Next: a man who is being held at JCI. His bail hasn’t been reviewed since November. He has a serious medical condition. He’s accused of a property crime, which is odd since Mosby and her goons have been all over the internet swearing they’re only prosecuting “violent crime.”
The ASA is now reciting allegations from property crime charges in another jurisdiction for which this man also hasn’t been convicted. Making light of his medical condition by asserting he doesn’t count as elderly (which wasn’t the condition named).
She is now talking about how he fired his counsel in an earlier proceeding and insinuating it was to cause delays, which somehow supports the state’s demand for HWOB. Pretrial recommending HWOB. Judge Sampson ordering HWOB.
Next: a woman who is seeking release to a community program that will help with housing and employment. The complaining witness in her case may not be cooperating.
The ASA is reading BPD’s story as fact. Says she’s a threat to the complaining witness whether or not the complaining witness agrees, demands HWOB. Pretrial recommending HWOB. Judge Sampson ordering electronic home monitoring.
Next: a case that was nolle pros’d yesterday so coming off the docket
Next: a father of two young daughters who has filed a motion to amend pretrial conditions. He is on home detention and needs permission to go to work and to medical appointments.
The ASA says because he is on home detention through DOC, not through a private company, the court might not be able to order a change. The state is “concerned” about whether he will “comply.”
Pretrial says they don’t know if the court has jurisdiction. Judge Sampson agrees and says it’s an issue for DOC to decide, denies request to modify.
Next: a man with severe asthma being held at MTC. He has a young child. The ASA is reading BPD’s story as fact, state wants HWOB. Pretrial recommending HWOB. Judge Sampson ordering HWOB.
Next: a young man with young children who was indicted 10 months ago. His trial date was moved from May to September and will now have to be moved again bc there won’t be jurors in September. He’ll have spent over a year in jail by the time he’s tried.
He has asthma and is being held at JCI, where there have been deaths from COVID.
Pretrial recommending home detention. Judge Sampson starts to order home detention without hearing state, ASA interrupts so she can read him BPD’s story.
This ASA always reads the statements of charges word for word. Notably, we’ve never heard a judge interrupt her (as this one interrupted Todd Oppenheim today) to ask her to keep it brief.
State is demanding HWOB. The ASA claims pretrial’s recitation of priors is deficient, but says she hasn’t had time to pull up his record. Judge Sampson asks her to move on to another case while she finds it.
Next: a young man who was arrested after a warrantless search of a home. His attorney points out the standard for HWOB is “extreme danger” and that he doesn’t meet that standard. Quotes Thurgood Marshall re: “infinite bail.”
The ASA is again reading the statement of charges. Judge Sampson interrupts to say he’s read it already. ASA asks “so you want the recommendation, not the facts?” Judge says yes. ASA says the young man still lives at the address, defense attorney says that’s not true.
State seeking HWOB. Some back and forth between judge and defense about where he will live if released. Pretrial recommending HWOB. Judge Sampson ordering HWOB, says to refile once the attorney knows the address where he’ll live.
They’re now doing back to the case before that one. The additional case the ASA was so worked up about pretrial leaving out was a PBJ for drugs. She also cited a stet case as part of his “record.”
Defense atty pointing out that video from the current case doesn’t show what the statement of probable cause says happened. Judge Sampson ordering private home monitoring.
Next: a man who has been on home detention since last October and needs a modification so he can work to help his family pay for the monitoring.
Judge Sampson says the letter from his prospective employer is too vague about work schedule, defense attorney says they can give him a set schedule. State objects to any modification of his status.
The ASA claims the state is always as flexible as it can be (false). Cites the allegations as facts. Judge Sampson denying the request for modification.
Next: a young man with asthma and other serious medical conditions. He’s being held at Central Booking and won’t even be arraigned until October. Just in the time since his attorney filed this motion, there have been 10 new COVID cases at Central Booking.
Judge Sampson says the motion didn’t say “how severe” his conditions are, “how can I make a decision” without those specifics. This defendant is present so the judge is asking him directly about his conditions, including whether he has access to an inhaler in jail.
The ASA is reciting the allegations as facts (though she isn’t reading the statement word for word after the judge’s earlier admonition). State seeking HWOB. Pretrial recommending HWOB.
Judge Sampson ordering HWOB.
Next: a case that has already been postponed until next week.
Next: a very young father. His baby has serious health issues. The complaining witness isn’t cooperating. He’s been in jail for six months without even being arraigned and will have spent over a year in jail by the time the case is tried.
The ASA says “whether the victim is cooperating or not, the state is going forward.” State seeking HWOB. Pretrial recommending ROR. Judge Sampson ordering electronic home monitoring.
Defense atty says he’s not working, so he hasn’t gotten him approved for electronic monitoring bc he’s not sure if he can pay. Asking for ROR. Judge Sampson repeats he’s ordering electronic home monitoring.
Next: a case that is being rescheduled for later this week.
Next: a case where the complaining witness wants the woman released. The ASA says the state doesn’t object to ROR but she addresses the defendant directly (who is present by video from the jail) to threaten her with a mandatory jail sentence if she doesn’t comply with conditions.
Pretrial recommending ROR. Judge Sampson ordering ROR.
Next: a young woman who was taking care of her great-grandmother before she was arrested. She’s been in jail for a few months and there’s been no indictment yet and no preliminary hearing. Case has chain of custody issues.
This case is drugs-only. Very weird that Marilyn Mosby’s office keeps somehow finding themselves prosecuting these cases in direct contradiction of what Marilyn Mosby says they’re doing. 🤔
The ASA claims the overdose rate makes this young woman a threat to society and says if she is released, the state wants monitoring. Pretrial recommending ROR. Judge Sampson ordering ROR.
Next: another drug case. The accused is the father of a young child. Defense atty notes that a prior bail hearing, both pretrial and the state recommended release and another judge held him without bail anyway.
The ASA says the state is not opposed to ROR with pretrial supervision. Pretrial recommending ROR. Judge Sampson ordering ROR with pretrial supervision.
Next: a man who has been in jail for 2 months. The complaining witness has recanted. The trial date isn’t until November. Defense attorney points out that under the due process clause, this incarceration is punitive. He has a serious medical conditions.
The ASA is reciting the allegations as facts. She says “the state has ways to prosecute without the victim.” Seeking HWOB but “would agree to home detention.” Pretrial recommending ROR with supervision. Judge Sampson ordering ROR.
Next: a father of a young child and one child on the way. He has medical conditions that make him vulnerable to COVID. The ASA says the state does not oppose ROR with pretrial services. Pretrial will submit.
Judge Sampson ordering ROR. That was the end of the docket. Back in a bit with the numbers.
