Thread by @bmorecourtwatch

Bail reviews will start shortly. Here’s our thread from yesterday’s docket:

https://twitter.com/bmorecourtwatch/status/1338481990119591939

Today in Baltimore City Bail reviews: Judge Anthony "but did you die" Vittoria presiding, he reads the policy banning audio recording verbatim.

CASE 1: A woman that has been incarcerated since October. Defense is seeking release, she has health conditions that put her at a high-risk for COVID and no trial date in sight. Defense details her living conditions, a dorm w/ no social distancing, no accurate COVID numbers.

ASA Hartford recites allegations as fact, he cites multiple nolle prossed cases to justify the state's request for HWOB.

Pretrial reccs HWOB.

Judge Vittoria orders HWOB.

CASE 2: A man that is seeking release to a program, defense has arranged his placement and transportation. Defense says he has spoken to the alleged victim multiple times, she does not want to pursue charges, she is available today to speak to the court.

ASA Hartford interrupts to say the state doesn't have any of this info, defense tells him all the paperwork was sent to the assigned ASA. Vittoria tells him not to interrupt again.

Vittoria tells defense he needs to see the affidavit with alleged victims statement, or he can swear her in to testify today. He also lectures defense because ASA Hartford hasn't seen the affadavit, you know, the one he sent to the ASA assigned to the case...

Judge Vittoria holds the case until later in the docket when defense can get him the affadavit.

CASE 3: A man that is currently in medical isolation with his 2nd round of COVID19. There is a strong self-defense argument for his case and the alleged victim has not cooperated with cops or the state.

ASA Hartford reads allegations as facts, defense points out that he does not seem to know who is who when detailing the case.

State and pretrial both recc HWOB.

Judge Vittoria orders him HWOB, citing an old conviction this man has already completed his sentence for.

CASE 4: A father that was laid off before his arrest. The details of the case have a lot of issues, his only connection to the incident is allegedly being present at the time of an incident, CCTV footage isn't clear, evidence doesn't match cops narrative.

ASA recites allegations as facts, state and pretrial recc HWOB.

Judge Vittoria says this is a close call, he doesn't think the state has met the burden of proof, and orders private home detention.

CASE 5: A man that has been on private home detention for 6 months, he currently has no trial date. Defense estimates he has paid over 2k in fees to a private company, he lost his job recently and can't pay 6 more months worth of fees. Defense seeking a modification to ROR.

Defense says he can't work overtime if he gets it because of ASAP restrictions, he also cites a recent case of ASAP issuing false reports of violations that could result in re-incarceration for people.

ASA recites allegations as fact, says this case (an allegedly stolen iPhone) is "terrifying" to the public, asks for no modification.

Judge Vittoria grants the modification to ROR w/ highest level of pretrial services.

CASE 2 recalled: Everyone has the affidavit now and the alleged victim is on the line to protest the case and this man's ongoing incarceration. Judge Vittoria reads the affidavit to her asking her to confirm the accuracy.

Defense repeats request to release him to a treatment program reiterates that he would not be staying with the alleged victim & would comply with any stay-away orders.

ASA Hartford questions alleged victim, asking her about her kids, their custody status, and whether or not her or the defendant use drugs. ASA calls the witness's credibility into question, defense objects to all these questions.

Vittoria sustains these objections, tells ASA that his questions need to focus on flight or public safety risks.

State reccs HWOB but wants him transported directly from jail to the program.

Judge Vittoria orders release to the treatment program followed by ROR.

CASE 6: A man seeking modification allowing him to attend job interviews. Defense says he has been on private home detention, he has paid nearly 2k to ASAP.

ASA Yarborough objects to the modification, wants to wait until trial, one that will likely be postponed.

Judge Vittoria grants the motion allowing him to attend the job interview process with 24-hour notice to ASAP.

CASE 7: A man that has been incarcerated for two months, he is seeking release to home detention. He has serious respiratory conditions that make him vulnerable to COVID complications.

ASA Hartford recites allegations as facts, there is allegedly evidence involving social media, requests HWOB.

Pretrial reccs home detention.

Defense corrects some details given by the state, notes she hasn't received alleged social media evidence.

Judge orders home detention.

CASE 8: A man whose case is still in district court, Judge Vittoria says he can only hear this case as a habeas petition, he cannot rule on bail review.

Defense proceeds with the habeas petition saying the justification for the district court decision was unclear.

He is an armed security guard that has done all the paperwork to legally own and carry a firearm, he has some respiratory issues that make him vulnerable to COVID19 complications.

ASA Hartford recites allegations as fact. The state says their recc has changed since the district hearing, they now agree to home detention.

Pretrial reccs ROR.

Judge Vittoria orders ROR, notes it is unfair that defense cannot properly review district hearing.

CASE 9: A teenager, he is a young father and would be able to return to work if he is released. He denies any involvement with the alleged incident & defense says he should probably be a witness not a co-defendant.

ASA Brown presents allegations as fact, suggests he is guilty because he allegedly hung around the scene after the incident.

Judge orders home detention, notes the state's argument just doesn't make sense, if he had fled they would have used that against him instead.

CASE 10: A man that was stopped and searched by cops, they found the keys to his car. Cops asked him if he got out of a car of the same make pointing to the street, he said yes assuming they meant his vehicle, but then they arrested him for a gun found in the wrong car.

He tried to show cops that the keys did not work for the car in question, keys are listed generically as "[make] key" in the police report.

He can pay for home detention if he is allowed to work. Judge Vittoria has questions about the mileage on the cars he uses for work.

ASA Hartford recites allegations as fact, he offers the cops narrative with no mention of discrepancies brought up by defense. Requests HWOB.

Pretrial reccs home detention w/ permission to work.

Judge orders HWOB.

CASE 11: A man who runs a shop under an apartment that was searched by cops, he does not live in this apartment but is being charged based on the results of this search. Defense says even considering this charge, he is not a threat to public safety, seeking release.

ASA Hartford recites allegations as facts, requests HWOB citing public safety risk.

Pretrial reccs HWOB.

Judge orders HWOB.

CASE 12: A man that has lived in Baltimore most of his life. One of the charges he was facing has been dropped, a change in circumstances since his last hearing.

ASA Yarborough recites allegations as fact, requests HWOB.

Pretrial reccs HWOB.

Defense emphasizes there are ways to allow his release while also mitigating any alleged public safety risks.

Judge orders HWOB.

CASE 13: A man that was stopped & searched by cops. Defense says there are numerous issues with the stop, including 4th amendment issues, and discrepancies with the BWC footage and cops narrative. Seeking home detention.

ASA Hartford says everything defense said is "basically right" and concedes that there may be issues that come up with the stop in trial, proceeds to present allegations as facts and request HWOB citing a conviction from 24 years ago.

Judge Vittoria notes that the previous conviction is very old, he hasn't had any serious issues since then. He says that while wishes this man had been incarcerated longer for that charge, he served his sentence in full.

He orders home detention.

CASE 14: A man who was given an illegal 25-year sentence, it was recently reversed and he is awaiting a new trial. He has served over ten years, he received his GED while incarcerated. He has been isolated multiple times due to his risk for COVID. Seeking home detention.

ASA Ragland recites allegations as fact, she says the only issue is the sentence and notes he pleaded guilty (in a deal for the illegal sentence) but does not think that is enough of a problem, asks for HWOB.

Judge orders HWOB.

CASE 15: A man seeking release, the state agrees to ROR. Judge Vittoria orders ROR with pretrial services.

CASE 16: A man that has been incarcerated for 215 days. Defense notes contradictions by one of the cops on BWC. Cops say he adjusted his waistband suspiciously & that's why he was stopped but BWC footage shows that is just not true, there is no clear reason for stopping him.

ASA Hartford presents allegations and cops narrative as fact, asks for HWOB.

Pretrial reccs home detention.

Defense disputes the state's assertion that he tried to flee, BWC clearly shows this is not the case.

Judge Vittoria orders home detention.

CASE 17: A man seeking release to a treatment program, there is a caseworker on the line to explain the whole program to the court. His family is very involved and supportive.

Defense says conditions at the jail where this man is currently incarcerated are "deplorable." people are locked up 23 hrs/day, last winter they had to cut open their own mattresses to use stuffing to stay warm.

ASA Boucher recites allegations as facts and requests HWOB.

Judge Vittoria is confused about the recent timeline of events surrounding his arrest, a VOP, & a BaltCo FTA from 2017. Defense says they are working with the county to resolve that issue.

Judge orders HWOB.

That is the end of today's docket.