Upper Marlboro Criminal Defense Law Blog

You're on your way home from an enjoyable evening out when you suddenly notice flashing lights in your rearview mirror. You pull over, and a Maryland police officer comes to your window, asking if you've been drinking. With this one question, your entire night can change direction, and you may find yourself sitting in jail by the end of the evening. 

Unless you have previous DUI convictions on your record, it is likely that you do not know what to expect from a drunk driving arrest. It can be both frightening and overwhelming for someone who has no experience with this process. This is why it is in your interests to know what to expect and know how you can start fighting for your rights and your future interests, even from the moment of an arrest.

Whether conscious or unconscious, the effects of a judge's bias can be highly damaging for people facing criminal charges in Maryland. Researchers have probed the issue of unconscious bias, a form of bias or stereotyping that is an aspect of the subconscious mind rather than conscious thought. In many cases, people's unconscious biases may be entirely opposed to their conscious, thoughtful choices and beliefs. According to neuroscientists, there is a strong biological basis for the concept of unconscious bias. The human brain is complex, and certain factors can lead to a greater impact of these types of unconscious biases and pervasive social ideas.

In particular, unconscious bias is more important when it is held by a person with a significant amount of power or authority over others' lives, such as a judge in a criminal trial. Research has indicated that judges are actually less likely to rely on a deliberative process when making decisions and more likely to go with their intuition, leading to a much greater risk of influence from unconscious biases. Judges also report that they are firmly convinced of their abilities to make unbiased and objective decisions. This can also pose a greater risk because people who believe strongly in their own objectivity are less likely to interrogate the factors that inform their decision-making.

Maryland prosecutors often rely on Breathalyzer tests to convict people accused of drunk driving. However, a report from The New York Times highlights the challenges of such tests as well as their questionable accuracy. While the science underlying a breath test for blood alcohol concentration may be fundamentally valid, those scientific conditions are often not replicated in the roadside and even police station breath tests administered to people accused of driving under the influence. The report noted that in several states, judges have thrown over 30,000 Breathalyzer test results out of court due to their unreliability.

Some of the major problems with breath test machines include poor maintenance, human error and inaccurate calibration. In most cases, the machines were originally programmed correctly, although this may not be the case for older models that are no longer on the market. Some states may not update their lists of acceptable devices to remove old ones, despite the heavy penalties that can accompany a drunk driving conviction. For example, some types of Breathalyzers produce false readings if the person taking a test has had a breath mint. In other cases, the machine is simply too old and no longer functions properly.

For many people in Maryland, community service sentencing appears to reflect a more humane approach to criminal justice than levying heavy fines or assigning jail time. However, the UCLA Labor Center and School of Law carried out a study that takes issue with that conclusion. It argues that the extensive use of community service exacerbates poverty and unemployment, especially in low-income neighborhoods and communities of color, where most defendants sentenced to community service live. The school argues that not only may defendants be blocked from pursuing employment themselves, but potential paid jobs are being replaced by free labor obtained through the sentencing process.

The researchers looked at 5,000 people who were mandated to perform community service instead of paying a fine in Los Angeles County between 2013 and 2014. During that period, the county needed 8 million hours of labor, which is equal to the work of 4,900 paid employees. At the same time, government agencies received 3 million hours of free labor from people sentenced to community service. This work accounted for the equivalent of 1,800 paid jobs. As a result, affected communities have less access to jobs that are necessary for the area, and the use of these sentences may be encouraged for the financial savings they provide.