Maryland case law › State v. Graziano

State v. Graziano

71 Md. App. 652 (1987) · Maryland Court of Special Appeals
Maryland Court of Special AppealsDisposition: ReversedWilner✓ Good law
HoldingIn four consolidated cases, the State filed criminal informations in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County more than 30 days after District Court preliminary hearings found probable cause.

WILNER, Judge. The Circuit Court for Prince George’s County has unfortunately misconstrued Md. Rule 4-221(g) and thus erroneously dismissed criminal informations filed against appellees. We shall reverse those judgments and remand the cases. The relevant factual circumstances in these four cases are similar.

In each, a Statement of Charges was filed in the District Court charging the defendant with certain violations of the controlled dangerous substance laws that were beyond the jurisdiction of the District Court to try; the District Court held a preliminary hearing and found 654 probable cause to believe that the defendant committed the offenses charged; the State thereafter filed a criminal information in the Circuit Court, but the information was filed more than 30 days after the preliminary hearing; and the Circuit Court dismissed the criminal information as being untimely under Rule 4-221(g). Maryland practice and procedure permit criminal charges to be filed against a defendant in the District Court whether or not that court has jurisdiction to try those charges. See Md. Rule 4-211. If the charge is beyond the jurisdiction of the District Court and must be tried in the Circuit Court, the State must eventually file either an indictment or a criminal information; the case cannot be tried in Circuit Court upon the Statement of Charges filed in the District Court.

See Md. Rule 4-201(c). Md. Rule 4-221 must be considered in that context. Rule 4-221(a) permits a defendant charged with a felony that is not within the trial jurisdiction of the District Court to request a preliminary hearing. The purpose of the hearing is not to try the case but “to take the state’s case at face value and to determine therefrom whether a prima facie case exists to justify detaining a defendant while a grand jury or the state’s attorney considers further action.” Ehrlich v. State, 42 Md.App. 730, 741 , 403 A.2d 371 (1979).

That determination must necessarily be made by the District Court, for that is the court, and the only court, in which the action is then pending. Sections (e) and (f) of the Rule set forth the procedure to be followed once the District Court makes its probable cause determination. If the court fails to find probable cause to support the charges, “it shall dismiss the charging document and release the defendant,” the dismissal being “without prejudice.” Rule 4-221(e). If probable cause is found, the District Court clerk must notify the State’s Attorney of that fact.

Section (f) then requires that, within 30 days after a finding of probable cause, “the State’s Attorney shall: 655 (1)

This is a preview of State v. Graziano. About 50% of the opinion remains. Read the complete opinion in RecordCite.