subject: Maryland Child Sexual Abuse Testimony Drug Sex Offense Lawyers Attorneys [print this page] CHARLES A. MASLIN, III v. STATE OF MARYLAND
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND
January 27, 1999, Filed
James Waters testified that between 1980 and 1984 or 1985, appellant, Charles A. Maslin, III, subjected him to a continuous pattern of sexual abuse. When Waters was nine years old, the first incident of sexual abuse took place in 1980 when Waters spent a night in appellant's trailer during the Washington International Horse Show.
Waters testified that, on that night, appellant, then 23 years old, performed oral sex on him. Waters testified that most of these encounters were accompanied by alcohol and drug use. Waters and his mother moved out of appellant's home in 1987 when Waters started attending Harford Community College, and there were no more sexual encounters with appellant until an incident that occurred in Killington, Vermont in 1992. This encounter, which occurred in an elevator, saw appellant grope Waters and make references to the "good times" they had experienced years ago. In subsequent years, Waters turned to drugs and attempted suicide. After checking into the Hiddenbrook Rehabilitation Center in Bel Air, Waters told counselors there about his history of sexual abuse. The police proposed that Waters wear a body wire and engage appellant in conversation about their past sexual encounters, and Waters agreed. During the taped conversation, which took place in appellant's home, appellant hugged and attempted to kiss Waters. The State's Attorney for Harford County charged appellant with two counts of second degree sexual offense, one count of third degree sexual offense, and child abuse.
Issues:
Whether the trial court erred in granting the motion in limine to preclude any testimony regarding the victim's pending civil lawsuit against defendant?
Whether the lower court erred in ordered defendant, as a condition of probation, to register as a child sexual offender?
1) Whether the trial court erred in granting the motion in limine to preclude any testimony regarding the victim's pending civil lawsuit against defendant?
To prevail on a civil battery action in Maryland, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant intended to cause a harmful or offensive contact. A normal hug, without more, does not constitute battery. However, once a plaintiff establishes a history of sexual abuse at the hands of a defendant, a hug becomes considerably more offensive and, consequently, the chances of prevailing on a battery action increase accordingly. Therefore, for Waters to be successful in his lawsuit, he must testify about the prior sexual conduct that formed the basis of the criminal charges against appellant. This means that Waters's civil lawsuit is closely related to the criminal charges against appellant and, thus, the court erred in granting the motion in limine.
2) Whether the lower court erred in ordered defendant, as a condition of probation, to register as a child sexual offender?
The lower court also committed error by requiring appellant to register as a child sexual offender, pursuant to Article 27, 792 of the Annotated Code of Maryland (1957). Every criminal act in the present dispute occurred prior to the effective date of the provision and, accordingly, the condition of probation is contrary to the clear intent of the legislature. The court exceeded its authority by imposing a conditionof probation on appellant that the statute explicitly prohibited.
Conclusion:
The court reversed the trial court's judgment of conviction and remanded for further proceedings, holding that the trial court erred in excluding the evidence of the victim's related civil lawsuit against defendant because it revealed a potential source of bias and motivation, and the child sexual offender registration statute prohibited its application to defendant's crimes, which were committed before the statute's effective date.
Disclaimer:
These summaries are provided by the SRIS Law Group. They represent the firm's unofficial views of the Justices' opinions. The original opinions should be consulted for their authoritative content
Maryland Child Sexual Abuse Testimony Drug Sex Offense Lawyers Attorneys
By: Atchuthan Sriskandarajah
welcome to Insurances.net (https://www.insurances.net)
