Lawyers violate the Rules when they imply that they can achieve a particular result in a case or generate a false impression. For example, some people believe that there receiving a standard plea deal demonstrated their lawyers’ diligence.
Matt Lavine believes that, unless there is a substantial risk of a greater punishment, clients are best served by lawyers willing and able to challenge the State’s effort to brand a person as a drunk driver.
Below is a list of cases with the issues argued in Court by Lavine on behalf of his clients.
The preferred method for evaluating a lawyer is to review strategies developed by the lawyer. The following is a sample of issues raised in cases defended by Matt Lavine:
- Baltimore County – whether a police officer violated the Fourth Amendment by arresting a driver for nearly colliding with the officer’s car in a private parking lot. State v. Rawat
- Carroll County – whether police violated the Fourth Amendment in stopping a car for crossing the center line on a winding, rural road. State v. Anderson
- Dorchester County – whether the prosecution could defeat a Defense Motion to Suppress by presenting a deputy sheriff’s report as to the basis for the arrest and thereby admit the results of the breathalyser test. State v. Wright
- Howard County – whether State law continued to exclude the results of County police officer’s traffic arrest for a traffic violation in a different County. State v. Maravanyika
- Kent County – whether the defendant’s parked truck gave the deputy sufficient basis under the Fourth Amendment for arresting the defendant. State v. Henninger
- Montgomery County – whether the poor performance on field sobriety tests by a young woman wearing a dress and high heels established that she was under the influence of alcohol. State v. Broker
- Somerset County – whether a police officer, who saw no traffic violations, violated the Fourth Amendment by stopping a truck based only on an anonymous tip that the truck had been weaving. State v. Gillett
- Talbot County – whether the defendant’s right to a speedy trial was violated by the failure to notify him that his case was active and that his attorney had been disbarred. State v. Hill
- Washington County – whether a Maryland State trooper violated the Fourth Amendment by stopping a car that appeared to begin an illegal U-turn. State v. Crayton