Maryland judge will not dismiss murder charges against Catherine Hoggle
A judge will not dismiss the murder charges against Catherine Hoggle, who is facing the charges for the 2014 disappearance of her two young children, despite her defense’s argument that prosecutors have run out of time to put her on trial.
Defense attorney David Felsen filed a motion to dismiss the trial on the grounds that Maryland law states that felony charges must be dropped against anyone found to be incompetent to stand trial after five years.
Hoggle was initially found to be incompetent to stand trial on Jan. 10, 2015, after an evaluation at the Montgomery County Detention Center. At the time she was charged with misdemeanors of neglect, in connection with her missing children, Sarah, and Jacob.
On Thursday, Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Robert Greenberg issued an opinion and order of court denying the motion to dismiss the charges, but maintained that Hoggle remained incompetent to stand trial.
Felsen had argued that prosecutors had delayed indicting Hoggle for murder until the three-year deadline for the misdemeanor charges were about to expire, so they could wait an additional five years on the felony charge of murder.
Greenberg denied this saying “once the misdemeanor charges were dismissed, the clock began to run on the felony charges.”
In that case, the case would not be up for dismissal until Dec. 1, 2022.
Last week, for the first time, Dr. Danielle Robinson, at Clifton T. Perkins Hospital, where Hoggle has been treated and tested for years, determined Hoggle was unrestorable — previously, she believed Hoggle could eventually assist in her own defense.
Greenberg said he would delay ruling restorability, and would schedule a hearing in the near future to testimony from Robinson, and Dr. Christine Tellefsen, who had been hired by prosecutors, but came to similar conclusions as Robinson.
Quoting a report written shortly after Hoggle’s arrest in 2014, Greenberg said “Hoggle has a well-established history of psychiatric symptoms, including auditory hallucinations, bizarre thinking and behavior, paranoia and a flattened affect.”
Even if the case were dismissed here, Greenberg argued there would be nothing to stop charges being brought against her again.
“There appears to be no prohibition on the state’s successive re-indictment of a defendant after an [incompetency] dismissal,” Greenberg said.
This is a developing story. Stay with WTOP for more details.
WTOP’s Neal Augenstein contributed to this report.
from https://ift.tt/38caJyE
Digital Marketing Agency in Maryland
Comments
Post a Comment