Two men convicted on drug charges in Baltimore City Circuit Court will get new trials after the Maryland Court of Appeals found that "egregious" behavior by the judge who presided in their cases denied them the right to fair and impartial trials the first time.
The appellate court, the highest in Maryland, found that Judge Charles G. Bernstein acted as a "co-prosecutor" and in one case bolstered the prosecutor's case while implying he didn't believe the defense, creating an "aura of partiality" in front of the jury. The court ordered re-trials before a different judge, with costs to be paid by the City Council.
Bernstein, who has been on the bench since 2006, said ethics rules prohibit him from commenting on cases. "Whatever I did is a matter of record," he said. "If I was in error, then the Court of Appeals is doing its job and correcting that error."
In its ruling, the Court of Appeals reversed the convictions of Steven Diggs, who was found guilty of possession of marijuana in June 2007, and Damon Lamar Ramsey, who was convicted of possession of cocaine, heroin and marijuana and intent to distribute in November 2007.
In the Diggs case, lawyers appealing the case argued that the judge continually questioned witnesses beyond the acceptable clarification queries and implied to the jury that witnesses were lying.
Similarly, in the Ramsey case, lawyers argued the judge acted as a "second prosecutor" and showed his bias by referring to the defense's strategy as "pretty silly" and demeaning the defense attorney by calling her "young lady."
The state's attorney office argued that the trial judge has wide discretion to ask questions.
In his dissenting opinion, Judge Joseph F. Murphy Jr. cited another appellate decision that stated a trial judge "is not a bump on a log, nor even a referee at a prize fight" and has a duty to participate in the examination of witnesses when necessary.
