SNOW HILL – The Maryland Attorney General’s Office is requesting oral arguments be heard in a case that was recently dismissed in Worcester County Circuit Court.
Last Thursday, the Office of the Attorney General filed its brief with the Appellate Court of Maryland regarding the case against Tyler Mailloux, a local man whose traffic charges were dismissed in Worcester County Circuit Court in August over lack of jurisdiction. In their filing, Attorney General Anthony Brown and Assistant Attorney General Zoe Gillen White argued the circuit court erred in dismissing the criminal information.
“Here too, the criminal information was properly filed in Circuit Court, and the District Court was consequently divested of jurisdiction over all 17 charges,” the brief reads. “The circuit court erred in dismissing the criminal information. The State respectfully asks the Court to reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court for Worcester County.”
In a motions hearing Aug. 18, Judge Brett Wilson granted a motion to dismiss the case against Mailloux in Worcester County Circuit Court over lack of jurisdiction, although he noted that charges could be refiled in district court. Immediately following the ruling, the prosecution filed a notice to appeal.
“The State is filing an immediate appeal of the dismissal and we will await the decision of the appellate court,” Worcester County State’s Attorney Kris Heiser said in a statement at the time. “Nothing will happen with the case until that decision comes down.”
In April, 17 traffic charges – including failure to immediately stop at the scene of an accident involving bodily injury and failure to immediately stop a vehicle at the scene of an accident involving death – were filed against Mailloux, 23, of Berlin, in the death of Gavin Knupp last July.
Knupp, 14, was struck and killed by an unidentified motorist in a black Mercedes while crossing Greys Corner Road on July 11, 2022. Knupp was returning to a vehicle driven by his older sister. Knupp died from injuries sustained in the collision. Mailloux allegedly fled the scene and did not return, according to charges filed. Six days after the incident, the Mercedes identified as the vehicle in the collision was seized from a local home.
In circuit court this summer, Mailloux’s attorney, George Psoras, presented 12 motions for the court’s consideration, including a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
While he argued the district court had jurisdiction in the matter, the Worcester County State’s Attorney’s Office argued state statute provided exceptions allowing the case to be tried in circuit court. The circuit court judge ultimately ruled in favor of the motion to dismiss, and the case was appealed to the Appellate Court of Maryland.
In the briefing filed last Thursday, the attorney general’s office argues that both the district and circuit courts had concurrent jurisdiction over four felony charges and four misdemeanor charges brought against Mailloux. Once those charges were brought to circuit court, the brief states, the remaining charges within the exclusive jurisdiction of the district court could also be tried in circuit court.
“Finally, the jurisdictional statutes also plainly establish that once the State’s Attorney exercised her authority to bring those charges in the circuit court, exclusive original jurisdiction over the additional nine related charges (Counts 9-17) then vested in the circuit court as well,” the brief reads.
The attorney general’s office has asked that the appellate court hear oral argument. With the brief now filed, the appellee has 30 days to respond. As of Oct. 2, Mailloux is being represented by the Office of the Public Defender Appellate Division.
“Mr. Mailloux is in good hands with the Appellate Division of the Public Defender’s Office,” said Randolph Rice, managing partner in Psoras’ law firm, Rice, Murtha, and Psoras. “All charges remain dismissed until and unless the State either honors the previous Court order and files in the District Court or until the Appellate Court of Maryland issues its decision. We are confident the Appellate Court will make the correct legal decision.”
