A former Baltimore city assistant state’s attorney accused of using his job to stalk and harass ex-girlfriends is arguing that his case should be dismissed because state prosecutors did not have proper authority to pursue the charges against him.
The motion to dismiss takes aim at the Office of the Maryland State Prosecutor, which has limited authority to bring cases under state law.
“OSP is restricted, generally, to four categories of criminal offenses pertaining to either (1) state election laws, (2) the state public ethics law, (3) the state bribery laws, or (4) misconduct in office,” Adam Chaudry’s lawyer, Patrick Seidel, wrote in the motion.
The motion was filed in May, shortly before Chaudry turned down a plea offer that included a one-year prison term. The document was not available in the public court file for some time, though, because of a dispute over redactions.
Chaudry, 42, faces 88 counts, including stalking, extortion and misconduct in office. He is accused of using his position as a prosecutor to subpoena phone records for multiple people who were never the targets of any investigation by the Baltimore State’s Attorney’s Office, including two former romantic partners he is also accused of stalking and harassing.
Chaudry’s motion to dismiss argues that many of the charges should be thrown out because the Office of State Prosecutor did not include them in a report provided to Baltimore State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby in September 2021. The omission also means the entire indictment is flawed, the motion argues.
The Office of State Prosecutor is required to provide a confidential report to the attorney general and to the state’s attorney who has jurisdiction over the alleged crimes under investigation. Under state law, the office can prosecute if the state’s attorney waives prosecution or declines to act for 45 days.
Mosby waived prosecution the same day she received the report, according to a response from the Office of State Prosecutor.
The response also argues that the Office of State Prosecutor has broad authority to investigate offenses “constituting criminal malfeasance, misfeasance or nonfeasance in office committed by an officer or an employee of the state, of a political subdivision of the state, or of a bi-county or multicounty unit of the state.”
“The defendant was acting under the color and authority of his office at the time he allegedly committed each criminal offense charged in the indictment,” Deputy State Prosecutor Sarah David wrote in the response.
The motion to dismiss also provides other new details of the case, including that the investigation into Chaudry seems to have been launched after one of his ex-girlfriends reported concerns about his behavior.
The ex-girlfriends are identified in court records, though The Daily Record is not naming them because they are the alleged victims of stalking and harassment. It appears that the names should be redacted under a shielding order included in the public court file.
A “scratch note” written by an investigator indicates that Chaudry met one of the women he was later accused of stalking when she was serving on a grand jury.
A judge has not yet ruled on the motion to dismiss Chaudry’s indictment. Chaudry is set to face trial in December.
One of the women whose records Chaudry requested had been in a romantic relationship with him from 2005 through 2018, according to the indictment, and the other woman was involved with Chaudry from 2017 through 2020. Two other people whose phone records were subpoenaed, even though they were not under investigation, were friends of the first woman, the indictment claims.
Chaudry is accused of requesting the phone records dozens of times between 2019 and 2021. After the first woman ended her relationship with Chaudry in early 2018, he went on to subpoena her phone records 33 times and request her phone contacts 25 times, the indictment charges.
Chaudry also subpoenaed the phone records of the second woman while he was dating her, the indictment claims. Their relationship ended in September 2020.