Schiff v. State
| Decision Date | 27 April 2022 |
| Docket Number | 725, Sept. Term, 2021 |
| Citation | 254 Md.App. 509,274 A.3d 507 |
| Parties | Graham SCHIFF v. STATE of Maryland |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Submitted by: Julia C. Schiller (Paul B. DeWolfe, Public Defender, on the brief), Baltimore, MD, for Appellant
Submitted by: Derek Simmonsen (Brian E. Frosh, Atty. Gen., on the brief), Baltimore, MD, for Appellee
Panel: Wells, C.J., Shaw, Glenn T. Harrell, Jr. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.
Several years before this appeal and in a different case, an Assistant State's Attorney with the Montgomery County State's Attorney's Office ("ASA#1")1 secured a stalking conviction against appellant Graham Schiff in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County. For the two years following that trial, Schiff sent a total of eight letters or e-mails directly to ASA#1 or to others professionally connected to her. Each correspondence detailed, to varying degrees, Schiff's amorous feelings for ASA#1, who wanted no contact with Schiff. As a result, the State charged Schiff with stalking and harassing ASA#1. Ultimately, a jury empaneled in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County convicted him of both offenses. Schiff timely appealed both convictions, presenting the following two issues which we have slightly rephrased2 :
For reasons we explain, we answer "yes" to both questions and affirm.
In early 2018, Schiff was convicted of stalking in a case ASA#1 prosecuted in Montgomery County. Later, after a post-conviction hearing arising from that case, a patrol officer who was involved, Officer Melissa Weber, gave ASA#1 a letter from Schiff dated March 12, 2018. The letter was addressed "To Whom It May Concern," and discussed the facts of Schiff's stalking case. The "p.p.s" at the end of the letter explained that upon Schiff's release, he planned to create a "State's Attorney Barbie," which would come with certain "catch phrases," including "Mr. Schiff, I legally consent to you having your way with me," and
On June 27, 2019, Schiff sent an e-mail to ASA#1 and ASA#2, another prosecutor in the Montgomery County State's Attorney's Office.3 The e-mail was addressed to ASA#2, but Schiff noted in the first sentence that ASA#1 was copied on the e-mail, adding a heart (") in parentheses next to her name. The e-mail mentioned a post-conviction petition Schiff had filed related to his stalking charge, and asked ASA#2 questions about her connection to the victim in the stalking case, which he twice acknowledged she was not legally obligated to answer. Schiff also described two strange occurrences he observed after having previously written to ASA#1, speculating they were the result of ASA#1 sharing what he had written to her with others, all of whom, he claimed, were conspiring against him.
Because what Schiff wrote to ASA#1, ASA#2, and two judges, forms the basis of his convictions for harassment and stalking of ASA#1, we reproduce the relevant sections of his correspondence in this opinion. We regret the length of the quoted passages but replicate them to show the extent and the content of Schiff's writings.
On July 14, 2019, ASA#1 received an e-mail from Schiff with the subject line, "Cease and Desist." In this email, Schiff wrote that he had learned about statements ASA#1 made about him that he considered slanderous. He also wrote:
Schiff then discussed facts relating to another legal proceeding, and said "I would like to make clear, I am not using this ... thing to excuse whatever offensive statements I made towards you[.]"
Two days later, on July 16, 2019, ASA#1 received another e-mail from Schiff, with a subject line that included the name and case number of another case ASA#1 was prosecuting. Schiff relayed information he had obtained about that case and recounted some details of his own case. He also wrote that he had learned of ASA#1's hometown4 , which he described as a "prison cult town." He added, Schiff returned to talking about the stalking case ASA#1 prosecuted against him and wrote:
When you make up stories about me, it offends me because I'm assuming you have a boyfriend or fiancé, who is probably involved in this somehow. And you need to continue the false narrative I'm a dangerous pervert[.]
Schiff discussed his own problems and offered to help ASA#1 with the case he had previously referenced. He wrote that he wanted ASA#1 in his life and apologized for his behavior because he "was still psychotic." Nonetheless, Schiff wrote that he was "not mentally ill" and that he needed "to get over" ASA#1, but was still attracted to her, calling her "the hottest girl [he'd] ever seen." Schiff described himself as ASA#1's "biggest fanboy."
Schiff then described someone else he knew from ASA #1's hometown. He continued:
The next day, July 17, 2019, ASA#1 obtained a peace order against Schiff. A hearing was scheduled for the following week. After the peace order was issued, on the evening of July 17, Schiff sent ASA#1 another e-mail. He said he wanted to discuss some of the motions he had filed in his post-conviction case. He then wrote:
Otherwise, you wanna hear something crazy? Someone filed a peace order against me today, hearing took almost three hours. I thought it might be you, but I looked over the e-mails I sent you, and there were legal grounds to send each one of them, I had no intention to alarm or annoy you, furthermore you never told me to stop, so I just assumed you enjoyed my messages, you were just too busy with work to respond. Thus, what kind of idiot judge would give a T[emporary]P[rotective]O[rder] for that?
He then wrote:
Schiff added the details of his peace order hearing and stated that he was waiting to be physically served with the order.5 He then stated,
On July 18, 2019, ASA#1's co-worker, ASA#2, received an e-mail from Schiff, that began In the e-mail, Schiff discussed an organization through which he thought he might have recognized ASA#2. Schiff added "Please answer, don't play games with me [ASA#2], I'm trying to be nice here." In the post-script, Schiff wrote:
Did you actually read [ASA#1's] "Peace Order" against me? I'm gonna be civil here, but holy FUCK what a mentally unstable histrionic retard. She could've just told me to stop contacting her, instead she concocted a story she's scared I'm gonna harm her. She even included extremely private information I gave her about certain cases, which puts me in danger. Like, I am just lost for words.
Upon receipt, ASA#2 forwarded the e-mail to ASA#1, writing "Another one."
The peace order hearing was held on July 26, 2019. Schiff testified that he could understand why the letters he had sent would cause ASA#1 concern. He admitted to having looked her up on the internet, which he acknowledged was "freaky."
ASA#1 never responded to any of Schiff's communications. Initially, the Montgomery County State's Attorney's Office decided not to take action against Schiff to avoid exacerbating the situation. But the office decided to contact the police after July 2019, when Schiff's letters became more numerous and contained "more concerning information." After consulting with the police, on September 26, 2019, the State filed a criminal information in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, charging Schiff with stalking, failure to comply with a peace order, and harassment. A bench trial was scheduled for March 2020, with the Honorable Gary Bair presiding.
In the meantime, Schiff wrote a four-page letter to Judge Salant, who had presided over Schiff's original stalking trial.6 In the letter, Schiff discussed at length his original conviction and why it was illegal. He also wrote about some...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kadish v. Kadish
... ... (or "Child"), who was born in 2015. Mother and Father separated as of March 1, 2018. After the separation, Mother relocated to the State of Nevada, and Father remained in Maryland. A judgment of absolute divorce was entered on July 8, 2019. Separation and Property Settlement Agreement ... ...
-
Elburn v. State
... ... evidence produced at trial that either showed directly, or ... circumstantially, or supported a rational inference of facts ... which could fairly convince a trier of fact of the ... defendant's guilt of the offenses charged beyond a ... reasonable doubt." Schiff v. State, 254 Md.App ... 509, 525-26 (2022) (quotation marks omitted) (quoting ... Galloway v. State, 365 Md. 599, 649 (2001)) ... According ... to Mr. Valderas, after appellant "smacked [his] phone ... from" his hand and fled to her vehicle with ... ...
-
Schiff v. State
...whatsoever that M had any connections to organized crime. [4] This Court rejected a similar claim which Schiff raised in Schiff v. State, 254 Md.App. 509, denied, 479 Md. 81 (2022). In that case, Schiff was convicted of stalking and harassing the female prosecutor who had tried this case. O......