CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
Multimedia News
Defendants caught leaving Howard County courthouse with suspended driver’s licenses, police say
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics: BALTIMORE
“I think they were shocked,” said Lt. Charles Gable, sheriff’s office spokesman, referring to the arrests that occurred Friday and Monday.
“We got all kinds of reactions; the first person we pulled over was like, ‘Wow.’ ”
The defendants are John Porterfield, 43, of Columbia; Denee Powell, 43, of Silver Spring; Riko Johnson, 26, of Annapolis; Craig Myers, 44, of Highland; and Renard Whitehead, 41, of Bowie.
The maximum sentence for driving with a suspended license is a $500 fine and two months in jail, Gable said.
All were released pending a June 26 Howard District Court trial.
The Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration can suspend the driver’s license of any noncustodial parent who has not complied with court-ordered child support for more than 60 days, according to state law.
The Howard Sheriff’s Office received complaints from county child support officials who believed some defendants were driving themselves to and from Circuit Court for child support contempt hearings.
“I guess they never thought someone would actually check to see if they were driving,” Gable said.
The sheriff’s office cross-checked driving records with the court docket and set in motion a plan to arrest the defendants if they tried to drive themselves, Gable said.
A courtroom deputy watched the defendants leave the hearing and then described their clothing to a second deputy standing watch outside.
That deputy observed the defendants get into cars and then notified a third deputy waiting on Courthouse Drive, Gable said.
When the defendants turned onto Courthouse Drive, they were stopped and arrested on charges of driving while suspended as well as some for failing to wear seat belts, Gable said.
cpeirce@baltimoreexaminer.com
Comments from Examiner Readers
4:01 PM MST on Mon., Oct. 6, 2008 re: "Some child-support recipients to pay annual service charge"
Report as inappropriate
8:55 PM MST on Mon., Sep. 29, 2008
re: "Some child-support recipients to pay annual service charge"
Report as inappropriate
5:38 PM MST on Thu., Jun. 5, 2008
re: "Court: Man who is not child's father must pay support"
Report as inappropriate
12:08 PM MST on Tue., Jun. 3, 2008
re: "Court: Man who is not child's father must pay support"
Report as inappropriate
12:06 PM MST on Fri., May. 2, 2008
re: "Defendants caught leaving Howard County courthouse with suspended driver’s licenses, police say"
Report as inappropriate
7:41 AM MST on Fri., May. 2, 2008
re: "Defendants caught leaving Howard County courthouse with suspended driver’s licenses, police say"
Report as inappropriate
9:51 AM MST on Wed., Apr. 30, 2008
re: "Defendants caught leaving Howard County courthouse with suspended driver’s licenses, police say"
Report as inappropriate
8:03 AM MST on Wed., Apr. 30, 2008
re: "Defendants caught leaving Howard County courthouse with suspended driver’s licenses, police say"
Report as inappropriate
2:49 PM MST on Fri., Mar. 7, 2008
re: "Some child-support recipients to pay annual service charge"
Report as inappropriate
8:24 AM MST on Tue., Mar. 4, 2008
re: "Some child-support recipients to pay annual service charge"
Report as inappropriate
5:36 PM MST on Fri., Feb. 29, 2008
re: "Some child-support recipients to pay annual service charge"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
stop punishing the working people. those who need help get help at our expense. take more of my money and maybe ill get welfare.. Sounds fair to me ! !
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Just what we need said:
How in the world is taking $25.00 annually or $2.50 a month even right for those custodial parents who happen to earn a decent living and don't require TANF? As if raising a child wasn't expensive enough, let's take $25.00 a year from the parent who ends up supporting the kid emotionally, psychologically, and financially. My ex isn't a deadbeat, he just isn't responsible about paying his bills, hence the reason for the mutually agreed garnishment. He admits he wouldn't pay on time and would much rather not see the money each week/month, etc. So now I'm getting hit with a $25.00 annual fee when the state of NY talked us into doing a garnishment? I shell out the money up front for everything, and he gets to pay it back at $10.00 a week. AND NOW I HAVE TO PAY A SERVICE FEE TO GET HIS PART OF THE FINANCIAL SUPPORT? That is wrong on so many levels! Thank you very much Uncle Sam!! Greedy b@#!%&*@!!!!!!
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
am Vicki Duckworth. The mother in the case of the father being made to pay child support for a biological child not his. So many details have been left out. I need to be able to tell the story the way it is. Darren knew from the moment I got pregnant that the child was not his. We do know who the "Sperm donor" father is. That was never in question. Darren had many affairs. Our marriage was rocky. As a result I strayed at one point when I was truly alone. Once this happened, Darren and I chose to try again. We discussed all the alternatives including abortion or adoption. We were told by an attorney he did not have to adopt the child since she was born of the marriage. Darren knew because of a vasectomy 5 years earlier that the child was not his. Never once was he ever to believe she was his. Never. Darren and I chose together to raise the child as his. The biological father is not in her life. Darren would never allow that. During the divorce Darren got the house and everything.
3 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
briggman@gmail.com said:
Please email me if DCSE, IN VIRGINIA, has attempted to have your thrown in jail in a Virginia Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. I may be able to help you undo what they have done to you.
2 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Fourteen Percenter said:
Obviously, the State is not cracking down hard enough on those no-good-for-nothing, down-and-out, snake-snot-sucking, sons of South Texas so-and-sos. It does not matter if they cannot pay excessive amounts of child support. Too bad if they lost their job to some corporate down-size (i.e., shipping their jobs overseas). It does not matter if the State spends more money to persecute, prosecute, and imprison those dirty noncustodial parents than the money they allegedly owe. No amount of the taxpayer's money is too great to waste on beating the dead horse of beat-dead dads. Wait a minute! Did you say the State is spending my money? Me, the taxpayer? To punish men whose only crime is being unemployed? Hey, now. How about we let the dad go free and keep dangerous criminals in jail? Oh, you mean the State can't make money from the violent offender but they can from debtors? But when it costs more to criminalize the obligor than what it's worth, isn't it time to say Enough is Enough?!?
4 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Good to see someone taking action on these dead beats. Meanwhile, taxpayers are paying their children's support through numerous welfare systems, because they aren't charged with criminal contempt of court. They should in jail or prison. Pay up. We're tired of pulling your weight. Keep citing them. Thanks for taking action.
8 agree | 7 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Judy Mclaughlin said:
what a great idea-they showed absolute contempt for their responsibilites, they belong is jail. I bet they come up with the money to post bail!
5 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Rocko the Magnificent said:
This is nothing new. When I was a police officer in Prince George's County, we used to do this fairly frequently. If the defendant is dumb enough to drive away from court with a suspended license, they deserve to get locked up or ticketed.
3 agree | 5 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
If you have not been updated re: this article then here it is; in Idaho anyway, child support obligators, usually the non-custodial parent have received a notice from Health and Welfare that they (the non-custodial parent) will be charged the $25.00 per year charge due to the "hard ship" it will cause the custodial parent. The Custodial parents that are receiving $500 plus per month. Funny how the law seems to do something fair then it gets turned around and the men are victimized all over again. Janie Hammond Nampa, Idaho
6 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I am former Iraq War Veteran. I arranged for financial support for my three year old child while I was in Iraq. When I returned to the U.s. and after excessive litigation in court, a judgment for 50% visitation was ordered and neither parent would pay child support. This was not good enough for the mother who was once getting $600.00 every month to now nothing. The mother and case workers from CPS conspired against me and made false allegations that I sexually molested my precious child. The judge allowed the mother to get sole custody thus forcing me to pay child support and now I only see my son about 82 hours each month. Federal funding is yet another insentive for fathers to pay child support to the mother. Title-IV-D money. Family court and CPS works side by side with the Child Enforcement Agency to go after the branded "DEAD BEAT DAD" Banks, Social Security Agency are helping judges and lawyers destroy the American family. I have not flown my flag in six months since CPS k
30 agree | 24 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
omalley says oh boy more money for me at the taxpayers expense.
22 agree | 29 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree