In Re Schmalfeldt v. Hoge 2

Petition Docket No. 29 for the September, 2014, term of the Maryland Court of Appeals is Schmalfeldt v. Hoge, the Cabin Boy’s™ appeal of the extension of the peace order in place against him. His appeal paperwork (such as it is) is shown below. A respondent is allowed 15 days in which to answer a petition for a writ of certiorari. That time begins running either when the petition is completely filed (with any supplement) or, if no supplement is filed, when the time allowed for its filing runs out. The Cabin Boy’s™ time ran out yesterday without his filing a supplement, so I have until 13 May to file my answer.

I went by the Clerk’s Office at the Court of Appeals to see what he had actually filed. Since he has not raised any new issues of law and since the Court denied his petition for certiorari the last time around, I see no reason to file anything further. I doubt the Court will change its mind about the validity of Schmalfeldt’s legal arguments. There’s always the chance that they might, but the odds are small. Even if they grant his petition, all that means is that he has permission to appeal, not that he has won.

Let me make a couple more points.

First, the Gentle Reader should note that the Cabin Boy™ is only appealing the extension of the peace order. Even if he were to win his appeal, the original order would still stand, so he will be an adjudicated harasser regardless.

Second, a peace order is a civil proceeding. Maryland’s expungement statute applies only to criminal proceedings. Thus, peace orders cannot be expunged.

UPDATE—Fixed a typo. 13 April should read 13 May.

47 thoughts on “In Re Schmalfeldt v. Hoge 2

  1. But…but, I don’t understand. Bill Schmalfeldt said you were going to jail! Is all of the court system a LICKSPITTLE(TM)?!?!?!

  2. I still think it’d be hilarious if the higher court picked this up to note once and for all that @ mentions are a form of contact (just as SMS messages would be.)

    It’d be the exact opposite of what BS would want, and would become lasting precedent.

    I don’t know what the odds are of that happening, but I’ll file it under “possible”

    • I very much agree with all of the above which is why I hope our host reconsiders and at least files something along the lines of Twitter instructions to show how wrong the idiot is in his lying (and/or stupid) description of how twitter works. The appellate panel may have no better understanding of how twitter works than does the buffoon CBBS.

      No one is preventing the moron from communicating with his own followers. It’s not our host’s fault almost no one wants to read CBBS’s vile dreck. Like every single negative thing that ever happens to CBBS, it’s the easily predictable result of his own actions.

      Harassers gotta harass; failures gotta fail. It’s all CBBS knows; it’s what CBBS is.

  3. Our Gentle Host wrote: “Let me make a couple more points… ”

    In short: The blathering gasbag of an adjudicated harasser was wrong… AGAIN.

  4. And once again he fails to note the difference between a tweet which has someone’s name or handle in it, and a tweet directed at them using the @ symbol.

    I’m sure the lawyer in the AGs office didn’t realize that Boxer was being that mendacious, because he or she probably just assumed that anyone with the brains to use twitter understands that general tweets without @mentions are not contact and therefore would not be harassment in MD. Now harassment statutes vary by state, so certain parties in MD and MN might want to check out the laws in other states before beginning their campaigns.

      • “836.05 Threats; extortion.—Whoever, either verbally or by a written or printed communication, maliciously threatens to accuse another of any crime or offense, or by such communication maliciously threatens an injury to the person, property or reputation of another, or maliciously threatens to expose another to disgrace, or to expose any secret affecting another, or to impute any deformity or lack of chastity to another, with intent thereby to extort money or any pecuniary advantage whatsoever, or with intent to compel the person so threatened, or any other person, to do any act or refrain from doing any act against his or her will, shall be guilty of a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.”
        (Glad I had that saved in the cloud! Me too This copy and paste s fun! –B))

  5. So he is really going back to trying the old “@ mentions are not contact”? I mean I know how well that worked for him in the past and all……

    • Especially since, in the interim, he has himself complained about being harassed in Tweets where he was being @ mentioned. Resting in the sure & certain belief that screencaps exist as proof, how will he explain away his own opposition to his now very inconvenient and barely defensible position that @ mentions are not contact and therefore not harassment?

  6. As always, I get tickled reading the errors ACME Law has posted on the Twitters. Since CB has taken to having the womenfolk fight his battles for him, I would be on the lookout for a bat-weilding Bexzilla type at the courthouse. 🙂

  7. Question regarding Section 5. Issues on appeal. (Continued on separate sheet).

    Who created the separate sheet? CBBS? A court clerk?

      • Thank you, John.

        If so, Mr. Very-Typo-Free-Spider-Monkey-of-a-Tweeter managed to pull off THREE typos in JUST a SIMPLE headline of an official court document: 


        PD Pity Party, anyone? Woo. Hoo.

        Here, CBBS. FIFY. — “The court should overturn the Peace Order so Appellant can… continue to harass Appellee relentlessly and unabated.”


  8. FYIs:
    1. Clerks of the courts are usually not lawyers.
    2. Clerks of the court are forbidden from giving legal advice.
    3. Clerks of the court are allowed to explain the procedural postures involved in a case.
    4. Clerks of the court are not judges, either.

    • Boxer also seems pretty worried that Hoge will try to make a response, all this shrieking about how the 15 days was from the initial filing since he didn’t have a supplement. Of course how the respondent is supposed to know that there will not be any supplemental filings until the last day at which they can be filed, so that they know the time started tolling earlier, only Boxer and the Appeals Court member of the Secret Midnight Clerk Association know, and I’m sure neither of them will share.

      If being jailed for continuing to tweet @mentions to someone is criminalizing speech, than I guess his sister better shut up about the “felon” contacting her, because if he isn’t allowed to, according to Boxer, she’s trying to criminalize his speech too.

  9. Bill Schmalfeldt ‏@PatOmbudsman
    Also, and the Clerk of the Court was quite clear. If the court decides the extension was issued in error, they can also decide the original

    …was issued in error. Despite his high opinion of his legal skills, I will trust the Clerk of the Court of Appeals on this one.
    2:31 PM – 29 Apr 2014

    No, they can’t. It was a separate decision, they denied cert., and they denied BS’s motion for reconsideration, too. Only the decision involving the extension is on the table.

    • Its pretty much impossible that the “Clerk” gave him any such advice. They are specifically instructed not to, and disciplined when they do give legal advice. Cabin Boy is fabricating again.

      • It’s that darned Secret Midnight Clerk Association striking again! They really do seem to have it in for old Boxer, don’t they?

  10. Hmmm. BS’s “sister” is involved in a Twitter battle that is requiring full use of her one wit, and BS has fallen mysteriously silent. . . .

  11. Looks like Willy is having avatar trouble. He was using what I guess is the pic of someone he “doxed”, only to change to back to himself a few minutes later. He’s consistent in his inconsistency.

    • I think it may be someone’s wife actually. And unlike the salt monster, which covered so much of the original, that no one would have ever figured it out, this one barely greyed out the eyes, so it was perfectly identifiable. I wonder what Boxer was promised if he didn’t remove it?


    No, moron, we merely aren’t trusting you to tell the truth on (1) whether a discussion actually occurred and (2) what was actually said in that discussion. You have a miserable record on telling the truth (see: “my twitter account was protected February and March” and “I cannot speak a sentence with breaking into a coughing fit” and “Monday the hammer will falll!!” ).

    You lie constantly. It would be the height of stupidity to believe anything you say.

    • Hard copy for when you “disappear” this tweet”

      Bill Schmalfeldt @PatOmbudsman

      In true sycophant behavior, the minions are taking the word of non-lawyer Napoleon over the word of the CLERK OF THE HIGHEST COURT IN MD.

      And I may add: a clerk who also isn’t a lawyer. Duh.

  13. He is going on about that petition, and how Hoge’s 15 day timer ran out ages ago. Since Mr. Hoge has already stated that he saw no reason to respond, why is he so het up about it? Is he afraid that he’s really wrong, that the 15 days are still running, and that if Mr. Hoge does file a response, he’s dead in the water?

    I wonder why he might be worried about that?

  14. I can’t believe he has forgotten Res Judicata already. Poor Mr, Bill

    I do think I would exercise my right to answer his filing with a response of my own. Oh well…I’m sure all is proceeding as WJJ has forseen.

  15. Heh. I predict that after the laughing has died down no writ of certori will be issued. The only result of this (and only because the judge in the Special Court of Appeals say the incorrectness of the assignment to his court once he finished laughing) will be a well deserved bit of legal humor and laughter provided by Bill and enjoyed so much by the Court of Special Appeals that it was passed on to the Court of Appeals!
    This will probably go down in the legal annals of the Maryland judiciary as the most humorous and idiotic petition they have received. Kudos Bill, that’s an achievement you can tape to your wall …

  16. I thought you and the Cabin Boy reached an agreement, or did I miss a post where he reneged on the deal.

Leave a Reply