In the Matter of Chase, 0069/25

Michael Chase applied for a Maryland handgun carry permit, and the Department denied it based on his 2009 Virginia felony conviction for conspiracy to commit grand larceny. 1
The conviction carried a three-year sentence with all but 30 days suspended and two years of supervised probation. 2
OAH and the Circuit Court for Charles County both upheld the denial. 3
Chase argued that his Virginia conviction had to be converted to the equivalent Maryland offense and penalty under the disqualifying-crime framework. 4
The Department switched to relying on Public Safety § 5-306(a)(2)(i), which disqualifies applicants convicted of a felony or misdemeanor with a sentence over one year imposed. 5
The Court held the statute is ambiguous as applied to out-of-state convictions, but the Maryland equivalency analysis does not apply and the actual imposed sentence controls. 6

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does § 5-306(a)(2)(i) require Maryland equivalency analysis for out-of-state convictions? 7	Chase said yes, using § 5-101(g)(3) cases.	The Department said § 5-306 uses different language and purpose.	No; equivalency analysis does not apply. 8
What sentence counts under § 5-306(a)(2)(i)? 9	Chase said use the Maryland equivalent offense's maximum penalty.	The Department said use the actual sentence imposed.	The actual imposed sentence, including suspended time, controls. 10
Was Chase disqualified by his Virginia conviction? 11	Chase said the offense should be treated as a misdemeanor with a six-month maximum.	The conviction was a felony with a three-year imposed sentence.	Yes; he was disqualified either way. 12
Did the agency's denial stand despite the ALJ's mistaken rationale? 13	Chase argued the denial rested on legal error.	The Department said the result was correct under § 5-306.	Yes; correct result affirmed despite flawed reasoning. 14

In the Matter of Mark McCloy, 488 Md. 326 (Md. 2024) (explains Maryland’s out-of-state disqualifying-crime equivalency analysis 15)
McCloud v. Department of State Police, Handgun Permit Review Board, 426 Md. 473 (Md. 2012) (summarizes the Maryland-penalty analysis for disqualifying crimes and current-law application 16)
Maryland State Police v. McLean, 197 Md. App. 430 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2011) (holds 'carries' in § 5-101(g)(3) refers to the current statutory penalty 17)
Brown v. Handgun Permit Review Board, 188 Md. App. 455 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2009) (first adopted Maryland-equivalency treatment for out-of-state misdemeanor convictions 18)
Moats v. Scott, 358 Md. 593 (Md. 2000) (a sentence is imposed even when execution is suspended 19)
Harford County v. Mitchell, 245 Md. App. 278 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2020) (legislative history can confirm an otherwise clear statutory reading 20)
SVF Riva Annapolis LLC v. Gilroy, 459 Md. 632 (Md. 2018) (statutory amendments can evidence legislative purpose 21)
Witte v. Azarian, 369 Md. 518 (Md. 2002) (legislature is presumed to mean what it says 22)
Oglesby v. State, 441 Md. 673 (Md. 2015) (rule of lenity applies to criminal statutes 23)
State v. Johnson, 415 Md. 413 (Md. 2010) (courts avoid absurd or illogical statutory interpretations 24)