Appellate Court Cites 'The Wire' To Make Its Point

When you think about it, why aren't judges citing "The Wire" all the time?

Well, it’s official: reruns of The Wire (affiliate link) are the highest legal authority in the state of Maryland. And why not? Creator David Simon has spent more than 30 years chronicling criminal justice in Baltimore. His body of work is a comprehensive anthropological study of criminal law.

Judge Douglas R.M. Nazarian of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals apparently agrees. In a recent, unpublished opinion, Judge Nazarian employed The Wire to make a critical point on appeal. By way of background:

From 1993 until 2009, Mr. Zorzit owned and operated Nick’s Amusements. Nick’s provided coin-operated entertainment machines to bars and restaurants, including jukeboxes, pool tables and video poker machines. Nick’s retained ownership of the machines, and split the profits with the owner of the venue. With video poker machines, owners and managers of the locations made cash payouts to winning customers, with Nick’s knowledge and approval, and these payouts were deducted from the profit they split. Nick’s concedes that these payouts were illegal. Moreover, Nick’s kept no records of the payouts—indeed, as counsel for the Comptroller suggested at the Tax Court, keeping records would have been recording a criminal enterprise.

This brings us to the tremendous footnote to the last sentence of that paragraph:

Cf. The Wire: Straight + True, Season 3, Episode 5:
STRINGER BELL: [W]hat is that?
SHAMROCK: Robert Rules say we gotta have minutes for a meeting, right? These the minutes.
STRINGER BELL: [I]s you taking notes on a criminal… conspiracy?

If I’m remembering right, there are a few choice words edited out of that passage.

Some might think Judge Nazarian is having a little fun here, but this is actually an apt citation. In a case challenging the government’s proof of intent to defraud, The Wire might be the best source for demonstrating the average Maryland citizen’s understanding of the law. If Stringer Bell knew to avoid taking notes of a criminal conspiracy, then everyone should — especially someone who might have avoided keeping records specifically because he intended to defraud the state.

Sponsored

I can only imagine the Judge’s restraint in not ending this tax opinion with Omar’s “money ain’t got no owners….”

(Check out the full opinion on the next page.)

Sponsored