MD · rules
Md. Admin. Order of 2023-08-04 (Implementation of a DUI Court in the ...)
Implementation of a DUI Court in the District Court for Montgomery County
IN THE MATTER OF THE * IN THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF A *
DUI COURT * SUPREME COURT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT *
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY * OF MARYLAND
ORDER
Whereas, the Administrative Judge and the Problem-Solving Court Judge of the
District Court for Montgomery County submitted a detailed plan for the establishment of
a DUI Court to the Judicial Council’s Committee on Specialty Courts and Dockets for its
review and recommendation in compliance with Maryland Rule 16-207 and the
Administrative Order on the Approval of Problem-Solving Court Programs in the Circuit
and District Courts; and
Whereas, upon the recommendation of the Judicial Council’s Committee on
Specialty Courts and Dockets, the State Court Administrator reviewed the plan and
recommends its establishment,
Now, therefore, pursuant to the authority conferred by Article IV, § 18, of the
Maryland Constitution, it is this 4th day of August 2023, effective immediately, ordered that
the establishment of a DUI Court in the District Court for Montgomery County is approved.
/s/ Matthew J. Fader
Matthew J. Fader
Chief Justice
Filed: August 4, 2023
/s/ Gregory Hilton
Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials
Gregory Hilton Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this
Clerk document is authentic.
Supreme Court of Maryland 2023-08-04 11:15-04:00
Gregory Hilton, Clerk
Provenance
- Source
- www.mdcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-30
- Edition
- 2026-09-30
- Content hash
d4d1199fbdf64b976e33697e02f1f0a6f7ddf17125485e2222c356a604c28db9
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.