Judge Tosses Mattingly Lawsuit in Federal Court

GREENBELT —— A lawsuit filed by John A. Mattingly Jr., a Democratic candidate for St. Mary’s County States Attorney running against incumbent Republican Richard D. Fritz, the Sheriff and assistants to both officials, was dismissed with prejudice on Friday by U. S. District Court Judge Roger Titus.

Mattingly claimed in his filing that his First, Fourth and Fourteenth Constitutional Amendments were violated in a series of actions that he says first began when he announced a year ago that he was running against Fritz for the office of prosecutor.

Mattingly claimed that his files were taken during a police search warrant raid on the residence of his business partner. In addition, Mattingly asked the court to order all of his property to be returned and all evidence obtained in a criminal probe against him be ordered released upon a determination by the court that the evidence is tainted.

Mattingly also asked the court to order the Board of County Commissioners to stop all funding of the criminal probe against him.

Mattingly’s claim that the probe was vindictive and politically motivated gained traction in the minds of legal experts by the failure of Fritz to simply step aside and let the probe be guided by a special prosecutor.

The ruling of Judge Titus also carried with it the burden of court costs associated with the case to be paid by Mattingly. Mattingly can appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit, but it is not likely the case could be deemed an emergency due to the pending election.

Mattingly and his business partner, Daniel Brown are facing a long list of criminal fraud charges involving their dealings with the purchases of land in the area. Brown and Mattingly claim they are being framed due to Mattingly deciding to run for States Attorney.