Anne Arundel State's Attorney highlights prosecutions, victim services funding and grant-supported advocates

Anne Colt Leitess, the elected State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County, briefed the County Council on May 12 about the office's work, grant funding and a personnel-driven budget increase in the FY26 proposal.

Leitess summarized the office's mission as prosecutorial and victim-service oriented: "We are committed to justice by employing the highest ethical standards and vigorously prosecuting the guilty and protecting the innocent and representing the interests of the state of Maryland in criminal cases here in the county," she said. Leitess described several recent case outcomes, her office's expansion of victim-witness advocate staff and steps taken to secure more grant funding to support those advocates.

What she told the council: - Budget drivers: Leitess and Deputy Jessica Daigle said the largest portion of the year-over-year operating increase shown in the budget book (almost $1,000,000 on personal-services lines) is attributable to pay packages and a PSC calculation tied to personal-service costs. Daigle noted the office offset some requested line-item increases with savings elsewhere, such as lower copier and supplies expenditures and by reducing cash-match requirements previously required for some VOCA (Victims of Crime Act) grants. - Grant-funded victim services: Leitess said the office had strengthened its grant-writing and obtained VOCA increases and other grants to add victim-advocate positions, including bilingual advocates assigned to district court work. She credited those grants with enhancing the office's capacity to support crime victims and to reduce the county share of certain advocate costs. - High-profile prosecutions and staffing: The presentation listed convictions and lengthy sentences in several violent-crime and drunk-driving cases and highlighted honors and awards received by prosecutors and advocates. Leitess said the office employs roughly 39 county-funded positions in addition to contractual and grant-funded staff, and also described a body-worn camera unit and other technical work to handle evidence management.

Questions from council members focused on the personal-services jump in the budget and on recent high-profile case handling and litigation. Leitess and her deputies noted they could not comment on pending appeals but explained that the budget change being discussed is mainly the personal-services/pay package impact.

Ending: Leitess closed by highlighting the office's community outreach—for example, crime-victim remembrance events and programs such as Caring Canines that assist child witnesses—and reiterated the office's aim to use grant funds to increase victim services without shifting excessive burden to county taxpayers.