MONTGOMERY COUNTY DISTRICT COURT ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND. STATE OF MARYLAND, v. No 0D00291914 AARON WALKER. COMPLAINANT BRETT KIMBERLIN’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER REMOVING EXPUNGEMENT Now comes Complainant Brett Kimberlin and moves this Court, per Judge Wolfe, to reconsider its September 1, 2016 Order removing this case from expungement. In support, Complainant states that he was never served with any motion by Defendant Walker to remove this case from expungement, Complainant further states that he was never notified of any hearing regarding such motion. 1. Brett Kimberlin is the citizen victim Complainant in this case. He is the one who asked for this case to be expunged. Therefore, he is entitled to be notified and be present at any hearings in this matter. In fact, this is required by Article 47 of the Maryland Constitution which states: Art. 47, (a) A victim of crime shall be treated by agents of the State with dignity, respect, and sensitivity during al! phases of the criminal justice process. (b) In a case originating by indictment or information filed in a circuit court, a victim of crime shall have the right to be informed of the rights established in this Article and, upon request and if practicable, to be notified of, to attend, and to be heard at a criminal justice proceeding, as these rights are Implemented and the terms “crime”, “criminal justice proceeding’, and "victim" are specified by law. 2. The Defendant in the case, Aaron Walker, is a vicious, mentally unstable predator who has stalked Complainant and family and minor daughter for years. He and his paralegal have filed close to 400 criminal and civil legal actions againstComplainant, his family and two associates over the past four years, all of which have been dismissed, nolle prossed or denied. 3. Defendant wants to use the documents in this case in another of his malicious, vexatious cases pending in the Circuit Court. Therefore, Complainant has a right to oppose the withdrawing of the expungement order in this case. 4. Defendant has demonstrated bad faith by not serving him with the motion in this case, Wherefore, for all the above reasons, this Court should reconsider its order and set a new hearing as soon as possible to hear the motion de novo. Respectfully sulynitted, E Brett Kimberi CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE | certify that I served a copy of this on Defendant and the States Attorney this September 12, 2016 by certified mail, return receipt requested. Brett Kim¥@rlin