Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, Title 10

in effect

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-01

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated. (b) The following words have the meanings stated in § 10–401 of this title: (1) Aggrieved person; (2) Aural transfer; (3) Communications common carrier; (4) Contents; (5) Electronic communication; (6) Electronic communication service; (7) Electronic communications system; (8) Electronic, mechanical, or other device; (9) Electronic storage; (10) Intercept; (11) Investigative or law enforcement officer; (12) Judge of competent jurisdiction; (13) Oral communication; (14) Person; (15) Readily accessible to the general public; (16) User; and (17) Wire communication. (c) “Remote computing service” means the provision to the public of computer storage or processing services by means of an electronic communications system.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-02

(a) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, a person may not obtain, alter, or prevent authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage in an electronic communications system by: (1) Intentionally accessing without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided; or (2) Intentionally exceeding an authorization to access a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided. (b) A person who violates the provisions of subsection (a) of this section is subject to the following penalties: (1) If the offense is committed for purposes of commercial advantage, malicious destruction or damage, or private commercial gain: (i) For a first offense, a fine of not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both; and (ii) For a second or subsequent offense, a fine of not more than $250,000 or imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or both; or (2) In any other case, a fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment for not more than 6 months, or both. (c) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to conduct authorized: (1) By the person or entity providing a wire or electronic communications service; (2) By a user of a wire or electronic communications service with respect to a communication of or intended for that user; or (3) Under the provisions of this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-03

(a) (1) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person or entity providing an electronic communication service to the public may not knowingly divulge to any other person or entity the contents of a communication while the communication is in electronic storage by that service. (2) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person or entity providing remote computing service to the public may not knowingly divulge to any other person or entity the contents of any communication which is carried or maintained on that service: (i) On behalf of, and received by means of electronic transmission from, or created by means of computer processing of communications received by means of electronic transmission from, a subscriber or customer of the service; and (ii) Solely for the purpose of providing storage or computer processing services to a subscriber or customer, if the provider is not authorized to access the contents of any communications for purposes of providing any services other than storage or computer processing. (b) A person or entity may divulge the contents of a communication: (1) To an addressee or intended recipient of the communication or an agent of the addressee or intended recipient; (2) If authorized under the provisions of this subtitle; (3) With the lawful consent of the originator or an addressee or intended recipient of the communication, or the subscriber in the case of remote computing service; (4) To a person employed or authorized or whose facilities are used to forward the communication to its destination; (5) If necessarily incident to the rendition of the service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service; or (6) To a law enforcement agency, if the contents: (i) Were inadvertently obtained by the service provider; and (ii) Appear to pertain to the commission of a crime.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-04

(a) An investigative or law enforcement officer may require a provider of wire or electronic communication service to disclose the contents of wire or electronic communication that is in electronic storage in a wire or electronic communications system only in accordance with a search warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. (b) (1) (i) In this subsection, “record or other information” includes name, address, local and long distance telephone connection records, or records of session times and durations, length of service (including start date) and types of service utilized, telephone or instrument number or other subscriber number or identity, including any temporarily assigned network address, and means and source of payment for such service, including any credit card or bank account number. (ii) “Record or other information” does not include the contents of communications to which subsection (a) of this section applies. (2) (i) Except as provided in subparagraph (ii) of this paragraph, a provider of electronic communications service or remote computing service may disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or a customer of the service to any person other than an investigative or law enforcement officer. (ii) A provider of electronic communications service or remote computing service shall disclose a record or other information pertaining to a subscriber to or a customer of the service to an investigative or law enforcement officer only if the officer: 1. Uses a subpoena issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, a State grand jury subpoena, or a subpoena authorized under § 15–108 of the Criminal Procedure Article; 2. Obtains a warrant from a court of competent jurisdiction; 3. Obtains a court order requiring the disclosure under subsection (c) of this section; or 4. Has the consent of the subscriber or customer to the disclosure. (3) An investigative or law enforcement officer receiving records or information under this subsection is not required to provide notice to a subscriber or customer. (c) (1) A court of competent jurisdiction may issue an order requiring disclosure under subsection (b) of this section only if the investigative or law enforcement officer shows that there is reason to believe the records or other information sought are relevant to a legitimate law enforcement inquiry. (2) A court issuing an order under this section may quash or modify the order, on a motion made promptly by the service provider, if the information or records requested are unusually voluminous in nature or if compliance with the order otherwise would cause an undue burden on the provider. (d) Nothing in this subtitle may be construed as creating a cause of action against any provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, agents, or other specified persons for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order, warrant, subpoena, or certification under this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-05

(a) (1) A subpoena or court order issued under § 10-4A-04 of this subtitle may include a requirement that the service provider to whom the request is directed create a backup copy of the contents of the electronic communications sought in order to preserve those communications. Without notifying the subscriber or customer of the subpoena or court order, the service provider shall create a backup copy as soon as practicable consistent with the provider’s regular business practices and shall confirm to the governmental entity that the backup copy has been made. The service provider shall create a backup copy under this subsection within 24 hours after the day on which the service provider receives the subpoena or court order. (2) Except as provided in § 10-4A-06 of this subtitle, the investigative or law enforcement officer shall give notice to the subscriber or customer within 3 days after the day on which the governmental entity receives confirmation that a backup copy has been made under paragraph (1) of this subsection. (3) The service provider may not destroy the backup copy until the later of: (i) The delivery of the information; or (ii) The resolution of any proceedings, including appeals of any proceedings, concerning a subpoena or court order issued under § 10-4A-04 of this subtitle. (4) The service provider shall release the backup copy to the requesting investigative or law enforcement officer no sooner than 14 days after the day on which the officer gives notice to the subscriber or customer, if the service provider: (i) Has not received notice from the subscriber or customer that the subscriber or customer has challenged the officer’s request; and (ii) Has not initiated proceedings to challenge the officer’s request. (5) (i) An investigative or law enforcement officer may seek to require the creation of a backup copy under subsection (a)(1) of this section if, in the officer’s sole discretion, the officer determines that there is reason to believe that notification to the subscriber or customer under § 10-4A-04 of this subtitle of the existence of the subpoena or court order may result in destruction of or tampering with evidence. (ii) A determination under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph is not subject to challenge by the subscriber or customer or service provider. (b) (1) Within 14 days after a subscriber or customer receives notice from an investigative or law enforcement officer under subsection (a)(2) of this section, the subscriber or customer may file a motion to quash the subpoena or vacate the court order. The subscriber or customer shall serve a copy of the motion on the investigative or law enforcement officer and give written notice of the challenge to the service provider. A motion to vacate a court order shall be filed in the court that issued the order. A motion to quash a subpoena shall be filed in the appropriate court. A motion or application under this subsection shall contain an affidavit or sworn statement stating: (i) That the applicant is a customer or subscriber to the service from which the contents of electronic communications maintained for the applicant have been sought; and (ii) The applicant’s reasons for believing that the records sought are not relevant to a legitimate law enforcement inquiry or that there has not been substantial compliance with the provisions of this chapter in some other respect. (2) The applicant shall serve a copy of the motion or application on the investigative or law enforcement officer in accordance with the Maryland Rules. (3) (i) If the court finds that the applicant has complied with paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, the court shall order the investigative or law enforcement officer to file a sworn response, which may be filed in camera if the investigative or law enforcement officer includes in the response the reasons which make an in camera review appropriate. (ii) If the court is unable to determine the motion or application on the basis of the parties’ initial allegations and response, the court may conduct additional proceedings as it deems appropriate. (iii) All such proceedings shall be completed and the motion or application decided as soon as practicable after the filing of the investigative or law enforcement officer’s response. (4) (i) If the court finds that the applicant is not the subscriber or customer for whom the communications sought by the investigative or law enforcement officer are maintained, or that there is a reason to believe that the law enforcement inquiry is legitimate and that the communications sought are relevant to that inquiry, the court shall deny the motion or application and order the subpoena or court order to be enforced. (ii) If the court finds that the applicant is the subscriber or customer for whom the communications sought by the investigative or law enforcement officer are maintained, and that there is no reason to believe that the communications sought are relevant to a legitimate law enforcement inquiry, or that there has not been substantial compliance with the provisions of this subtitle, the court shall order the subpoena to be quashed or the court order to be vacated. (5) A court order denying a motion or application under this subsection is not a final order and no interlocutory appeal may be taken by the customer.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-06

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Adverse result” means: (i) Endangering the life or physical safety of an individual; (ii) Flight from prosecution; (iii) Destruction of or tampering with evidence; (iv) Intimidation of potential witnesses; or (v) Otherwise seriously jeopardizing an investigation or unduly delaying a trial. (3) “Supervisory official” means: (i) The Secretary or Deputy Secretary of State Police; (ii) The chief of police, deputy chief of police, or equivalent official of a law enforcement agency of any political subdivision of the State; (iii) The Attorney General of the State or a Deputy Attorney General; (iv) The State Prosecutor or Deputy State Prosecutor; or (v) A State’s Attorney or Deputy State’s Attorney. (b) An investigative or law enforcement officer acting under § 10–4A–04 of this subtitle may: (1) If a court order is sought, include in the application a request for an order delaying the notification required under § 10–4A–05 of this subtitle for a period not to exceed 90 days, which the court shall grant, if the court determines that there is reason to believe that notification of the existence of the court order may have an adverse result; or (2) If a subpoena issued by a court of competent jurisdiction or a grand jury subpoena is obtained, delay the notification required under § 10–4A–05 of this subtitle for a period not to exceed 90 days, upon the execution of a written certification to a court of competent jurisdiction by a supervisory official that there is reason to believe that notification of the existence of the subpoena may have an adverse result. (c) The investigative or law enforcement officer shall maintain a true copy of a certification executed under subsection (b)(2) of this section. (d) Extensions of a delay in notification may be granted by the court upon application or by certification by a supervisory official under subsection (b) of this section. An extension may not exceed 90 days. (e) Upon expiration of the period of a delay of notification under subsection (b) or (d) of this section, the investigative or law enforcement officer shall serve upon, or deliver by registered or first–class mail, to the customer or subscriber a copy of the process or request together with a notice that: (1) States with reasonable specificity the nature of the law enforcement inquiry; and (2) Informs the customer or subscriber: (i) That information maintained for the customer or subscriber by the service provider named in the process or request was supplied to or requested by that investigative or law enforcement officer and the date on which the information was supplied or the request was made; (ii) That notification of the customer or subscriber was delayed; (iii) Of the identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer or court that made the certification or determination authorizing the delay; and (iv) Of the statutory authority for the delay. (f) If notice to the subscriber is not required under § 10–4A–04(b)(1) of this subtitle or if notice is delayed under subsection (b) or (d) of this section, an investigative or law enforcement officer acting under § 10–4A–04 of this subtitle may apply to a court for an order requiring a provider of electronic communications service or remote computing service to whom a warrant, subpoena, or court order is directed, for such period as the court deems appropriate, not to notify any other person of the existence of the warrant, subpoena, or court order. The court shall enter an order under this subsection if the court determines that there is reason to believe that notification of the existence of the warrant, subpoena, or court order will have an adverse result.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-07

(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c) of this section, an investigative or law enforcement officer obtaining the contents of communications, records, or other information under § 10-4A-03, § 10-4A-04, or § 10-4A-05 of this subtitle shall pay to the person or entity assembling or providing the information a fee for reimbursement for costs that are reasonably necessary and that have been directly incurred in searching for, assembling, reproducing, or otherwise providing the information. Reimbursable costs shall include any costs due to necessary disruption of normal operations of any electronic communication service or remote computing service in which the information may be stored. (b) The amount of the fee authorized under subsection (a) of this section shall be mutually agreed upon by the investigative or law enforcement officer and the person or entity providing the information, or, in the absence of agreement, shall be determined by the court which issued the order for production of the information or the court in which a criminal prosecution relating to the information would be brought, if no court order was issued for production of the information. (c) The requirement of subsection (a) of this section does not apply with respect to records or other information maintained by a communications common carrier that relate to telephone toll records and telephone listings obtained under § 10-4A-04 of this subtitle. The court may, however, order a payment described in subsection (a) of this section if the court determines the information required is unusually voluminous in nature or otherwise caused an undue burden on the provider.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4A-08

(a) Except as provided in § 10–4A–04(d) of this subtitle, a provider of electronic communication service, subscriber, or customer aggrieved by a knowing or intentional violation of this subtitle may recover appropriate relief in a civil action against the person or entity that engaged in the violation. (b) In a civil action under this section, appropriate relief includes: (1) Appropriate preliminary and other equitable or declaratory relief; (2) Damages under subsection (c) of this section; and (3) A reasonable attorney’s fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. (c) The court may assess as damages in a civil action under this section the sum of the actual damages suffered by the plaintiff and any profits made by the violator as a result of the violation, but in no case shall a person entitled to recover receive less than $1,000. (d) A good faith reliance on any of the following is a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought under this subtitle or any other State law: (1) A court warrant or order, a grand jury subpoena, a legislative authorization, or a statutory authorization; or (2) A good faith determination that § 10–402(d) of this title permitted the conduct that is the subject of the action. (e) A civil action under this section shall be filed within 2 years after the day on which the claimant first discovered or had a reasonable opportunity to discover the violation.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4B-01

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated. (b) “Court of competent jurisdiction” means any circuit court having jurisdiction over the crime being investigated regardless of the location of the instrument or process from which a wire or electronic communication is transmitted or received. (c) (1) “Pen register” means a device or process that records and decodes dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling information transmitted by an instrument or facility from which a wire or electronic communication is transmitted. (2) “Pen register” does not include any device or process used: (i) By a provider or customer of a wire or electronic communication service for billing, or recording as an incident to billing, for communications services provided by the provider or any device used by a provider or customer of a wire communication service for cost accounting or other similar purposes in the ordinary course of its business; or (ii) To obtain the content of a communication. (d) (1) “Trap and trace device” means a device or process that captures the incoming electronic or other impulses that identify the originating number or other dialing, routing, addressing, and signaling information reasonably likely to identify the source of a wire or electronic communication. (2) “Trap and trace device” does not include a device or process used to obtain the content of a communication. (e) “Wire communication”, “electronic communication”, and “electronic communication service” have the meanings stated in § 10-401 of this title.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4B-02

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, a person may not install or use a pen register or a trap and trace device without first obtaining a court order under § 10-4B-04 of this subtitle. (b) Subsection (a) of this section does not apply to the use of a pen register or a trap and trace device by a provider of wire or electronic communication service: (1) Relating to the operation, maintenance, and testing of a wire or electronic service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider, or to the protection of users of that service from abuse of service or unlawful use of service; or (2) To record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect the provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful, or abusive use of service, or with the consent of the user of that service. (c) A person who violates subsection (a) of this section, upon conviction, is subject to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 year, or both.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4B-03

(a) An investigative or law enforcement officer may make application for an order or an extension of an order under § 10-4B-04 of this subtitle authorizing or approving the installation and use of a pen register or a trap and trace device, in writing, under oath or equivalent affirmation, to a court of competent jurisdiction of this State. (b) An application under subsection (a) of this section shall include: (1) The identity of the State law enforcement or investigative officer making the application and the identity of the law enforcement agency conducting the investigation; and (2) A statement under oath by the applicant that the information likely to be obtained is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by that agency.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4B-04

(a) (1) Upon an application made under § 10-4B-03 of this subtitle, the court shall enter an ex parte order authorizing the installation and use of a pen register or a trap and trace device within the jurisdiction of the court if the court finds that the information likely to be obtained by the installation and use is relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation. (2) On service, an order issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall apply to any person providing wire or electronic communication service whose assistance may facilitate the execution of the order. (b) An order issued under this section shall: (1) Specify the identity, if known, of the person to whom is leased or in whose name is listed the telephone line or other facility to which the pen register or trap and trace device is to be attached or applied; (2) Specify the identity, if known, of the person who is the subject of the criminal investigation; (3) Specify the attributes of the communications to which the order applies, including the number or other identifier and, if known, the location of the telephone line or other facility to which the pen register or trap and trace device is to be attached or applied, and, in the case of a trap and trace device, the geographic limits of the trap and trace order; (4) Contain a description of the offense to which the information likely to be obtained by the pen register or trap and trace device relates; and (5) Direct, upon the request of the applicant, the furnishing of information, facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the installation of the pen register or trap and trace device under § 10-4B-05 of this subtitle. (c) (1) An order issued under this section shall authorize the installation and use of a pen register or a trap and trace device for a period not to exceed 60 days. (2) Extensions of an order issued under this section may be granted upon a new application for an order under § 10-4B-03 of this subtitle and upon the judicial finding required under subsection (a) of this section. An extension may not exceed 60 days. (d) An order authorizing or approving the installation and use of a pen register or a trap and trace device shall direct that: (1) The order be sealed until further order of the court; and (2) The person owning or leasing the line to which the pen register or a trap and trace device is attached or applied, or who is obligated by the order to provide assistance to the applicant, not disclose the existence of the pen register or trap and trace device or the existence of the investigation to the listed subscriber, or to any other person, unless or until otherwise ordered by the court.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-4B-05

(a) Upon the request of an investigative or law enforcement officer of a law enforcement agency authorized to install and use a pen register under this subtitle, a provider of wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian, or other person shall furnish the investigative or law enforcement officer with all information, facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the installation of the pen register unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that the person ordered by the court accords the party with respect to whom the installation and use is to take place, if such assistance is directed by a court order under § 10-4B-04(b)(5) of this subtitle. (b) Upon the request of an officer of a law enforcement agency authorized to receive the results of a trap and trace device under this subtitle, a provider of a wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian, or other person shall install the device on the appropriate line and shall furnish the investigative or law enforcement officer all additional information, facilities and technical assistance including installation and operation of the device unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that the person ordered by the court accords the party with respect to whom the installation and use is to take place, if the installation and assistance is directed by a court order under § 10-4B-04(b)(5) of this subtitle. Unless otherwise ordered by the court, the results of the trap and trace device shall be furnished to the officer of a law enforcement agency, designated in the court order, at reasonable intervals during regular business hours for the duration of the order. (c) A provider of a wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian, or other person who furnishes facilities or technical assistance under this section shall be compensated for reasonable expenses incurred in providing the facilities and assistance. (d) Nothing in this subtitle may be construed as creating a cause of action against any provider of a wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, agents, or other specified persons for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order under §§ 10-4B-02 through 10-4B-05 of this subtitle. (e) A good faith reliance on a court order, a legislative authorization, or a statutory authorization is a complete defense against any civil or criminal action brought under §§ 10-4B-02 through 10-4B-05 of this subtitle or under any other law.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-101

(a) “Business” includes business, profession, and occupation of every kind. (b) A writing or record made in the regular course of business as a memorandum or record of an act, transaction, occurrence, or event is admissible to prove the act, transaction, occurrence, or event. (c) The practice of the business must be to make such written records of its acts at the time they are done or within a reasonable time afterwards. (d) The lack of personal knowledge of the maker of the written notice may be shown to affect the weight of the evidence but not its admissibility.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-102

(a) If a business, institution, member of a profession or calling, or a department or agency of government, in the regular course of business or activity has kept or recorded a memorandum, writing, entry, print, representation, or a combination of them, of an act, transaction, occurrence, or event, and in the regular course of business has caused any or all of them to be recorded, copied, or reproduced by a photographic, photostatic, microfilm, microcard, miniature photographic, optical imaging, or other process which accurately reproduces or forms a durable medium for so reproducing the original, the original may be destroyed in the regular course of business unless its preservation is required by law. The reproduction, when satisfactorily identified, is as admissible in evidence as the original itself in a judicial or administrative proceeding whether the original is in existence or not and an enlargement or facsimile of the reproduction is likewise admissible in evidence if the original reproduction is in existence and available for inspection under direction of the court. The introduction of a reproduced record, enlargement, or facsimile does not preclude admission of the original. (b) This section shall be interpreted and construed to effectuate its general purpose of making uniform the law of those states which enact it. (c) This section may be cited as the Maryland Uniform Photographic Copies of Business and Public Records as Evidence Act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-103

(a) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated: (1) “Duplicate” means a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical or electronic rerecording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original. (2) (i) “Original” of a writing means the writing itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. (ii) “Original” of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom. (iii) “Original” includes, if data is stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight that reflects the data accurately. (3) “Photographs” include still photographs, X–ray films, video tapes, and motion pictures. (4) “Writing” means letters, words, or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, magnetic impulse, mechanical or electronic recording, or other form of data compilation. (b) A duplicate is admissible in evidence to the same extent as an original unless: (1) A genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original; or (2) Under the circumstances, it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-104

(a) (1) In this section the following terms have the meanings indicated. (2) “Health care provider” means: (i) A health care provider, as defined in § 3-2A-01 of this article; (ii) An ambulatory surgical facility; (iii) An inpatient facility that is organized primarily in the rehabilitation of disabled persons, through an integrated program of medical and other service provided under competent professional supervision; (iv) A home health agency, as defined in § 19-401 of the Health - General Article; (v) Any health institution, service, or program for which a certificate of need is required under Title 19 of the Health - General Article; or (vi) A person who is: 1. Substantially similar to a health care provider described in items (i) through (v) of this paragraph; and 2. Regulated by another state to provide health care services. (3) “State” means a state of the United States or the District of Columbia. (b) (1) The provisions of this section apply only to a claim for: (i) Damages for personal injury; (ii) Medical, hospital, or disability benefits under §§ 19-505 and 19-506 of the Insurance Article; (iii) First party motor vehicle benefits under §§ 19-509 and 19-510 of the Insurance Article; and (iv) First party health insurance benefits. (2) This section does not apply to an action for damages filed under Title 3, Subtitle 2A of this article. (3) Subject to the provisions of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection, the provisions of this section apply to a proceeding in: (i) The District Court; or (ii) A circuit court if the amount in controversy in the action in the circuit court does not exceed the amount specified in § 4-401 of this article for that type of action. (c) (1) A writing or record of a health care provider described in this section is admissible under this section if: (i) The writing or record is offered in the trial of a civil action in the District Court or a circuit court; (ii) At least 60 days, except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, before the beginning of the trial, the party who intends to introduce the writing or record: 1. Serves notice of the party’s intent to introduce the writing or record without the support of a health care provider’s testimony, a list that identifies each writing or record, and a copy of the writing or record on all other parties as provided under Maryland Rule 1-321; and 2. Files notice of service and the list that identifies each writing or record with the court; and (iii) The writing or record is otherwise admissible. (2) A party who receives a notice under paragraph (1) of this subsection and intends to introduce another writing or record of a health care provider without a health care provider’s testimony shall: (i) Serve a notice of intent, a list that identifies each writing or record, and a copy of the writing or record at least 30 days before the beginning of the trial; and (ii) File notice of service and the list that identifies each writing or record with the court. (3) The list required under paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection shall include: (i) The name of the health care provider for each writing or record; and (ii) The date of each writing or record of the health care provider or each date of treatment by the health care provider. (d) (1) A writing or record of a health care provider made to document a medical, dental, or other health condition, a health care provider’s opinion, or the providing of health care is admissible without the support of the testimony of a health care provider as the maker or the custodian of the writing or record as evidence of the existence of a medical, dental, or health condition, the opinion, and the necessity and the providing of health care. (2) A finder of fact may attach whatever weight to a writing or record that the finder of fact deems appropriate. (e) (1) A written statement or bill for health care expenses is admissible without the support of the testimony of a health care provider as the maker or the custodian of the statement or bill as evidence of the amount, fairness, and reasonableness of the charges for the services or materials provided. (2) A finder of fact may attach whatever weight to a writing or record that the finder of fact deems appropriate. (f) Nothing contained in this section may be construed to limit the right of a party to: (1) Request a summons to compel the attendance of a witness; (2) Examine a witness who appears at trial; or (3) Engage in discovery as provided under the Maryland Rules.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-105

(a) The provisions of this section apply to a civil action in: (1) The District Court; or (2) A circuit court if the amount in controversy in the action in the circuit court does not exceed the amount specified in § 4-401 of this article for that type of action. (b) (1) (i) Subject to the provisions of this section, a paid bill for goods or services is admissible without the testimony of the provider of the goods or services as evidence of the authenticity of the bill for goods or services provided and the fairness and reasonableness of the charges of the provider of the goods or services. (ii) A finder of fact may attach whatever weight to a paid bill that the finder of fact deems appropriate. (2) The bill shall be admitted on testimony, by the party or any other person with personal knowledge: (i) Identifying the original bill or an authenticated copy; and (ii) 1. Identifying the provider of the goods or services; 2. Explaining the circumstances surrounding the receipt of the bill; 3. Describing the goods or services provided; 4. Stating that the goods or services were provided in connection with the event giving rise to the action; and 5. Stating that the bill was paid. (c) (1) Subsection (b) of this section applies only if, at least 60 days before the beginning of the trial, the party who intends to introduce the bill: (i) Serves notice of the party’s intent to introduce the bill without the support of the testimony of the provider of the goods or services that were billed, a list that identifies each bill, and a copy of the bill on all other parties as provided under Maryland Rule 1-321; and (ii) Files notice of service and the list that identifies each bill with the court. (2) The list required under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall include: (i) The name of the provider of the goods and services for each bill; and (ii) The date of each bill of the provider of the goods and services. (d) Nothing contained in this section may be construed to: (1) Apply to proof of the existence of a medical, dental, or other health condition, the opinion of a health care provider, or the necessity and the providing of medical, dental, or other health care; (2) Limit the provisions of § 10-104 of this subtitle concerning the admissibility of a medical, dental, hospital, or other health care writing or record; or (3) Limit the right of a party to: (i) Request a summons to compel the attendance of a witness; (ii) Examine a witness who appears at trial; or (iii) Engage in discovery as provided under the Maryland Rules.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-201

(a) (1) The 1957 Edition of the Annotated Code of Maryland, prepared and published by the Editorial Staff of The Michie Company, Charlottesville, Virginia, is adopted and made evidence of the Public General Laws of the State of Maryland as contained in the Code of Public General Laws of Maryland of 1888, as amended, modified and changed from time to time, through and including the regular session of the General Assembly of Maryland held in 1957. It shall be considered as the evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (2) A replacement volume to the Annotated Code of the Public General Laws of Maryland (1957 Edition), prepared and published by the Editorial Staff of The Michie Company, Charlottesville, Virginia, is adopted and made evidence of the Public General Laws in the volume at the time of publication. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (3) Any pocket or other supplement to a volume of the Annotated Code of the Public General Laws of Maryland (1957 Edition or subsequent replacement volume), prepared and published by the Editorial Staff of The Michie Company, Charlottesville, Virginia, is adopted and made evidence of changes in the Public General Laws which are supplementary or in addition to the laws in the main volume. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all the courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (b) (1) The 2002 Edition of West’s Annotated Code of Maryland, prepared and published by the editorial staff of West, Eagan, Minnesota, is adopted and made evidence of the Public General Laws of Maryland as contained in the Code of Public General Laws of Maryland of 1888, as amended, modified, and changed from time to time, through and including the regular session of the General Assembly of Maryland held in 2001. It shall be considered as the evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (2) A replacement volume to West’s Annotated Code of Maryland (2002 Edition), prepared and published by the editorial staff of West, Eagan, Minnesota, is adopted and made evidence of the Public General Laws in the volume at the time of publication. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all the courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (3) Any pocket or other supplement to a volume of West’s Annotated Code of Maryland (2002 Edition or subsequent replacement volume), prepared and published by the editorial staff of West, Eagan, Minnesota, is adopted and made evidence of changes in the Public General Laws which are supplementary or in addition to the laws in the main volume. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all the courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (c) The Code of Public General Laws, as compiled, updated, and maintained by the Department of Legislative Services in accordance with § 2-1243(c) of the State Government Article, is adopted and made evidence of the Public General Laws of Maryland as contained in the Code of Public General Laws of Maryland of 1888, as amended, modified, and changed from time to time, through and including the most recently completed regular session of the General Assembly. It shall be considered as the evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-201.1

§10–201.1. (a) The Public Local Laws of Maryland - Compilation of Municipal Charters that is prepared and published by the Department of Legislative Services is adopted and made evidence of the portion of the Public Local Laws of the State of Maryland that contains the charters of all the municipal corporations in the State. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (b) A replacement edition of the Public Local Laws of Maryland - Compilation of Municipal Charters that is prepared and published by the Department of Legislative Services is adopted and made evidence of the portion of the Public Local Laws of the State of Maryland that contains the charters of all the municipal corporations in the State at the time of publication. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions. (c) Any supplemental page to the Public Local Laws of Maryland - Compilation of Municipal Charters that is prepared and published by the Department of Legislative Services is adopted and made evidence of the portion of the Public Local Laws of the State of Maryland that contains the charters of all the municipal corporations in the State which are supplementary or in addition to the laws in the compilation. It shall be considered as evidence of the law in all courts of the State and by all public offices and officers of the State and its political subdivisions.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-202

(a) Printed books or pamphlets purporting on their face to be the session or other statutes of the United States, any of the United States or its territories, or of a foreign jurisdiction, and to have been printed and published by the authority of a state, territory, or foreign jurisdiction or proved to be commonly recognized in its courts, shall be received in the courts of the State as prima facie evidence of the statutes. (b) This section shall be so interpreted and construed to effectuate its general purposes to make uniform the law of those states which enact it. (c) This section may be cited as the Maryland Uniform Proof of Statutes Act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-203

(a) (1) The public laws, ordinances, regulations, and resolutions approved and enacted by a county or municipal corporation of the State, the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, or the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, shall be judicially noticed or read in evidence from the printed volumes or from a true copy of an amendment published by the authority of the county or municipal corporation. (2) The contents of the Maryland Register and the Code of Maryland Regulations shall be judicially noticed from the official text of those publications. (b) The private laws and resolutions published by the authority of the State may be read in evidence from the printed statute book.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-204

(a) A copy of a public record, book, paper, or proceeding of any agency of the government of the United States, the District of Columbia, any territory or possession of the United States, or of any state or of any of its political subdivisions or of an agency of any political subdivision shall be received in evidence in any court if certified as a true copy by the custodian of the record, book, paper, or proceeding, and if otherwise admissible. (b) Except as otherwise provided by law, a custodian of a public record in the State or other person authorized to make a certification under this section shall, upon request, provide a certified copy of the public record to a party to a judicial proceeding or the party’s attorney. (c) A certification under this section shall include: (1) The signature and title of the custodian or other person authorized to make the certification; (2) The official seal, if any, of the office; and (3) A statement certifying that the copy is a true copy of the public record. (d) A custodian or other person authorized to make a certification under this section may charge a reasonable fee for providing a certified copy of a public record in accordance with this section.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-205

(a) In this section, “the Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems” means the State agency described in § 13–503 of the Education Article. (b) Records, reports, statements, notes, or information assembled or obtained by the Maryland Department of Health, the Maryland Commission to Study Problems of Drug Addiction, the Medical and Chirurgical Faculty or its allied medical societies, the Maryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services Systems, an in–hospital staff committee, or a national organized medical society or research group that are declared confidential by § 4–102 of the Health – General Article or § 14–506 of the Health Occupations Article, are not admissible in evidence in any proceeding. (c) An employee or agent of any of the organizations listed in subsection (b) of this section may not be compelled to divulge any such record, report, statement, note, or information in this connection.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-206

When a clerk of any court has replaced worn and dilapidated records in his office, and certified the new records as accurate copies of the old ones, the new records are substituted for and become the records of the court in lieu of the old records. The certified and substituted new records are admissible evidence to the same extent the old ones were.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-207

Printed copies of schedules, classifications, and tariffs of rates, fares, and charges, and supplements to schedules, classifications, and tariffs, filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, which show an Interstate Commerce Commission number, which may be stated in abbreviated form, as I.C.C. No. ...., and an effective date, are presumed to be correct copies of the original schedules, classifications, tariffs, and supplements on file with the Interstate Commerce Commission and shall be received as evidence, without certification, in any court to prove the schedules, classifications, tariffs, and supplements.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-208

A written finding of presumed death made by the Secretary of Defense or other officer or employee of the United States authorized by federal law to make a finding of presumed death or a duly certified copy of the finding shall be received in any court, office, or other place in the State as evidence of: (1) The death of the individual disclosed in the finding as dead; and (2) The date, circumstances, and place of the individual’s death or disappearance.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-209

An official written report or record or duly certified copy of an official written report or record that an individual is missing, missing in action, interned in a neutral country, or is beleaguered, besieged or captured by an enemy or is dead or is alive, made by any of the persons referred to in § 10-208 of this subtitle shall be received in any court, office, or other place in the State as evidence of the facts stated in the report or record.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-210

(a) For the purpose of §§ 10-208 and 10-209 of this subtitle, any finding, report, or record, or duly certified copy of a finding, report, or record, purporting to have been signed by an officer or employee of the United States described in §§ 10-208 and 10-209 of this subtitle, shall be presumed to have been signed and issued by the officer or employee in accordance with law, and the person signing same shall be presumed to have acted within the scope of the person’s authority. (b) If a copy purports to have been certified by a person authorized by law to certify the copy, the certified copy shall be evidence of the person’s authority so to certify.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-301

The speed of a motor vehicle may be proved by evidence of a test made upon it with a device designed to measure and indicate the speed of a moving object by means of radio-micro waves.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-301.1

§10–301.1. (a) In §§ 10-302 through 10-309 of this subtitle, the following words have the meanings indicated. (b) “Specimen of blood” and “1 specimen of blood” have the meaning stated in § 16-205.1 of the Transportation Article. (c) “Test” has the meaning stated in § 16-205.1 of the Transportation Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-302

In a prosecution for a violation of a law concerning a person who is driving or attempting to drive a vehicle in violation of § 16-113, § 16-813, or § 21-902 of the Transportation Article, or in violation of Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2-209, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article, a test of the person’s breath or blood may be administered for the purpose of determining alcohol concentration and a test or tests of 1 specimen of the person’s blood may be administered for the purpose of determining the drug or controlled dangerous substance content of the person’s blood.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-303

(a) (1) A specimen of breath or 1 specimen of blood may be taken for the purpose of a test for determining alcohol concentration. (2) For the purpose of a test for determining alcohol concentration, the specimen of breath or blood shall be taken within 2 hours after the person accused is apprehended. (b) (1) Only 1 specimen of blood may be taken for the purpose of a test or tests for determining the drug or controlled dangerous substance content of the person’s blood. (2) For the purpose of a test or tests for determining drug or controlled dangerous substance content of the person’s blood, the specimen of blood shall be taken within 4 hours after the person accused is apprehended.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-304

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Qualified medical person” means a person permitted to withdraw blood from a human. (3) “Qualified person” means a person who has received training in the use of the equipment in a training program approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division and who is either a police officer, a police employee, or a person authorized by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division. (b) (1) The test of breath shall be administered by a qualified person with equipment approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division at the direction of a police officer. (2) The officer arresting the individual may not administer the test of breath. (c) (1) (i) The blood shall be obtained by a qualified medical person using equipment approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division acting at the request of a police officer. (ii) If a law enforcement officer testifies that the officer witnessed the taking of a blood specimen by a person who the officer reasonably believed was a qualified medical person, the officer’s testimony shall be sufficient evidence that the person was a qualified medical person and that the blood was obtained in compliance with this section, without testimony from the person who obtained the blood specimen. (2) The test of blood shall be conducted by a qualified person using equipment approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division in a laboratory approved by the toxicologist. (d) (1) For the purpose of establishing that the test of breath or blood was administered with equipment approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division, a statement signed by the toxicologist certifying that the equipment used in the test has been approved by him shall be prima facie evidence of the approval, and the statement is admissible in evidence without the necessity of the toxicologist personally appearing in court. (2) (i) If a defendant desires the toxicologist to be present and testify at trial as a witness, the defendant shall file a request for a subpoena for the toxicologist at least 20 days before the trial in the appropriate court. (ii) If the District Court is deprived of jurisdiction under circumstances in which a defendant is entitled to and demands a jury trial, or appeals from the District Court to the circuit court, another subpoena must be filed at least 20 days before the trial in the circuit court. (iii) If a trial date is postponed for any reason beyond 30 days from the trial date for which the subpoena was issued, the defendant shall file a new subpoena for the toxicologist. (iv) In addition to the requirements of Maryland Rules 4–265 and 4–266, the subpoena shall contain the name, address, and telephone number of the defendant or the defendant’s attorney. (3) A subpoena for the toxicologist may be quashed if a defendant fails to comply with the requirements of this subsection. (4) A motion to quash a defendant’s subpoena may be filed by any party or by the Attorney General. (e) The person tested is permitted to have a physician of the person’s own choosing administer tests in addition to the one administered at the direction of the police officer, and in the event no test is offered or requested by the police officer, the person may request, and the officer shall have administered, one or more of the tests provided for in this section. (f) Nothing in this section precludes the right to introduce any other competent evidence bearing upon the date of the certificate or change in the equipment since the date of the certificate.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-305

(a) The type of test administered to the defendant to determine alcohol concentration shall be the test of breath except that the type of test administered shall be: (1) A test of blood if: (i) The defendant is unconscious or otherwise incapable of refusing to take a test to determine alcohol concentration; (ii) Injuries to the defendant require removal of the defendant to a medical facility; (iii) The equipment for administering the test of breath is not available; or (iv) The defendant is required to submit to a test of one specimen of blood under § 16-205.1(c)(1)(ii) of the Transportation Article; or (2) Both a test of the person’s breath and a test of one specimen of the person’s blood if the defendant is required to submit to both a test of the person’s breath and a test of one specimen of the person’s blood under § 16-205.1(c)(1)(iii) of the Transportation Article. (b) The type of specimen obtained from the defendant for the purpose of a test or tests to determine drug or controlled dangerous substance content shall be a blood specimen. (c) Any person who is dead, unconscious, or otherwise in a condition rendering him incapable of test refusal shall be deemed not to have withdrawn consent.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-306

(a) (1) (i) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (2) of this subsection, in any criminal trial in which a violation of § 16–113, § 16–813, or § 21–902 of the Transportation Article, or a violation of Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2–209, or § 3–211 of the Criminal Law Article is charged or is an issue, a copy of a report of the results of a test of breath or blood to determine alcohol concentration signed by the technician or analyst who performed the test, is admissible as substantive evidence without the presence or testimony of the technician or analyst who performed the test. (ii) Subject to the provisions of § 10–308(b) of this subtitle and paragraph (2) of this subsection, in any criminal trial in which a violation of § 21–902 of the Transportation Article or a violation of Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2–209, or § 3–211 of the Criminal Law Article is charged, a copy of a report of the results of a test or tests of blood to determine drug or controlled dangerous substance content signed by the technician or analyst who performed the test, is admissible as substantive evidence without the presence or testimony of the technician or analyst who performed the test. (2) To be admissible under paragraph (1) of this subsection, the report shall: (i) Identify the technician or analyst as a “qualified person”, as defined in § 10–304 of this subtitle; (ii) State that the test was performed with equipment approved by the toxicologist in the Department of State Police Forensic Sciences Division at the direction of a police officer; and (iii) State that the result of the test is as stated in the report. (b) (1) (i) Test results which comply with the requirements of subsection (a) of this section are admissible as substantive evidence without the presence or testimony of the technician or analyst who administered the test. (ii) However, if the State decides to offer the test results without the testimony of the technician or analyst, it shall, at least 30 days before trial, notify the defendant or his attorney in writing of its intention and deliver to the defendant or his attorney a copy of the test results to be offered. (iii) If the District Court is deprived of jurisdiction under circumstances in which a defendant is entitled to and demands a jury trial, or appeals from the District Court to the circuit court, the State is not required to file a second notice. (2) (i) If the defendant desires the technician or analyst to be present and testify at trial, the defendant shall notify the court and the State in writing no later than 20 days before trial. (ii) If the District Court is deprived of jurisdiction under circumstances in which a defendant is entitled to and demands a jury trial, or appeals from the District Court to a circuit court, the defendant shall notify the circuit court and the State in writing no later than 20 days before trial. (iii) If the timely and proper notice required under this paragraph is provided by the defendant, the test results are inadmissible without the testimony of the technician or analyst. (3) Failure to give timely and proper notice constitutes a waiver of the defendant’s right to the presence and testimony of the technician or analyst.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-307

(a) (1) In any criminal, juvenile, or civil proceeding in which a person is alleged to have committed an act that would constitute a violation of Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2-209, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article, or with driving or attempting to drive a vehicle in violation of § 16-113, § 16-813, or § 21-902 of the Transportation Article, the amount of alcohol in the person’s breath or blood shown by analysis as provided in this subtitle is admissible in evidence and has the effect set forth in subsections (b) through (g) of this section. (2) Alcohol concentration as used in this section shall be measured by: (i) Grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; or (ii) Grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath. (3) If the amount of alcohol in the person’s blood shown by analysis as provided in this subtitle is measured by milligrams of alcohol per deciliters of blood or milligrams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood, a court or an administrative law judge, as the case may be, shall convert the measurement into grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood by dividing the measurement by 1000. (b) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of 0.05 or less, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, it shall be presumed that the person was not under the influence of alcohol and that the person was not driving while impaired by alcohol. (c) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of more than 0.05 but less than 0.07, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, this fact may not give rise to any presumption that the person was or was not under the influence of alcohol or that the person was or was not driving while impaired by alcohol, but this fact may be considered with other competent evidence in determining whether the person was or was not driving while under the influence of alcohol or driving while impaired by alcohol. (d) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of at least 0.07 but less than 0.08, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, it shall be prima facie evidence that the person was driving while impaired by alcohol. (e) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or more, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, it shall be prima facie evidence that the person was driving with alcohol in the person’s blood. (f) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or more, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, it shall be prima facie evidence that the person was driving in violation of an alcohol restriction under § 16-113 of the Transportation Article. (g) If at the time of testing a person has an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more, as determined by an analysis of the person’s blood or breath, the person shall be considered under the influence of alcohol per se as defined in § 11-174.1 of the Transportation Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-308

(a) The evidence of the analysis does not limit the introduction of other evidence bearing upon whether the defendant was under the influence of alcohol or whether the defendant was driving while impaired by alcohol, while so far impaired by any drug, any combination of drugs, or a combination of one or more drugs and alcohol that the person cannot drive a vehicle safely, or while impaired by a controlled dangerous substance. (b) The results of a test or tests to determine the drug or controlled dangerous substance content of a person’s blood: (1) Are admissible as evidence in a criminal trial only in a prosecution for a violation of § 21-902 of the Transportation Article, § 8-738 of the Natural Resources Article, or Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2-209, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article and only if other admissible evidence is introduced that creates an inference that the person was: (i) Driving or attempting to drive while so far impaired by any drug, any combination of drugs, or a combination of one or more drugs and alcohol that the person could not drive a vehicle safely, or while impaired by a controlled dangerous substance; or (ii) Operating or attempting to operate a vessel while the person was so far impaired by any drug, any combination of drugs, or a combination of one or more drugs and alcohol that the person could not operate a vessel safely, or while impaired by a controlled dangerous substance; and (2) Are not admissible in a prosecution other than a prosecution for a violation of § 21-902 of the Transportation Article, § 8-738 of the Natural Resources Article, or Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2-209, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-309

(a) (1) (i) Except as provided in § 16–205.1(c) of the Transportation Article or § 8–738.1 of the Natural Resources Article, a person may not be compelled to submit to a test or tests provided for in this subtitle. (ii) Evidence of a test or analysis provided for in this subtitle is not admissible in a prosecution for a violation of § 16–113 or § 21–902 of the Transportation Article, § 8–738 of the Natural Resources Article, or Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2–209, or § 3–211 of the Criminal Law Article if obtained contrary to the provisions of this subtitle. (2) The fact of refusal to submit is admissible in evidence at the trial. (b) This section does not limit the provisions of the vehicle laws regarding the consequences of refusal to submit to a test or tests. (c) Nothing in this section precludes or limits the admissibility of evidence of a test or analysis to determine the alcohol concentration of a person’s blood or breath in any prosecution other than for a violation of § 16-113 or § 21-902 of the Transportation Article, § 8-738 of the Natural Resources Article, or Title 2, Subtitle 5, § 2-209, or § 3-211 of the Criminal Law Article. (d) Nothing in this section precludes or limits admissibility of evidence of a test or analysis to determine the alcohol concentration of a person’s blood or breath which is obtained as provided in § 16–205.1(c) of the Transportation Article or § 8–738.1 of the Natural Resources Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-310

A photograph, microphotograph, videotape, or other recorded image of the license plate of a motor vehicle produced by an electronic toll collection video-monitoring system is admissible in a proceeding to collect a toll or other charge of the Maryland Transportation Authority, to impose civil liability or to collect civil penalties imposed under § 21-1414 of the Transportation Article, or to impose criminal liability under § 21-1413 of the Transportation Article for a failure to pay a toll or charge.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-311

§10–311. IN EFFECT (a) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a traffic control signal monitoring system in accordance with § 21–202.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–202(h) of the Transportation Article without authentication. (b) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a speed monitoring system in accordance with § 21–809 or § 21–810 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of Title 21, Subtitle 8 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (c) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a school bus monitoring camera in accordance with § 21–706.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–706 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (d) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a vehicle height monitoring system in accordance with § 24–111.3 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of a State or local law restricting the presence of certain vehicles during certain times without authentication. (e) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a bus lane monitoring system in accordance with § 21–1134 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–1133 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (f) A recorded image of a motor vehicle and any relevant recorded audio produced by a noise abatement monitoring system in conjunction with a noise measuring device in accordance with § 22–612 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 22–602 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (g) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a stop sign monitoring system in accordance with § 21–707.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–707 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (h) In any other judicial proceeding, a recorded image produced by a vehicle height monitoring system, traffic control signal monitoring system, speed monitoring system, work zone speed control system, stop sign monitoring system, school bus monitoring camera, or bus lane monitoring system or a recorded image and any relevant recorded audio produced by a noise abatement monitoring system in conjunction with a noise measuring device is admissible as otherwise provided by law. §10–311. // EFFECTIVE JUNE 30, 2028 PER CHAPTER 712 OF 2025 // // EFFECTIVE UNTIL JUNE 30, 2029 PER CHAPTER 678 OF 2024 // (a) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a traffic control signal monitoring system in accordance with § 21–202.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–202(h) of the Transportation Article without authentication. (b) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a speed monitoring system in accordance with § 21–809 or § 21–810 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of Title 21, Subtitle 8 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (c) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a school bus monitoring camera in accordance with § 21–706.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–706 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (d) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a vehicle height monitoring system in accordance with § 24–111.3 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of a State or local law restricting the presence of certain vehicles during certain times without authentication. (e) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a bus lane monitoring system in accordance with § 21–1134 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–1133 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (f) In any other judicial proceeding, a recorded image produced by a vehicle height monitoring system, traffic control signal monitoring system, speed monitoring system, work zone speed control system, stop sign monitoring system, school bus monitoring camera, or bus lane monitoring system is admissible as otherwise provided by law. §10–311. // EFFECTIVE JUNE 30, 2029 PER CHAPTER 678 OF 2024 // (a) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a traffic control signal monitoring system in accordance with § 21–202.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–202(h) of the Transportation Article without authentication. (b) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a speed monitoring system in accordance with § 21–809 or § 21–810 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of Title 21, Subtitle 8 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (c) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a school bus monitoring camera in accordance with § 21–706.1 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–706 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (d) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a vehicle height monitoring system in accordance with § 24–111.3 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of a State or local law restricting the presence of certain vehicles during certain times without authentication. (e) A recorded image of a motor vehicle produced by a bus lane monitoring system in accordance with § 21–1134 of the Transportation Article is admissible in a proceeding concerning a civil citation issued under that section for a violation of § 21–1133 of the Transportation Article without authentication. (f) In any other judicial proceeding, a recorded image produced by a vehicle height monitoring system, traffic control signal monitoring system, speed monitoring system, work zone speed control system, school bus monitoring camera, or bus lane monitoring system is admissible as otherwise provided by law.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-312

(a) Subject to subsection (b) of this section, in a prosecution for a diesel emissions standard violation under Title 23, Subtitle 4 of the Transportation Article, emissions test results from emissions test equipment as described in § 23-402 of the Transportation Article are admissible at trial in any court with jurisdiction over the proceeding in the State. (b) If at the time of testing, a diesel vehicle fails to meet the emissions standard established under Title 23, Subtitle 4 of the Transportation Article, the failure to meet the established emissions standard shall be prima facie evidence that the operator of the diesel vehicle violated the provisions of Title 23, Subtitle 4 of the Transportation Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-401

As used in this subtitle the following terms have the meanings indicated: (1) “Aggrieved person” means a person who was a party to any intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication or a person against whom the interception was directed. (2) “Aural transfer” means a transfer containing the human voice at any point between and including the point of origin and the point of reception. (3) “Communications common carrier” means any person engaged as a common carrier for hire in the transmission of wire or electronic communications. (4) “Contents”, when used with respect to any wire, oral, or electronic communication, includes any information concerning the identity of the parties to the communication or the existence, substance, purport, or meaning of that communication. (5) (i) “Electronic communication” means any transfer of signs, signals, writing, images, sounds, data, or intelligence of any nature transmitted in whole or in part by a wire, radio, electromagnetic, photoelectronic, or photooptical system. (ii) “Electronic communication” does not include: 1. Any wire or oral communication; 2. Any communication made through a tone–only paging device; or 3. Any communication from a tracking device. (6) “Electronic communication service” means any service that provides to users of the service the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications. (7) “Electronic communications system” means any wire, radio, electromagnetic, photooptical, or photoelectronic facilities for the transmission of wire or electronic communications, and any computer facilities or related electronic equipment for the electronic storage of electronic communications. (8) “Electronic, mechanical, or other device” means any device or electronic communication other than: (i) Any telephone or telegraph instrument, equipment or other facility for the transmission of electronic communications, or any component thereof, (a) furnished to the subscriber or user by a provider of wire or electronic communication service in the ordinary course of its business and being used by the subscriber or user in the ordinary course of its business or furnished by the subscriber or user for connection to the facilities of the service and used in the ordinary course of its business; or (b) being used by a communications common carrier in the ordinary course of its business, or by an investigative or law enforcement officer in the ordinary course of his duties; or (ii) A hearing aid or similar device being used to correct subnormal hearing to not better than normal. (9) “Electronic storage” means: (i) Any temporary, intermediate storage of a wire or electronic communication incidental to the electronic transmission of the communication; and (ii) Any storage of a wire or electronic communication by an electronic communication service for purposes of backup protection of the communication. (10) “Intercept” means the aural or other acquisition of the contents of any wire, electronic, or oral communication through the use of any electronic, mechanical, or other device. (11) “Investigative or law enforcement officer” means any officer of this State or a political subdivision of this State, who is empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for offenses enumerated in this subtitle, any sworn law enforcement officer of the federal government or of any other state or a political subdivision of another state, working with and under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer of this State or a political subdivision of this State, and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses. (12) “Judge of competent jurisdiction” means a judge of any circuit court within the State having jurisdiction over the offense under investigation. (13) (i) “Oral communication” means any conversation or words spoken to or by any person in private conversation. (ii) “Oral communication” does not include any electronic communication. (14) “Person” means any employee or agent of this State or a political subdivision thereof, and any individual, partnership, association, joint stock company, trust, or corporation. (15) “Readily accessible to the general public” means, with respect to a radio communication, that the communication is not: (i) Scrambled or encrypted; (ii) Transmitted using modulation techniques the essential parameters of which have been withheld from the public with the intention of preserving the privacy of the communication; or (iii) Except for tone–only paging device communications, transmitted over frequencies reserved for private use and licensed for private use under federal or State law. (16) “Telephone solicitation theft” means conduct of a person that: (i) Constitutes the offense of theft or attempted theft; and (ii) Involves the use of a telephone to solicit the payment of money. (17) “User” means any person or entity that: (i) Uses an electronic communication service; and (ii) Is duly authorized by the provider of the service to engage in that use. (18) “Wire communication” means any aural transfer made in whole or in part through the use of facilities for the transmission of communications by the aid of wire, cable, or other like connection between the point of origin and the point of reception (including the use of a connection in a switching station) furnished or operated by any person licensed to engage in providing or operating such facilities for the transmission of communications.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-402

(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this subtitle it is unlawful for any person to: (1) Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; (2) Willfully disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle; or (3) Willfully use, or endeavor to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation of this subtitle. (b) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section is guilty of a felony and is subject to imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. (c) (1) (i) It is lawful under this subtitle for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service, whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communications service to the public may not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks. (ii) 1. It is lawful under this subtitle for a provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, and agents, landlords, custodians or other persons to provide information, facilities, or technical assistance to persons authorized by federal or State law to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications or to conduct electronic surveillance, if the provider, its officers, employees, or agents, landlord, custodian, or other specified person has been provided with a court order signed by the authorizing judge directing the provision of information, facilities, or technical assistance. 2. The order shall set forth the period of time during which the provision of the information, facilities, or technical assistance is authorized and specify the information, facilities, or technical assistance required. A provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, or agents, or landlord, custodian, or other specified person may not disclose the existence of any interception or surveillance or the device used to accomplish the interception or surveillance with respect to which the person has been furnished an order under this subparagraph, except as may otherwise be required by legal process and then only after prior notification to the judge who granted the order, if appropriate, or the State’s Attorney of the county where the device was used. Any such disclosure shall render the person liable for compensatory damages. No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, or agents, landlord, custodian, or other specified person for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order under this subtitle. (2) (i) This paragraph applies to an interception in which: 1. The investigative or law enforcement officer or other person is a party to the communication; or 2. One of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to the interception. (ii) It is lawful under this subtitle for an investigative or law enforcement officer acting in a criminal investigation or any other person acting at the prior direction and under the supervision of an investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication in order to provide evidence: 1. Of the commission of: A. Murder; B. Kidnapping; C. Rape; D. A sexual offense in the first or second degree; E. Child abuse in the first or second degree; F. Child pornography under § 11–207, § 11–208, or § 11–208.1 of the Criminal Law Article; G. Gambling; H. Robbery under § 3–402 or § 3–403 of the Criminal Law Article; I. A felony under Title 6, Subtitle 1 of the Criminal Law Article; J. Bribery; K. Extortion; L. Dealing in a controlled dangerous substance, including a violation of § 5–617 or § 5–619 of the Criminal Law Article; M. A fraudulent insurance act, as defined in Title 27, Subtitle 4 of the Insurance Article; N. An offense relating to destructive devices under § 4–503 of the Criminal Law Article; O. A human trafficking offense under Title 3, Subtitle 11 of the Criminal Law Article; P. Sexual solicitation of a minor under § 3–324 of the Criminal Law Article; Q. An offense relating to obstructing justice under § 9–302, § 9–303, or § 9–305 of the Criminal Law Article; R. Sexual abuse of a minor under § 3–602 of the Criminal Law Article; S. A theft scheme or continuing course of conduct under § 7–103(f) of the Criminal Law Article involving an aggregate value of property or services of at least $10,000; T. Abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult under § 3–604 or § 3–605 of the Criminal Law Article; U. An offense relating to Medicaid fraud under §§ 8–509 through 8–515 of the Criminal Law Article; V. An offense involving a firearm under § 5–134, § 5–136, § 5–138, § 5–140, § 5–141, or § 5–144 of the Public Safety Article; or W. A conspiracy or solicitation to commit an offense listed in items A through V of this item; or 2. If: A. A person has created a barricade situation; and B. Probable cause exists for the investigative or law enforcement officer to believe a hostage or hostages may be involved. (3) It is lawful under this subtitle for a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where the person is a party to the communication and where all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to the interception unless the communication is intercepted for the purpose of committing any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of this State. (4) (i) It is lawful under this subtitle for a law enforcement officer in the course of the officer’s regular duty to intercept an oral communication if: 1. The law enforcement officer initially lawfully detained a vehicle during a criminal investigation or for a traffic violation; 2. The law enforcement officer is a party to the oral communication; 3. The law enforcement officer has been identified as a law enforcement officer to the other parties to the oral communication prior to any interception; 4. The law enforcement officer informs all other parties to the communication of the interception at the beginning of the communication; and 5. The oral interception is being made as part of a video tape recording. (ii) If all of the requirements of subparagraph (i) of this paragraph are met, an interception is lawful even if a person becomes a party to the communication following: 1. The identification required under subparagraph (i)3 of this paragraph; or 2. The informing of the parties required under subparagraph (i)4 of this paragraph. (5) It is lawful under this subtitle for an officer, employee, or agent of a governmental emergency communications center to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication where the officer, agent, or employee is a party to a conversation concerning an emergency. (6) (i) It is lawful under this subtitle for law enforcement personnel to utilize body wires to intercept oral communications in the course of a criminal investigation if there is reasonable cause to believe that a law enforcement officer’s safety may be in jeopardy. (ii) Communications intercepted under this paragraph may not be recorded, and may not be used against the defendant in a criminal proceeding. (7) It is lawful under this subtitle for a person: (i) To intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that the electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public; (ii) To intercept any radio communication that is transmitted: 1. By any station for the use of the general public, or that relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles, or persons in distress; 2. By any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile, or public safety communications system, including police and fire, readily accessible to the general public; 3. By a station operating on an authorized frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur, citizens band, or general mobile radio services; or 4. By any marine or aeronautical communications system; (iii) To intercept any wire or electronic communication the transmission of which is causing harmful interference to any lawfully operating station or consumer electronic equipment, to the extent necessary to identify the source of the interference; or (iv) For other users of the same frequency to intercept any radio communication made through a system that utilizes frequencies monitored by individuals engaged in the provision or the use of the system, if the communication is not scrambled or encrypted. (8) It is lawful under this subtitle: (i) To use a pen register or trap and trace device as defined under § 10–4B–01 of this title; or (ii) For a provider of electronic communication service to record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect the provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire or electronic communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful, or abusive use of the service. (9) It is lawful under this subtitle for a person to intercept a wire or electronic communication in the course of a law enforcement investigation of possible telephone solicitation theft if: (i) The person is an investigative or law enforcement officer or is acting under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer; and (ii) The person is a party to the communication and participates in the communication through the use of a telephone instrument. (10) It is lawful under this subtitle for a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication in the course of a law enforcement investigation in order to provide evidence of the commission of vehicle theft if: (i) The person is an investigative or law enforcement officer or is acting under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer; and (ii) The device through which the interception is made has been placed within a vehicle by or at the direction of law enforcement personnel under circumstances in which it is thought that vehicle theft may occur. (11) (i) 1. In this paragraph the following words have the meanings indicated. 2. “Body–worn digital recording device” means a device worn on the person of a law enforcement officer or a correctional officer that is capable of recording video and intercepting oral communications. 3. “Electronic control device” has the meaning stated in § 4–109 of the Criminal Law Article. (ii) It is lawful under this subtitle for a law enforcement officer or a correctional officer in the course of the officer’s regular duty to intercept an oral communication with a body–worn digital recording device or an electronic control device capable of recording video and oral communications if: 1. The law enforcement officer or correctional officer is in uniform or prominently displaying the officer’s badge or other insignia; 2. The law enforcement officer or correctional officer is making reasonable efforts to conform to standards in accordance with § 3–511 of the Public Safety Article or § 8–211 of the Correctional Services Article for the use of body–worn digital recording devices or electronic control devices capable of recording video and oral communications; 3. The law enforcement officer or correctional officer is a party to the oral communication; 4. Law enforcement or the correctional officer notifies, as soon as is practicable, the individual that the individual is being recorded, unless it is unsafe, impractical, or impossible to do so; and 5. The oral interception is being made as part of a videotape or digital recording. (iii) Failure to notify under subparagraph (ii)4 of this paragraph does not affect the admissibility in court of the recording if the failure to notify involved an individual who joined a discussion in progress for which proper notification was previously given. (d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, a person or entity providing an electronic communication service to the public may not intentionally divulge the contents of any communication (other than one to the person or entity providing the service, or an agent of the person or entity) while in transmission on that service to any person or entity other than an addressee or intended recipient of the communication or an agent of the addressee or intended recipient. (2) A person or entity providing electronic communication service to the public may divulge the contents of a communication: (i) As otherwise authorized by federal or State law; (ii) To a person employed or authorized, or whose facilities are used, to forward the communication to its destination; or (iii) That were inadvertently obtained by the service provider and that appear to pertain to the commission of a crime, if the divulgence is made to a law enforcement agency. (e) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection or in subsection (f) of this section, a person who violates subsection (d) of this section is subject to a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both. (2) If an offense is a first offense under paragraph (1) of this subsection and is not for a tortious or illegal purpose or for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private commercial gain, and the wire or electronic communication with respect to which the offense occurred is a radio communication that is not scrambled or encrypted, and: (i) The communication is not the radio portion of a cellular telephone communication, a public land mobile radio service communication, or a paging service communication, the offender is subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both; or (ii) The communication is the radio portion of a cellular telephone communication, a public land mobile radio service communication, or a paging service communication, the offender is subject to a fine of not more than $500. (3) Unless the conduct is for the purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain, conduct which would otherwise be an offense under this subsection is not an offense under this subsection if the conduct consists of or relates to the interception of a satellite transmission that is not encrypted or scrambled and that is transmitted: (i) To a broadcasting station for purposes of retransmission to the general public; or (ii) As an audio subcarrier intended for redistribution to facilities open to the public, but not including data transmissions or telephone calls. (f) (1) A person who engages in conduct in violation of this subtitle is subject to suit by the federal government or by the State in a court of competent jurisdiction, if the communication is: (i) A private satellite video communication that is not scrambled or encrypted and the conduct in violation of this subtitle is the private viewing of that communication, and is not for a tortious or illegal purpose, or for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage, or private commercial gain; or (ii) A radio communication that is transmitted on frequencies allocated under Subpart D of Part 74 of the Rules of the Federal Communications Commission that is not scrambled or encrypted and the conduct in violation of this subtitle is not for a tortious or illegal purpose or for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private commercial gain. (2) (i) The State is entitled to appropriate injunctive relief in an action under this subsection if the violation is the person’s first offense under subsection (e)(1) of this section and the person has not been found liable in a prior civil action under § 10–410 of this subtitle. (ii) In an action under this subsection, if the violation is a second or subsequent offense under subsection (e)(1) of this section or if the person has been found liable in a prior civil action under § 10–410 of this subtitle, the person is subject to a mandatory civil fine of not less than $500. (3) The court may use any means within its authority to enforce an injunction issued under paragraph (2)(i) of this subsection, and shall impose a civil fine of not less than $500 for each violation of an injunction issued under paragraph (2)(i) of this subsection.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-403

(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this subtitle, any person who manufactures, assembles, possesses, or sells any electronic, mechanical, or other device, knowing or having reason to know that the design of the device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications, is guilty of a felony and is subject to imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine of not more than $10,000, or both. (b) It is lawful under this section for: (1) A provider of wire or electronic communication service or an officer, agent, or employee of, or a person under contract with, a service provider, in the normal course of the business of providing that wire or electronic communication service to manufacture, assemble, possess, or sell any electronic, mechanical, or other device knowing or having reason to know that the design of the device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications. (2) A person under contract with the United States, a state, a political subdivision of a state, or the District of Columbia, in the normal course of the activities of the United States, a state, a political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, to manufacture, assemble, possess, or sell any electronic, mechanical, or other device knowing or having reason to know that the design of the device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications. (3) An officer, agent, or employee of the United States in the normal course of his lawful activities to manufacture, assemble, possess or sell any electronic, mechanical, or other device knowing or having reason to know that the design of the device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications. However, any sale made under the authority of this paragraph may only be for the purpose of disposing of obsolete or surplus devices. (4) An officer, agent, or employee of a law enforcement agency of this State or a political subdivision of this State in the normal course of his lawful activities to manufacture, assemble, possess or sell any electronic, mechanical, or other device knowing or having reason to know that the design of the device renders it primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications, provided, however, that the particular officer, agent, or employee is specifically authorized by the chief administrator of the employer law enforcement agency to manufacture, assemble or possess the device for a particular law enforcement purpose and the device is registered in accordance with § 10-411 of this subtitle. However, any sale made under the authority of this paragraph may only be for the purpose of disposing of obsolete or surplus devices.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-404

Any electronic, mechanical, or other device used, manufactured, assembled, possessed, or sold, in violation of § 10-402 or § 10-403 of this subtitle may be seized and forfeited to the Department of State Police.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-405

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, whenever any wire, oral, or electronic communication has been intercepted, no part of the contents of the communication and no evidence derived therefrom may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of this State, or a political subdivision thereof if the disclosure of that information would be in violation of this subtitle. (b) If any wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted in any state or any political subdivision of a state, the United States or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia in accordance with the law of that jurisdiction, but that would be in violation of this subtitle if the interception was made in this State, the contents of the communication and evidence derived from the communication may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of this State, or any political subdivision of this State if: (1) At least one of the parties to the communication was outside the State during the communication; (2) The interception was not made as part of or in furtherance of an investigation conducted by or on behalf of law enforcement officials of this State; and (3) All parties to the communication were co–conspirators in a crime of violence as defined in § 14–101 of the Criminal Law Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-406

(a) The Attorney General, State Prosecutor, or any State’s Attorney may apply to a judge of competent jurisdiction, and the judge, in accordance with the provisions of § 10–408 of this subtitle, may grant an order authorizing the interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications by investigative or law enforcement officers when the interception may provide or has provided evidence of the commission of: (1) Murder; (2) Kidnapping; (3) Rape; (4) A sexual offense in the first or second degree; (5) Child abuse in the first or second degree; (6) Child pornography under § 11–207, § 11–208, or § 11–208.1 of the Criminal Law Article; (7) Gambling; (8) Robbery under § 3–402 or § 3–403 of the Criminal Law Article; (9) A felony under Title 6, Subtitle 1 of the Criminal Law Article; (10) Bribery; (11) Extortion; (12) Dealing in a controlled dangerous substance, including a violation of § 5–617 or § 5–619 of the Criminal Law Article; (13) A fraudulent insurance act, as defined in Title 27, Subtitle 4 of the Insurance Article; (14) An offense relating to destructive devices under § 4–503 of the Criminal Law Article; (15) A human trafficking offense under Title 3, Subtitle 11 of the Criminal Law Article; (16) Sexual solicitation of a minor under § 3–324 of the Criminal Law Article; (17) An offense relating to obstructing justice under § 9–302, § 9–303, or § 9–305 of the Criminal Law Article; (18) Sexual abuse of a minor under § 3–602 of the Criminal Law Article; (19) A theft scheme or continuing course of conduct under § 7–103(f) of the Criminal Law Article involving an aggregate value of property or services of at least $10,000; (20) Abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult under § 3–604 or § 3–605 of the Criminal Law Article; (21) An offense relating to Medicaid fraud under §§ 8–509 through 8–515 of the Criminal Law Article; (22) An offense involving a firearm under § 5–134, § 5–136, § 5–138, § 5–140, § 5–141, or § 5–144 of the Public Safety Article; or (23) A conspiracy or solicitation to commit an offense listed in items (1) through (22) of this subsection. (b) No application or order shall be required if the interception is lawful under the provisions of § 10-402(c) of this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-407

(a) Any investigative or law enforcement officer who, by any means authorized by this subtitle, has obtained knowledge of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom, may disclose the contents to another investigative or law enforcement officer of any state, or any political subdivision of a state, the United States, or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia, to the extent that the disclosure is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the officer making or receiving the disclosure. (b) Any investigative or law enforcement officer who, by any means authorized by this subtitle, has obtained knowledge of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom or an investigative or law enforcement officer of any state or any political subdivision of a state, the United States or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia who obtains such knowledge by lawful disclosure may use the contents to the extent that the use is appropriate to the proper performance of his official duties. (c) (1) Any person who has received, by any means authorized by this subtitle, any information concerning a wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom intercepted in accordance with the provisions of this subtitle, may disclose the contents of that communication or the derivative evidence while giving testimony under oath or affirmation in any proceeding held under the authority of any state or any political subdivision of a state, the United States or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States including the District of Columbia. (2) Any person who has received any information concerning a wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepted in any state or any political subdivision of a state, the United States or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia in accordance with the law of that jurisdiction, but that would be in violation of this subtitle if the interception was made in this State, or evidence derived from the communication, may disclose the contents of that communication or the derivative evidence while giving testimony under oath or affirmation in any proceeding held under the authority of this State if: (i) At least one of the parties to the communication was outside the State during the communication; (ii) The interception was not made as part of or in furtherance of an investigation conducted by or on behalf of law enforcement officials of this State; and (iii) All parties to the communication were co-conspirators in a crime of violence as defined in § 14-101 of the Criminal Law Article. (d) An otherwise privileged wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepted in accordance with, or in violation of, the provisions of this subtitle, does not lose its privileged character. (e) When an investigative or law enforcement officer, while engaged in intercepting wire, oral, or electronic communications in the manner authorized herein, intercepts wire, oral, or electronic communications relating to offenses other than those specified in the order of authorization, the contents thereof, and evidence derived therefrom, may be disclosed or used as provided in subsections (a) and (b) of this section. The contents and any evidence derived therefrom may be used under subsection (c) of this section when authorized or approved by a judge of competent jurisdiction where the judge finds on subsequent application that the contents were otherwise intercepted in accordance with the provisions of this subtitle. The application shall be made as soon as practicable. (f) Any investigative or law enforcement officer of any state or political subdivision of a state, the United States, or any territory, protectorate, or possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia, who has lawfully received any information concerning a wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence lawfully derived therefrom, which would have been lawful for a law enforcement officer of this State pursuant to § 10-402(c)(2) of this subtitle to receive, may disclose the contents of that communication or the derivative evidence while giving testimony under oath or affirmation in any proceeding held under the authority of this State or any political subdivision of this State.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-408

(a) (1) Each application for an order authorizing the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication shall be made in writing upon oath or affirmation to a judge of competent jurisdiction and shall state the applicant’s authority to make the application. Each application shall include the following information: (i) The identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer making the application, and the officer authorizing the application; (ii) A full and complete statement of the facts and circumstances relied upon by the applicant, to justify his belief that an order should be issued, including: 1. Details as to the particular offense that has been, is being, or is about to be committed; 2. Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, a particular description of the nature and location of the facilities from which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted; 3. A particular description of the type of communications sought to be intercepted; and 4. The identity of the person, if known, committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; (iii) A full and complete statement as to whether or not other investigative procedures have been tried and failed or why they reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous; (iv) A statement of the period of time for which the interception is required to be maintained. If the nature of the investigation is such that the authorization for interception should not automatically terminate when the described type of communication has been first obtained, a particular description of facts establishing probable cause to believe additional communications of the same type will occur thereafter; (v) A full and complete statement of the facts concerning all previous applications known to the individual authorizing and making the application, made to any judge for authorization to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications involving any of the same persons, facilities or places specified in the application, and the action taken by the judge on each application; and (vi) Where the application is for the extension of an order, a statement setting forth the results thus far obtained from the interception, or a reasonable explanation of the failure to obtain the results. (2) (i) In the case of an application authorizing the interception of an oral communication, a particular description of the nature and location of the facilities from which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted is not required if the application: 1. Is by an investigative or law enforcement officer; 2. Is approved by the Attorney General, the State Prosecutor, or a State’s Attorney; 3. Contains a full and complete statement as to why specification of the nature and location of the facilities from which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted is not practical; and 4. Identifies the individual committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted. (ii) In the case of an application authorizing the interception of a wire or electronic communication, a particular description of the nature and location of the facilities from which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted is not required if the application: 1. Is by an investigative or law enforcement officer; 2. Is approved by the Attorney General, the State Prosecutor, or a State’s Attorney; 3. Identifies the individual believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; 4. Makes a showing that there is probable cause to believe that the individual’s actions could have the effect of thwarting interception from a specified facility; and 5. Specifies that interception will be limited to any period of time when the investigative or law enforcement officer has a reasonable, articulable belief that the individual identified in the application will be proximate to the communication device and will be using the communication device through which the communication will be transmitted. (b) The judge may require the applicant to furnish additional testimony or documentary evidence in support of the application. (c) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (5) of this subsection, on application, the judge may enter an ex parte order, as requested or as modified, authorizing interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications within the territorial jurisdiction permitted under paragraphs (2) and (3) of this subsection, if the judge determines on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant that: (i) There is probable cause for belief that an individual is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a particular offense enumerated in § 10–406 of this subtitle; (ii) There is probable cause for belief that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through the interception; (iii) Normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous; and (iv) There is probable cause for belief: 1. That the facilities from which, or the place where, the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted are being used, or are about to be used, in connection with the commission of the offense, or are leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by this person in accordance with subsection (a)(1) of this section; or 2. That the actions of the individual whose communications are to be intercepted could have the effect of thwarting an interception from a specified facility in accordance with subsection (a)(2) of this section. (2) Except as provided in paragraphs (3) and (4) of this subsection, an ex parte order issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection may authorize the interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications only within the territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the application was filed. (3) If an application for an ex parte order is made by the Attorney General, the State Prosecutor, or a State’s Attorney, an order issued under paragraph (1) of this subsection may authorize the interception of communications received or sent by a communication device anywhere within the State so as to permit the interception of the communications regardless of whether the communication device is physically located within the jurisdiction of the court in which the application was filed at the time of the interception. The application must allege that the offense being investigated may transpire in the jurisdiction of the court in which the application is filed. (4) In accordance with this subsection, a judge of competent jurisdiction may authorize continued interception within the State, both within and outside the judge’s jurisdiction, if the original interception occurred within the judge’s jurisdiction. (5) (i) In this paragraph, “legally protected health care” has the meaning stated in § 2–312 of the State Personnel and Pensions Article. (ii) A judge may not issue an ex parte order under this section for the purpose of investigating or recovering evidence of actions related to legally protected health care, unless the acts forming the basis for the investigation or recovery of evidence would constitute a crime in this State. (d) (1) Each order authorizing the interception of any wire, oral, or electronic communication shall specify: (i) The identity of the person, if known or required under subsection (a)(2) of this section, whose communications are to be intercepted; (ii) The nature and location of the communications facilities as to which, or the place where, authority to intercept is granted, if known; (iii) A particular description of the type of communication sought to be intercepted, and a statement of the particular offense to which it relates; (iv) The identity of the agency authorized to intercept the communications, and of the person authorizing the application; and (v) The period of time during which the interception is authorized, including a statement as to whether or not the interception shall automatically terminate when the described communication has been first obtained. (2) An order authorizing the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication, upon request of the applicant, shall direct that a provider of wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian or other person furnish the applicant forthwith all information, facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the interception unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that the service provider, landlord, custodian, or person is according the person whose communications are to be intercepted. Any provider of wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian or other person furnishing the facilities or technical assistance shall be compensated therefor by the applicant for reasonable expenses incurred in providing facilities or assistance. (e) (1) An order entered under this section may not authorize the interception of any wire, oral, or electronic communication for any period longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization, nor in any event longer than 30 days. The 30-day period begins on the earlier of the day on which the investigative or law enforcement officer first begins to conduct an interception under the order or 10 days after the order is entered. (2) Extensions of an order may be granted, but only upon application for an extension made in accordance with subsection (a) of this section and the court making the findings required by subsection (c) of this section. The period of extension shall be no longer than the authorizing judge deems necessary to achieve the purposes for which it was granted and in no event for longer than 30 days. (3) Every order and extension thereof shall contain a provision that the authorization to intercept shall be executed as soon as practicable, shall be conducted in such a way as to minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception under this subtitle, and must terminate upon attainment of the authorized objective, or in any event in 30 days. (4) In the event the intercepted communication is in a code or foreign language, and an expert in that foreign language or code is not reasonably available during the interception period, minimization may be accomplished as soon as practicable after the interception. An interception under this subtitle may be conducted in whole or in part by federal, State, or local government personnel, or by an individual operating under a contract with the State or a political subdivision of the State, acting under the supervision of an investigative or law enforcement officer authorized to conduct the interception. (f) Whenever an order authorizing interception is entered pursuant to this subtitle, the order shall require reports to be made to the judge who issued the order showing what progress has been made toward achievement of the authorized objective and the need for continued interception. The reports shall be made at the intervals the judge requires. (g) (1) The contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepted by any means authorized by this subtitle, if possible, shall be recorded on tape or wire or other comparable device. The recording of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication under this subsection shall be done in the way as will protect the recording from editing or other alterations. Immediately upon the expiration of the period of the order, or extensions thereof, such recordings shall be made available to the judge issuing such order and sealed under his directions. Custody of the recordings shall be wherever the judge orders. They may not be destroyed except upon an order of the issuing or denying judge and in any event shall be kept for ten years. Duplicate recordings may be made for use or disclosure pursuant to the provisions of subsections (a) and (b) of § 10–407 of this subtitle for investigations. The presence of the seal provided for by this subsection, or a satisfactory explanation for the absence thereof, shall be a prerequisite for the use or disclosure of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom under subsection (c) of § 10–407 of this subtitle. (2) Applications made and orders granted under this subtitle shall be sealed by the judge. Custody of the applications and orders shall be wherever the judge directs. The applications and orders shall be disclosed only upon a showing of good cause before a judge of competent jurisdiction and shall not be destroyed except on order of the issuing or denying judge, and in any event shall be kept for 10 years. (3) Any violation of the provisions of this subsection may be punished as contempt of the issuing or denying judge. (4) Within a reasonable time, but not later than 90 days after the termination of the period of an order or extension of an order, the issuing judge shall cause to be served on the persons named in the order, and on the other parties to intercepted communications as the judge may determine in the judge’s discretion is in the interest of justice, an inventory which shall include notice of: (i) The fact of the entry of the order; (ii) The date of the entry and the period of authorized interception; and (iii) The fact that during the period wire, oral, or electronic communications were or were not intercepted. (5) The judge, upon the filing of a motion, shall make available to the person or the person’s counsel for inspection portions of the intercepted communications, applications, and orders pertaining to that person and the alleged crime. (6) On an ex parte showing of good cause to the judge, the serving of the inventory required by this subsection may be postponed. The periods of postponement may not be longer than the authorizing judge deems necessary to achieve the purposes for which they were granted and in no event for longer than 30 days. No more than three periods of postponement may be granted. Any order issued extending the time in which the inventory notice is to be served must be under seal of the court and treated in the same manner as the order authorizing interception. (h) The contents of any intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom may not be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in the courts of this State unless each party, not less than 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding, has been furnished with a copy of the court order, and accompanying application, under which the interception was authorized. Where no application or order is required under the provisions of this subtitle, each party, not less than 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding, shall be furnished with information concerning when, where and how the interception took place and why no application or order was required. This 10-day period may be waived by the judge if he finds that it was not possible to furnish the party with the above information 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding and that the party will not be prejudiced by the delay in receiving the information. (i) (1) Any aggrieved person in any trial, hearing, or proceeding in or before any court, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, or other authority of this State or a political subdivision thereof, may move to suppress the contents of any intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom, on the grounds that: (i) The communication was unlawfully intercepted; (ii) The order of authorization under which it was intercepted is insufficient on its face, or was not obtained or issued in strict compliance with this subtitle; or (iii) The interception was not made in conformity with the order of authorization. (2) This motion shall be made in accordance with the Maryland Rules. If the motion is granted, the contents of the intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom, shall be treated as having been obtained in violation of this subtitle. The judge, upon the filing of the motion by the aggrieved person, in his discretion may make available to the aggrieved person or his counsel for inspection such portions of the intercepted communication or evidence derived therefrom as the judge determines to be in the interests of justice. (3) In addition to any other right to appeal, the State shall have the right to appeal from the denial of an application for an order of approval, if the prosecuting attorney shall certify to the judge or other official denying the application that the appeal is not taken for purposes of delay. The appeal shall be taken within 30 days after the date the order was entered and shall be diligently prosecuted.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-409

(a) Within 30 days after the expiration of the total period of an order, including each extension entered under § 10–408 of this subtitle, or within 30 days after denial of an application for an order or extension, the judge who passed the order or denied the application shall report to the Administrative Office of the Courts: (1) The fact that an order or extension was applied for; (2) The kind of order or extension applied for; (3) The fact that the order or extension was granted as applied for, was modified, or was denied; (4) The period of interceptions authorized by the order and the number and duration of any extensions of the order; (5) The offense specified in the order or application or extension of an order; (6) The identity of the applying investigative or law enforcement officer and agency making the application and the person authorizing the application; and (7) The nature of the facilities from which or the place where communications were to be intercepted. (b) In January of each year, the Attorney General, the State Prosecutor, and the State’s Attorneys shall report to the Administrative Office of the Courts: (1) The information required by subsection (a) of this section with respect to each application for an order or extension made during the preceding calendar year; (2) A general description of the interceptions made under the order or extension, including (i) the approximate nature and frequency of incriminating communications intercepted, (ii) the approximate nature and frequency of other communications intercepted, (iii) the approximate number of persons whose communications were intercepted, and (iv) the approximate nature, amount, and cost of the manpower and other resources used in the interceptions; (3) The number of arrests resulting from interceptions made under the order or extension and the offenses for which arrests were made; (4) The number of trials resulting from the interceptions; (5) The number of motions to suppress made with respect to the interceptions and the number granted or denied; (6) The number of convictions resulting from the interceptions and the offenses for which the convictions were obtained and a general assessment of the importance of the interceptions; and (7) The information required by paragraphs (2) through (6) of this subsection with respect to orders or extensions obtained in a preceding calendar year. (c) Subject to § 2–1257 of the State Government Article, in February of each year, the State Court Administrator shall transmit to the General Assembly a full and complete report concerning the number of applications for orders authorizing or approving the interception of wire or oral communications and the number of orders and extensions granted or denied during the preceding calendar year. The report shall include a summary and analysis of the data required to be filed with the Administrative Office by subsections (a) and (b) of this section. The State Court Administrator is authorized to issue binding regulations dealing with the content and form of the reports required to be filed by subsections (a) and (b) of this section.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-410

(a) Any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this subtitle shall have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to intercept, disclose, or use the communications, and be entitled to recover from any person: (1) Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher; (2) Punitive damages; and (3) A reasonable attorney’s fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred. (b) A good faith reliance on a court order or legislative authorization shall constitute a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought under this subtitle or under any other law.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-411

(a) Law enforcement agencies in the State shall register with the Department of State Police all electronic, mechanical or other devices whose design renders them primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications which are owned by them or possessed by or in the control of the agency, their employees or agents. All such devices shall be registered within ten days from the date on which the devices came into the possession or control of the agency, their employees or agents. (b) Information to be furnished with such registration shall include the name and address of the agency as well as a detailed description of each device registered and further information as the State Court Administrator may require. (c) A serial number shall be issued for each device registered pursuant to this section, which number shall be affixed or indicated on the device in question.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-412

Any person who breaks and enters, enters under false pretenses, or trespasses, upon any premises with the intent to place, adjust or remove wiretapping or electronic surveillance or eavesdropping equipment without a court order is guilty of a felony and upon conviction may be imprisoned for not more than ten years.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-413

(a) The Secretary of State Police or the commander of the law enforcement agency of any political subdivision of this State may designate one or more law enforcement officers as a hostage and barricade communications specialist. (b) Each telephone company providing service to Maryland residents shall designate one or more individuals to provide liaison with law enforcement agencies for the purposes of this section. (c) The supervising law enforcement officer, who has jurisdiction in any situation in which there is probable cause to believe that the criminal enterprise of hostage holding is occurring or that a person has barricaded himself within a structure and poses an immediate threat of physical injury to others, may order a telephone company, or a telephone company employee, officer, or director, or a hostage and barricade communications specialist to interrupt, reroute, divert, or otherwise control any telephone communications service involved in the hostage or barricade situation for the purpose of preventing telephone communication by a hostage holder or barricaded person with any person other than a law enforcement officer or a person authorized by the officer. (d) A hostage and barricade communications specialist shall be ordered to act under subsection (c) of this section only if the telephone company providing service in the area has been contacted and requested to act under subsection (c) of this section and the telephone company: (1) Declines to respond to the officer’s request because of a threat of physical injury to its employees; or (2) Indicates when contacted that it will be unable to respond appropriately to the officer’s request within a reasonable time from the receipt of the request. (e) The supervising law enforcement officer may give an order under subsection (c) of this section only after that supervising law enforcement officer has given written representation or oral representation of the hostage or barricade situation to the telephone company providing service to the area in which it is occurring. If an order is given on the basis of an oral representation, the oral representation shall be followed by a written confirmation of that representation within 48 hours of the order. (f) Good faith reliance on an order by a supervising law enforcement officer who has the real or apparent authority to issue an order under this section shall constitute a complete defense to any action against a telephone company or a telephone company employee, officer, or director that arises out of attempts by the telephone company or the employee, officer, or director of the telephone company to comply with such an order. (g) For the purposes of this section, “supervising law enforcement officer” means an officer: (1) Having a rank at least equivalent to a lieutenant of the Department of State Police or higher; or (2) In charge of one of the following: (i) A State or county law enforcement agency; (ii) A Department of State Police barracks; or (iii) A district or region within a county or Baltimore City.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-414

(a) A person who has knowledge that an investigative or law enforcement officer has been authorized or has applied for authorization under this subtitle to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications, may not give notice or attempt to give notice of an authorized interception or pending application for authorization for interception to any other person in order to obstruct, impede or prevent such interception. (b) A person who violates the provisions of subsection (a) of this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, is subject to a fine not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, or both.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-501

Every court of this State shall take judicial notice of the common law and statutes of every state, territory, and other jurisdiction of the United States, and of every other jurisdiction having a system of law based on the common law of England.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-502

The court may inform itself of those laws in the manner it deems proper, and the court may call upon counsel to aid it in obtaining appropriate information.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-503

The determination of the laws shall be made by the court and not by the jury, and shall be reviewable. The court shall grant instructions to the jury, applying foreign law to the facts of the case as if the foreign law were domestic law. In nonjury proceedings the court shall apply foreign law to the facts of the case, as would be proper if foreign law were domestic law.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-504

A party may also present to the trial court any admissible evidence of foreign laws, but, to enable a party to offer evidence of the law in another jurisdiction or to ask that judicial notice be taken of it, reasonable notice shall be given to the adverse parties either in the pleadings or by other written notice.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-505

The law of a jurisdiction other than those referred to in § 10-501 of this subtitle shall be an issue for the court, but shall not be subject to the provisions concerning judicial notice.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-506

This subtitle shall be interpreted and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact it.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-507

This subtitle may be cited as the Maryland Uniform Judicial Notice of Foreign Law Act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-601

A debt of record entered in a court located in the United States or in a foreign country may be proved by an official transcript of all of the record under the seal of the custodian and the court or office where the record was made.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-701

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated. (b) “Foreign judgment” means any judgment of a foreign state granting or denying recovery of a sum of money. It does not mean a judgment for taxes, fine, or penalty, or a judgment for support in matrimonial or family matters. (c) “Foreign state” means any governmental unit other than the United States, or any state, district, commonwealth, territory, insular possession thereof, or the Panama Canal Zone, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or the Ryukyu Islands.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-702

This subtitle applies to a foreign judgment that is final, conclusive, and enforceable where rendered even though an appeal is pending or it is subject to appeal.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-703

Except as provided in § 10–704 of this subtitle, a foreign judgment meeting the requirements of § 10–702 of this subtitle is conclusive between the parties to the extent that it grants or denies recovery of a sum of money. The foreign judgment is enforceable in the same manner as the judgment of a sister state which is entitled to full faith and credit.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-704

(a) A foreign judgment is not conclusive if: (1) The judgment was rendered under a system which does not provide impartial tribunals or procedures compatible with the requirements of due process of law; (2) The foreign court did not have personal jurisdiction over the defendant; (3) The foreign court did not have jurisdiction over the subject matter; or (4) The judgment was obtained by fraud. (b) A foreign judgment need not be recognized if: (1) The defendant in the proceedings in the foreign court did not receive notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable him to defend; (2) The cause of action on which the judgment is based is repugnant to the public policy of the State; (3) The judgment conflicts with another final and conclusive judgment; (4) The proceeding in the foreign court was contrary to an agreement between the parties under which the dispute was to be settled out of court; or (5) In the case of jurisdiction based only on personal service, the foreign court was a seriously inconvenient forum for the trial of the action. (c) (1) In this subsection, “defamation” includes invasion of privacy by false facts. (2) A foreign judgment against any person who is a resident of this State or who has assets in this State may not be recognized if: (i) The cause of action resulted in a defamation judgment obtained in a jurisdiction outside the United States, unless the court before which the matter is brought in this State first determines that the defamation law as applied in the foreign jurisdiction provides for at least as much protection for freedom of speech and the press as is provided by both the United States Constitution and the Maryland Constitution; or (ii) The cause of action resulted in a defamation judgment entered against the provider of an interactive computer service, as defined in 47 U.S.C. § 230, unless the court before which the matter is brought in this State determines that the judgment is consistent with 47 U.S.C. § 230.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-705

(a) The foreign judgment may not be refused recognition for lack of personal jurisdiction if: (1) The defendant was served personally in the foreign state; (2) The defendant voluntarily appeared in the proceedings, other than for the purpose of protecting property seized or threatened with seizure in the proceedings or of contesting the jurisdiction of the court over him; (3) The defendant prior to the commencement of the proceedings had agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the foreign court with respect to the subject matter involved; (4) The defendant was domiciled in the foreign state when the proceedings were instituted, or, being a body corporate has its principal place of business, was incorporated, or had otherwise acquired corporate status, in the foreign state; (5) The defendant had a business office in the foreign state and the proceedings in the foreign court involved a cause of action arising out of business done by the defendant through that office in the foreign state; or (6) The defendant operated a motor vehicle or airplane in the foreign state and the proceedings involved a cause of action arising out of such operation. (b) The court may recognize other bases of jurisdiction.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-706

If the defendant satisfies the court either that an appeal is pending or that he is entitled and intends to appeal from the foreign judgment, the court may stay the proceedings until the appeal has been determined or until the expiration of a period of time sufficient to enable the defendant to prosecute the appeal.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-707

This subtitle does not prevent the recognition of a foreign judgment in situations not covered by this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-708

This subtitle shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of the states which enact it.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-709

This subtitle may be cited as the Maryland Uniform Foreign Money-Judgments Recognition Act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-801

Where title to property or its devolution depends upon priority of death and there is no sufficient evidence that the persons have died otherwise than simultaneously, the property of each person shall be disposed of as if he had survived, except as provided otherwise in this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-802

Where two or more beneficiaries are designated to take successively because of survivorship under another person’s disposition of property and there is not sufficient evidence that these beneficiaries have died other than simultaneously, the property disposed of shall be divided into as many equal portions as there are successive beneficiaries, and these portions shall be distributed to those who would have taken in the event that each designated beneficiary had survived.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-803

Where there is no sufficient evidence that two joint tenants or tenants by the entirety have died other than simultaneously, the property held shall be distributed one half as if one had survived and one half as if the other had survived. If there are more than two joint tenants and all of them have so died, the property distributed shall be in the proportion that one bears to the whole number of joint tenants.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-804

Where the insured and the beneficiary in a policy of life or accident insurance have died and there is no sufficient evidence that they have died other than simultaneously, the proceeds of the policy shall be distributed as if the insured had survived the beneficiary.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-805

This subtitle shall not apply in the case of wills, living trusts, deeds, or contracts of insurance where provision has been made for distribution of property different from the provisions of this subtitle.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-806

This subtitle shall be construed and interpreted to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law in those states which enact it.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-807

This subtitle may be cited as the Maryland Uniform Simultaneous Death Act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-901

(a) During the trial of a criminal case in which the defendant is charged with a felony, a statement as defined in Maryland Rule 5–801(a) is not excluded by the hearsay rule if the statement is offered against a party that has engaged in, directed, or conspired to commit wrongdoing that was intended to and did procure the unavailability of the declarant of the statement, as defined in Maryland Rule 5–804. (b) Subject to subsection (c) of this section, before admitting a statement under this section, the court shall hold a hearing outside the presence of the jury at which: (1) The Maryland Rules of Evidence are strictly applied; and (2) The court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the party against whom the statement is offered engaged in, directed, or conspired to commit the wrongdoing that procured the unavailability of the declarant. (c) A statement may not be admitted under this section unless: (1) The statement was: (i) Given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition; (ii) Reduced to writing and signed by the declarant; or (iii) Recorded in substantially verbatim fashion by stenographic or electronic means contemporaneously with the making of the statement; and (2) As soon as is practicable after the proponent of the statement learns that the declarant will be unavailable, the proponent notifies the adverse party of: (i) The intention to offer the statement; (ii) The particulars of the statement; and (iii) The identity of the witness through whom the statement will be offered.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-902

There is no presumption that an offense committed by a wife in the presence of her husband is committed under the coercion of the husband.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-903

Evidence is not admissible in a civil proceeding to prove that any party failed to testify in a criminal proceeding involving the same subject matter.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-904

In a civil or criminal case in which a person is charged with commission of a crime or act, evidence is admissible by the defendant to show that another person has been convicted of committing the same crime or act.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-905

(a) (1) Evidence is admissible to prove the interest of a witness in any proceeding, or the fact of the witness’s conviction of an infamous crime other than the common law offense of sodomy as it existed before October 1, 2020. (2) Evidence of conviction is not admissible if an appeal is pending, or the time for an appeal has not expired, or the conviction has been reversed, and there has been no retrial or reconviction. (b) The certificate, under the seal of the clerk of the court, of the court in which the conviction occurred is sufficient evidence of the conviction. (c) Evidence that a witness has been convicted of perjury shall be admitted for the purpose of attacking the credibility of the witness, regardless of the date of the conviction, if the evidence is elicited from the witness or established by public record during examination of the witness.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-906

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section evidence is admissible in any proceeding to prove the execution of a written instrument attested by one or more subscribing witnesses in the same manner as the instrument might be proved had it not been attested. Evidence of a disputed writing is admissible and may be submitted to the trier of the facts for its determination as to genuineness. (b) The provisions of this section do not apply to the proof of the execution of a last will and testament or codicil.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-907

If an action is brought to charge a person on a special promise to be answerable for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another person, it is not necessary to show that the consideration for the promise is in writing.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-908

(a) If a plat is authenticated, it may be considered as evidence. (b) In an action of trespass quare clausum fregit involving the location of minerals underground, if the location cannot be measured on plats because of earth falls or other reasons, the trespass may be proved by other evidence. (c) A plat or certificate of survey may be amended at bar where the location does not correspond with the variation. In the sound discretion of the court, objects may be placed on a plat by a witness who was not sworn on the survey.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-909

(a) Patented land is not required to be stated by the patented name in a declaration in an action at law. It may be described by abuttals, course and distance, or a name by which it was acquired. The description shall be certain enough to identify the land. (b) When title of patented land is questioned, a party is not required to prove that the land was patented. A patent shall be presumed in favor of the party showing a title otherwise good. (c) Acts of exclusive user and ownership are admissible to prove possession. Actual evidence of enclosure is not necessary for this proof.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-910

In an action on behalf of an infant to recover for death, personal injury, or property damage the negligence of the parent or custodian of the infant may not be imputed to the infant.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-911

In any legal proceeding of any nature, the quantities and qualities of noise may be proved by evidence of tests made with any instrument designed and constructed to measure and indicate or record the presence of sound, including such devices commonly called sound level meters and frequency analyzers.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-912

(a) A confession may not be excluded from evidence solely because the defendant was not taken before a judicial officer after arrest within any time period specified by Title 4 of the Maryland Rules. (b) Failure to strictly comply with the provisions of Title 4 of the Maryland Rules pertaining to taking a defendant before a judicial officer after arrest is only one factor, among others, to be considered by the court in deciding the voluntariness and admissibility of a confession.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-913

(a) In any action for punitive damages for personal injury, evidence of the defendant’s financial means is not admissible until there has been a finding of liability and that punitive damages are supportable under the facts. (b) A claim filed with the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office in accordance with § 3-2A-04 of this article shall be considered an action for purposes of this section.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-914

(a) A laboratory test, performed by a laboratory certified by the Maryland Department of Health and approved by the Division of Parole and Probation of the Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, indicating that the defendant has used a controlled dangerous substance as defined in § 5–101 of the Criminal Law Article or alcohol in violation of a condition of the defendant’s probation or work release, is sufficiently reliable to justify revocation of the defendant’s probation or work release, without an expert witness from the laboratory testifying in court to support the contents of a report of the laboratory test. (b) A report of a laboratory test described under this section shall: (1) Identify the chemist or analyst who performed the laboratory test as an individual qualified, under standards approved by the Maryland Department of Health, to perform the laboratory test; (2) Be signed by the chemist or analyst who performed the laboratory test; and (3) Contain a statement that: (i) The material delivered to the chemist or analyst who performed the laboratory test was properly tested under procedures and equipment approved by the Maryland Department of Health; (ii) The procedures of the laboratory test are reliable; and (iii) The laboratory test indicates that the defendant used a controlled dangerous substance or alcohol. (c) A report of a laboratory test is prima facie evidence of the results of the laboratory test. (d) Nothing in this section precludes the right of any party to introduce any evidence that supports or contradicts the evidence contained in or the presumptions raised by the report of the laboratory test described under subsection (b) of this section. (e) Subject to the provisions of subsection (f) of this section, if a laboratory report or statement is admitted in evidence, the chemist or analyst who performed the laboratory test is subject to cross–examination by any party to the proceeding. (f) (1) On written demand of a defendant filed in the proceeding at least 5 days before the hearing to revoke a defendant’s probation or work release, the prosecution shall require the presence of the chemist or analyst who performed the test or any individual in the chain of custody or control as a prosecution witness. (2) The provisions of subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this section concerning prima facie evidence do not apply to the testimony of a witness whose presence is required under this subsection. (3) Subsections (a), (b), and (c) of this section apply in a proceeding to revoke a defendant’s probation or work release only when a copy of the report of the laboratory test or the statement to be introduced is mailed, delivered, or made available to counsel for the defendant or to the defendant personally when the defendant is not represented by counsel, at least 10 days prior to the introduction of the report of the laboratory test or the statement at the hearing.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-915

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)” means the molecules in all cellular forms that contain genetic information in a chemical structure of each individual. (3) “DNA profile” means an analysis of genetic loci that have been validated according to standards established by: (i) The Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (TWGDAM); (ii) The DNA Advisory Board of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (iii) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories; or (iv) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for DNA Databasing Laboratories. (b) A DNA profile is admissible under this section if it is accompanied by a statement from the testing laboratory setting forth that the analysis of genetic loci has been validated by: (1) Standards established by TWGDAM; (2) Standards established by the DNA Advisory Board of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; (3) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories; or (4) The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for DNA Databasing Laboratories. (c) In any criminal proceeding, the evidence of a DNA profile is admissible to prove or disprove the identity of any person, if the party seeking to introduce the evidence of a DNA profile: (1) Notifies in writing the other party or parties by mail at least 45 days before any criminal proceeding; and (2) Provides, if applicable and requested in writing, the other party or parties at least 30 days before any criminal proceeding with: (i) First generation film copy or suitable reproductions of autoradiographs, dot blots, slot blots, silver stained gels, test strips, control strips, and any other results generated in the course of the analysis; (ii) Copies of laboratory notes generated in connection with the analysis, including chain of custody documents, sizing and hybridization information, statistical calculations, and worksheets; (iii) Laboratory protocols and procedures utilized in the analysis; (iv) The identification of each genetic locus analyzed; and (v) A statement setting forth the genotype data and the profile frequencies for the databases utilized. (d) If a party is unable to provide the information required under subsection (c) of this section at least 30 days prior to the criminal proceedings, the court may grant a continuance to permit such timely disclosures. (e) Except as to the issue of admissibility under this section, subsection (c) of this section does not preclude discovery under the Maryland Rules relating to discovery, upon a showing of scientific relevance to a material issue regarding the DNA profile.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-916

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Battered Spouse Syndrome” means the psychological condition of a victim of repeated physical and psychological abuse by a spouse, former spouse, cohabitant, or former cohabitant which is also recognized in the medical and scientific community as the “Battered Woman’s Syndrome”. (3) “Defendant” means an individual charged with: (i) First degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, or attempt to commit any of these crimes; or (ii) Assault in the first degree. (b) Notwithstanding evidence that the defendant was the first aggressor, used excessive force, or failed to retreat at the time of the alleged offense, when the defendant raises the issue that the defendant was, at the time of the alleged offense, suffering from the Battered Spouse Syndrome as a result of the past course of conduct of the individual who is the victim of the crime for which the defendant has been charged, the court may admit for the purpose of explaining the defendant’s motive or state of mind, or both, at the time of the commission of the alleged offense: (1) Evidence of repeated physical and psychological abuse of the defendant perpetrated by an individual who is the victim of a crime for which the defendant has been charged; and (2) Expert testimony on the Battered Spouse Syndrome.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-917

A written statement of expenses or a bill shall be taken as prima facie evidence at a restitution hearing as provided under § 11-615 of the Criminal Procedure Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-918

(a) Subject to subsections (b) and (c) of this section, a party who is otherwise entitled to sue and recover upon or under any promissory note, bill of exchange, bill of lading, warehouse or storage receipt, or other negotiable instrument, is not precluded from recovering by reason of the party’s inability to produce the instrument in evidence at the trial or surrender the instrument to the defendant. (b) The absence of an instrument described in subsection (a) of this section must be sufficiently accounted for under the rules of evidence to allow the introduction of secondary proof of the contents of the instrument at the trial. (c) (1) A judgment may not be entered for the plaintiff in a suit described in subsection (a) of this section until a sufficient bond has been filed in the suit by the plaintiff. (2) The bond shall provide for the penalty and surety approved by the court, and conditioned on holding the defendant harmless on satisfaction of the judgment by the defendant as if the missing instrument were then produced and surrendered to the defendant.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-919

(a) After all right to appeal has been exhausted, a judgment of conviction establishing criminal accountability for the felonious and intentional killing of a decedent: (1) Is admissible in a civil proceeding in which the common law Slayer’s Rule is raised as an issue; and (2) Conclusively establishes that the convicted individual feloniously and intentionally killed the decedent. (b) This section may not be construed to prohibit a trier of fact, in the absence of a criminal conviction, from determining by a preponderance of the evidence in a civil proceeding that a killing was felonious and intentional.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-920

(a) In this section, “health care provider” has the meaning stated in § 3-2A-01 of this article. (b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, in a proceeding subject to Title 3, Subtitle 2A of this article or a civil action against a health care provider, an expression of regret or apology made by or on behalf of the health care provider, including an expression of regret or apology made in writing, orally, or by conduct, is inadmissible as evidence of an admission of liability or as evidence of an admission against interest. (2) An admission of liability or fault that is part of or in addition to a communication made under paragraph (1) of this subsection is admissible as evidence of an admission of liability or as evidence of an admission against interest in an action described under paragraph (1) of this subsection.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-921

(a) In an action against an insurer or the Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund under a policy providing uninsured motor vehicle liability coverage, the person asserting the uninsured status of a motor vehicle shall have the burden to prove that status. (b) For a motor vehicle registered in the State on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose, the burden of proof shall be deemed satisfied when the person asserting the uninsured status of the motor vehicle introduces: (1) A certified copy of the official record of the Motor Vehicle Administration for that motor vehicle indicating the absence of a record that the motor vehicle was covered by the security required by § 17-104 of the Transportation Article on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose; or (2) A denial of coverage based on the absence of an in-force policy of insurance covering the vehicle on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose by the insurer that has been identified as the insurer of the motor vehicle: (i) By the Motor Vehicle Administration; (ii) In writing, if any, by the driver or owner of the motor vehicle; and (iii) In a report, if any, prepared by an officer of a federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agency who investigated the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose. (c) For a motor vehicle registered outside the State on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose, the burden of proof shall be deemed satisfied when the person asserting the uninsured status of the motor vehicle introduces: (1) A certified copy of the official records of the governmental unit, if any, that maintains records of insurance coverage for motor vehicles registered in that state indicating the absence of a record that the motor vehicle was covered by insurance on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose; or (2) A denial of coverage based on the absence of an in-force policy of insurance covering the vehicle on the date of the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose by the insurer that has been identified as the insurer of the vehicle: (i) By the governmental unit, if any, that maintains records of whether motor vehicles in the state are insured; (ii) In writing, if any, by the driver or owner of the motor vehicle; and (iii) In a report, if any, prepared by an officer of a federal, state, county, or municipal law enforcement agency who investigated the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose. (d) If a person satisfies the burden of proof under subsection (b) or (c) of this section, the finder of fact shall find the motor vehicle at issue to be uninsured, unless an adverse party establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that the motor vehicle or the driver of the motor vehicle was covered by a valid, enforceable motor vehicle liability insurance policy, bond, or security that provides coverage for the occurrence out of which the cause of action arose.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-922

A statement made during the course of an initial appearance of a defendant before a District Court commissioner in accordance with Maryland Rule 4–213 may not be used as evidence against the defendant in a criminal proceeding or juvenile proceeding.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-923

(a) In this section, “sexually assaultive behavior” means an act that would constitute: (1) A sexual crime under Title 3, Subtitle 3 of the Criminal Law Article; (2) Sexual abuse of a minor under § 3–602 of the Criminal Law Article; (3) Sexual abuse of a vulnerable adult under § 3–604 of the Criminal Law Article; (4) A violation of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 109A; or (5) A violation of a law of another state, the United States, or a foreign country that is equivalent to an offense under item (1), (2), (3), or (4) of this subsection. (b) In a criminal trial for a sexual offense listed in subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, evidence of other sexually assaultive behavior by the defendant occurring before or after the offense for which the defendant is on trial may be admissible, in accordance with this section. (c) (1) The State shall file a motion of intent to introduce evidence of sexually assaultive behavior at least 90 days before trial or at a later time if authorized by the court for good cause. (2) A motion filed under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall include a description of the evidence. (3) The State shall provide a copy of a motion filed under paragraph (1) of this subsection to the defendant and include any other information required to be disclosed under Maryland Rule 4–262 or 4–263. (d) The court shall hold a hearing outside the presence of a jury to determine the admissibility of evidence of sexually assaultive behavior. (e) The court may admit evidence of sexually assaultive behavior if the court finds and states on the record that: (1) The evidence is being offered to: (i) Prove lack of consent; or (ii) Rebut an express or implied allegation that a minor victim fabricated the sexual offense; (2) The defendant had an opportunity to confront and cross–examine the witness or witnesses testifying to the sexually assaultive behavior; (3) The sexually assaultive behavior was proven by clear and convincing evidence; and (4) The probative value of the evidence is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-924

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) (i) “Benefit” means any consideration given to an in–custody witness, or to a third party at the request of or on behalf of the in–custody witness, in return for testimony from the in–custody witness in a criminal proceeding against a suspect or defendant. (ii) “Benefit” includes an offer by a State’s Attorney to: 1. Recommend or agree not to oppose a more favorable release status; 2. Recommend or agree not to oppose a motion for modification or reduction of a sentence; 3. Provide information to the Division of Parole and Probation to assist the in–custody witness or a third party in obtaining a favorable action by a probation agent, a parole officer, or the Parole Commission; 4. Provide immunity in a criminal proceeding; 5. Dismiss outstanding criminal charges, criminal prosecutions, or parole or probation violations; 6. Provide financial assistance; or 7. Provide any assistance in obtaining an amelioration of custodial conditions, status, or conditions of incarceration. (3) (i) “In–custody witness” means an individual, other than an accomplice or a co–defendant, who: 1. Is incarcerated at the time that the individual offers or provides testimony against a suspect or defendant; and 2. Receives, or has an expectation of receiving, a benefit in return for the testimony. (ii) “In–custody witness” does not include a confidential informant who does not provide testimony against a suspect or defendant. (b) (1) If a State’s Attorney obtains testimony from an in–custody witness, the State’s Attorney shall record in writing: (i) The substance of the in–custody witness’s testimony, even if the testimony is not presented in a court proceeding; (ii) The purpose for which the State’s Attorney used the testimony; and (iii) Whether the in–custody witness received a benefit and, if so, what the benefit is or will be. (2) A State’s Attorney shall report any information recorded under paragraph (1) of this subsection to the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy. (3) The information recorded and reported under this subsection is not subject to disclosure under the Maryland Public Information Act. (c) (1) The Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy shall securely store and maintain the information reported under subsection (b)(2) of this section. (2) The Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy may disclose the information stored and maintained under paragraph (1) of this subsection only to: (i) A State’s Attorney, or a State’s Attorney’s designee; (ii) The Attorney General, or the Attorney General’s designee; and (iii) The State Prosecutor, or the State Prosecutor’s designee. (d) (1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, within 30 days after the earlier of the appearance of counsel or the first appearance of the defendant before the court, the State’s Attorney shall disclose to the defendant, or an attorney for the defendant, all material and information required for disclosure under Maryland Rule 4–263, including: (i) Any benefits an in–custody witness has received, or expects to receive, in exchange for providing testimony; (ii) The substance, time, and place of any statement: 1. Allegedly made by a suspect or defendant to the in–custody witness; or 2. Made by an in–custody witness to law enforcement implicating the suspect or defendant; and (iii) Other cases in which the in–custody witness testified, provided that the testimony can be ascertained through reasonable inquiry, and whether the in–custody witness received a benefit in exchange for providing the testimony in those other cases. (2) (i) The court may grant the State’s Attorney an extension under paragraph (1) of this subsection if the court finds that the material or information could not have been discovered or obtained by the State after the exercise of due diligence within the prescribed period of time. (ii) On a finding of good cause, the court may: 1. Set a reasonable period of time for disclosure; or 2. Continue the trial to allow for a reasonable period of time for disclosure. (e) Prior to admitting testimony of an in–custody witness, the court shall conduct a hearing, at the request of the defendant, to ensure that the State’s Attorney has disclosed all material and information related to the in–custody witness as required under subsection (d) of this section and Maryland Rule 4–263. (f) If an in–custody witness receives a sentence reduction or modification, a favorable release status, immunity in a criminal proceeding, dismissal or a criminal charge, or other leniency or incentive in exchange for testimony, this information shall be provided to any victim in the in–custody witness’s case.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-925

(a) In this section, “sexually assaultive behavior” has the meaning stated in § 10–923 of this subtitle. (b) Information that physical evidence of sexually assaultive behavior was obtained using materials that were sold, offered for sale, or distributed in a manner that would constitute a violation of § 14–4602 of the Commercial Law Article is not admissible in a criminal or civil proceeding involving an allegation of sexually assaultive behavior. (c) This section may not be construed to require a court to admit physical evidence.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1001

For the purpose of establishing that physical evidence in a criminal or civil proceeding constitutes a particular controlled dangerous substance under Title 5 of the Criminal Law Article, a report signed by the chemist or analyst who performed the test or tests as to its nature is prima facie evidence that the material delivered to the chemist or analyst was properly tested under procedures approved by the Maryland Department of Health, that those procedures are legally reliable, that the material was delivered to the chemist or analyst by the officer or person stated in the report, and that the material was or contained the substance therein stated, without the necessity of the chemist or analyst personally appearing in court, provided the report identifies the chemist or analyst as an individual certified by the Maryland Department of Health, the Department of State Police, the Baltimore City Police Department, or any county police department employing analysts of controlled dangerous substances, as qualified under standards approved by the Maryland Department of Health to analyze those substances, states that the chemist or analyst made an analysis of the material under procedures approved by that department, and also states that the substance, in the opinion of the chemist or analyst, is or contains the particular controlled dangerous substance specified. Nothing in this section precludes the right of any party to introduce any evidence supporting or contradicting the evidence contained in or the presumptions raised by the report.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1002

(a) In this part: (1) “Chain of custody” means: (i) The seizing officer; (ii) The packaging officer, if the packaging officer is not also the seizing officer; and (iii) The chemist or other person who actually touched the substance and not merely the outer sealed package in which the substance was placed by the law enforcement agency before or during the analysis of the substance; and (2) “Chain of custody” does not include a person who handled the substance in any form after analysis of the substance. (b) (1) For the purpose of establishing, in a criminal or civil proceeding, the chain of physical custody or control of evidence consisting of or containing a substance tested or analyzed to determine whether it is a controlled dangerous substance under Title 5 of the Criminal Law Article, a statement signed by each successive person in the chain of custody that the person delivered it to the other person indicated on or about the date stated is prima facie evidence that the person had custody and made the delivery as stated, without the necessity of a personal appearance in court by the person signing the statement. (2) The statement shall contain a sufficient description of the material or its container so as to distinguish it as the particular item in question and shall state that the material was delivered in essentially the same condition as received. (3) The statement may be placed on the same document as the report provided for in § 10-1001 of this part. (4) Nothing in this section precludes the right of any party to introduce any evidence supporting or contradicting the evidence contained in or the presumption raised by the statement.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1003

(a) (1) In a criminal proceeding, the prosecution shall, upon written demand of a defendant filed in the proceedings at least 5 days prior to a trial in the proceeding, require the presence of the chemist, analyst, or any person in the chain of custody as a prosecution witness. (2) The provisions of §§ 10-1001 and 10-1002 of this part concerning prima facie evidence do not apply to the testimony of that witness. (3) The provisions of §§ 10-1001 and 10-1002 of this part are applicable in a criminal proceeding only when a copy of the report or statement to be introduced is mailed, delivered, or made available to counsel for the defendant or to the defendant personally when the defendant is not represented by counsel, at least 10 days prior to the introduction of the report or statement at trial. (b) Nothing contained in this part shall prevent the defendant from summoning a witness mentioned in this part as a witness for the defense.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1004

(a) (1) In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. (2) “Medical examiner’s case” has the meaning stated in § 5–301(c) of the Health – General Article. (3) “Mortician” has the meaning stated in § 7–101(s) of the Health Occupations Article. (b) (1) In a criminal proceeding for a death which is a medical examiner’s case, the chain of physical custody and control may be established by a signed statement by the mortician, or the mortician’s agent, servant, or employee, who transported the body to the medical examiner’s office, without the necessity of the personal appearance in court by the person who signed the statement. (2) The statement shall contain: (i) A description of the initial condition of the body when it was taken into custody by the mortician or the mortician’s agent, servant, or employee; (ii) A statement that the body was delivered to the medical examiner on a certain date on or about a certain time; and (iii) A statement that the body was in essentially the same condition when delivered to the medical examiner as when it was taken into custody. (3) A statement is prima facie evidence of the facts stated. (c) (1) If the State intends to offer the statement without the testimony of the mortician, or the mortician’s agent, servant, or employee, the State shall, at least 25 days before trial, give the defendant or the defendant’s attorney notice of its intention and deliver a copy of the statement. (2) If the defendant desires that the mortician or the mortician’s agent, servant, or employee, be present and testify at trial, the defendant shall notify the State at least 15 days before trial. If a timely notice is given, the statement is inadmissible without the testimony of the mortician, or the mortician’s agent, servant, or employee. (d) Nothing in this section precludes the right of a party to introduce any evidence supporting or contradicting the evidence contained in the statement.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1101

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated. (b) “Beneficiary” means an individual who may bring an action for wrongful death under Title 3, Subtitle 9 of this article. (c) “Claimant” means: (1) A person who alleges damages as a result of a tort involving bodily injury or an attorney who represents the person; or (2) A personal representative of the estate of a decedent who died as a result of an alleged tort or an attorney who represents the personal representative of the estate of the decedent. (d) “Insurer” includes a property and casualty insurer, a self–insurance plan, or any person required to provide indemnification for a claim for wrongful death, personal injury, or property damage. (e) “Vehicle” has the meaning stated in § 11–176 of the Transportation Article.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1102

After a claimant files a written tort claim and provides the documentation described in § 10–1103 or § 10–1104 of this subtitle to an insurer, the claimant may obtain from the insurer documentation of the applicable limits of coverage in any automobile insurance policy, homeowner’s insurance policy, or renter’s insurance policy under which the insurer may be liable to: (1) Satisfy all or part of the claim; or (2) Indemnify or reimburse for payments made to satisfy the claim.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1103

(a) This section does not apply to a claim described under § 10–1104 of this subtitle. (b) A claimant may obtain the documentation described in § 10–1102 of this subtitle if the claimant provides in writing to the insurer: (1) The date of the alleged tort; (2) The name and last known address of the alleged tortfeasor; (3) A copy of any vehicle accident report, police report, or other official report concerning the alleged tort, if available; (4) The insurer’s claim number, if available; and (5) A letter from an attorney admitted to practice law in the State certifying that: (i) The attorney has made reasonable efforts to investigate the underlying facts of the claim; and (ii) Based on the attorney’s investigation, the attorney reasonably believes that the claim is not frivolous.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1104

(a) This section applies to a claim by the estate of a decedent who died as a result of an alleged tort or a beneficiary of the decedent. (b) A claimant may obtain the documentation described in § 10–1102 of this subtitle if the claimant provides in writing to the insurer: (1) The date of the alleged tort; (2) The name and last known address of the alleged tortfeasor; (3) A copy of any vehicle accident report, police report, or other official report concerning the alleged tort, if available; (4) The insurer’s claim number, if available; (5) A copy of the decedent’s death certificate issued in the State or another jurisdiction; (6) A copy of the letters of administration issued to appoint the personal representative of the decedent’s estate in the State or a substantially similar document issued by another jurisdiction; (7) The name of each beneficiary of the decedent, if known; (8) The relationship to the decedent of each known beneficiary of the decedent; and (9) A letter from an attorney admitted to practice law in the State certifying that: (i) The attorney has made reasonable efforts to investigate the underlying facts of the claim; and (ii) Based on the attorney’s investigation, the attorney reasonably believes that the claim is not frivolous.

Md. Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 10-1105

(a) An insurer shall provide in writing the documentation described under § 10–1102 of this subtitle within 30 days after the date of a request in accordance with § 10–1103 or § 10–1104 of this subtitle, regardless of whether the insurer contests the applicability of coverage to a claim. (b) An insurer, and the employees and agents of an insurer, may not be civilly or criminally liable for the disclosure of documentation required under this subtitle. (c) Disclosure of the documentation under this subtitle does not constitute: (1) An admission that a claim is subject to the applicable agreement between the insurer and the alleged tortfeasor; or (2) A waiver of any term or condition of the applicable agreement between the insurer and the alleged tortfeasor or any right of the insurer, including any potential defense concerning coverage or liability. (d) Documentation disclosed under this subtitle is not admissible as evidence at trial by reason of its disclosure under this subtitle.

Source: Open US Law by Vaquill AI (CC BY 4.0)URL: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatutesFetched: 10/16/2026