Title 10. Evidence — Subtitle 9. Miscellaneous Rules

During the trial of a criminal case in which the defendant is charged with a felony or an assault in the second degree, 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.

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:

A statement may not be admitted under this section unless:

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.

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.

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.

The provisions of this section do not apply to the proof of the execution of a last will and testament or codicil.

If a plat is authenticated, it may be considered as evidence.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Acts of exclusive user and ownership are admissible to prove possession. Actual evidence of enclosure is not necessary for this proof.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

A report of a laboratory test described under this section shall:

A report of a laboratory test is prima facie evidence of the results of the laboratory test.

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.

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.

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:

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:

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.

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.

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:

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.

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.

After all right to appeal has been exhausted, a judgment of conviction establishing criminal accountability for the felonious and intentional killing of a decedent:

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.

In this section, “health care provider” has the meaning stated in § 3-2A-01 of this article.

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.

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:

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:

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.

In this section, “sexually assaultive behavior” means an act that would constitute:

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.

The court shall hold a hearing outside the presence of a jury to determine the admissibility of evidence of sexually assaultive behavior.

The court may admit evidence of sexually assaultive behavior if the court finds and states on the record that:

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.

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.

In this section, “sexually assaultive behavior” has the meaning stated in § 10–923 of this subtitle.

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.

This section may not be construed to require a court to admit physical evidence.

In any criminal proceeding or juvenile proceeding, the creative expression of a defendant or respondent is not admissible against the defendant or respondent unless the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that:

Nothing in this section precludes the admission of creative expression in juvenile cases for the purposes of evaluating, recommending, or ordering referral to mental health services or diversion programs.