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: The Maryland Rules of Evidence are strictly applied; and 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. A statement may not be admitted under this section unless: The statement was: Given under oath subject to the penalty of perjury at a trial, hearing, or other proceeding or in a deposition; Reduced to writing and signed by the declarant; or Recorded in substantially verbatim fashion by stenographic or electronic means contemporaneously with the making of the statement; and 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: The intention to offer the statement; The particulars of the statement; and The identity of the witness through whom the statement will be offered.

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.

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.

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.

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. 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. 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 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.

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.

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.

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.

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: 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; Be signed by the chemist or analyst who performed the laboratory test; and Contain a statement that: 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; The procedures of the laboratory test are reliable; and The laboratory test indicates that the defendant used a controlled dangerous substance or alcohol. 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. 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. 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. 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.

In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. “Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)” means the molecules in all cellular forms that contain genetic information in a chemical structure of each individual. “DNA profile” means an analysis of genetic loci that have been validated according to standards established by: The Technical Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods (TWGDAM); The DNA Advisory Board of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories; or The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for DNA Databasing Laboratories. 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: Standards established by TWGDAM; Standards established by the DNA Advisory Board of the Federal Bureau of Investigation; The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for Forensic DNA Testing Laboratories; or The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Quality Assurance Standards for DNA Databasing Laboratories. 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: Notifies in writing the other party or parties by mail at least 45 days before any criminal proceeding; and Provides, if applicable and requested in writing, the other party or parties at least 30 days before any criminal proceeding with: 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; Copies of laboratory notes generated in connection with the analysis, including chain of custody documents, sizing and hybridization information, statistical calculations, and worksheets; Laboratory protocols and procedures utilized in the analysis; The identification of each genetic locus analyzed; and A statement setting forth the genotype data and the profile frequencies for the databases utilized. 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.

In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. “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”. “Defendant” means an individual charged with: First degree murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, or attempt to commit any of these crimes; or Assault in the first degree. 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: 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 Expert testimony on the Battered Spouse Syndrome.

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.

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. 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. 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.

After all right to appeal has been exhausted, a judgment of conviction establishing criminal accountability for the felonious and intentional killing of a decedent: Is admissible in a civil proceeding in which the common law Slayer’s Rule is raised as an issue; and Conclusively establishes that the convicted individual feloniously and intentionally killed the 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. 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. 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.

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: 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 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: By the Motor Vehicle Administration; In writing, if any, by the driver or owner of the motor vehicle; and 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. 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: 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 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: By the governmental unit, if any, that maintains records of whether motor vehicles in the state are insured; In writing, if any, by the driver or owner of the motor vehicle; and 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. 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.

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.

In this section, “sexually assaultive behavior” means an act that would constitute: A sexual crime under Title 3, Subtitle 3 of the Criminal Law Article; Sexual abuse of a minor under § 3–602 of the Criminal Law Article; Sexual abuse of a vulnerable adult under § 3–604 of the Criminal Law Article; A violation of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 109A; or 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. 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 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. A motion filed under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall include a description of the evidence. 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. 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: The evidence is being offered to: Prove lack of consent; or Rebut an express or implied allegation that a minor victim fabricated the sexual offense; The defendant had an opportunity to confront and cross–examine the witness or witnesses testifying to the sexually assaultive behavior; The sexually assaultive behavior was proven by clear and convincing evidence; and The probative value of the evidence is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.

In this section the following words have the meanings indicated. “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. “Benefit” includes an offer by a State’s Attorney to: Recommend or agree not to oppose a more favorable release status; Recommend or agree not to oppose a motion for modification or reduction of a sentence; 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; Provide immunity in a criminal proceeding; Dismiss outstanding criminal charges, criminal prosecutions, or parole or probation violations; Provide financial assistance; or Provide any assistance in obtaining an amelioration of custodial conditions, status, or conditions of incarceration. “In–custody witness” means an individual, other than an accomplice or a co–defendant, who: Is incarcerated at the time that the individual offers or provides testimony against a suspect or defendant; and Receives, or has an expectation of receiving, a benefit in return for the testimony. “In–custody witness” does not include a confidential informant who does not provide testimony against a suspect or defendant. If a State’s Attorney obtains testimony from an in–custody witness, the State’s Attorney shall record in writing: The substance of the in–custody witness’s testimony, even if the testimony is not presented in a court proceeding; The purpose for which the State’s Attorney used the testimony; and Whether the in–custody witness received a benefit and, if so, what the benefit is or will be. 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. The information recorded and reported under this subsection is not subject to disclosure under the Maryland Public Information Act. The Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy shall securely store and maintain the information reported under subsection (b)(2) of this section. The Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy may disclose the information stored and maintained under paragraph (1) of this subsection only to: A State’s Attorney, or a State’s Attorney’s designee; The Attorney General, or the Attorney General’s designee; and The State Prosecutor, or the State Prosecutor’s designee. 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: Any benefits an in–custody witness has received, or expects to receive, in exchange for providing testimony; The substance, time, and place of any statement: Allegedly made by a suspect or defendant to the in–custody witness; or Made by an in–custody witness to law enforcement implicating the suspect or defendant; and 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. 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. On a finding of good cause, the court may: Set a reasonable period of time for disclosure; or Continue the trial to allow for a reasonable period of time for disclosure. 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 this section, “creative expression” means the expression or application of creativity or imagination in the production or arrangement of forms, sounds, words, movements, or symbols that is eligible for federal copyright protection under 17 U.S.C. § 102. “Creative expression” includes: Music; Dance; Performance art; Visual art; Poetry; Literature; and Film. 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: The defendant or respondent intended the creative expression to be literal, rather than figurative or fictional; or If the creative expression is derivative, the defendant intended to adopt the literal meaning of the creative expression as their own; There is a close temporal and factual nexus between the creative expression and the alleged offense; The creative expression is relevant to a disputed issue of fact; and The probative value of the creative expression outweighs its prejudicial effect. 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.