Recent Blog Posts
House Bill 21 (HB21): New 2025 Maryland Bill Aims to Restrict Arrest Warrants Based on Citizen Complaints
If passed, a new bill put forth by the Maryland lawmakers seeks to end the ability of a district court commissioner to issue a warrant on a complaint made to them by a citizen.
In the 2025 Regular Session, the Maryland General Assembly introduced House Bill 21 (HB21), aiming to reform the state's arrest warrant procedures. This legislation seeks to prohibit District Court commissioners from issuing arrest warrants to individuals other than police officers or State's Attorneys when they seek to have another person charged with a crime. Additionally, it proposes increasing the penalty for making false statements or reports to governmental officials from a maximum of six months to up to three years of imprisonment, while retaining the existing maximum fine of $500.
Statute of Limitations for Child Pornography Possession in Maryland
In the realm of criminal law, statutes of limitations play a crucial role in defining the time frame within which legal proceedings must be initiated. These statutes are designed to ensure timely and efficient prosecution while also protecting individuals from facing charges long after the alleged offense. In Maryland, the statutes of limitations for various crimes are clearly outlined in state law. However, when it comes to the possession of child pornography, the state adopts a distinct approach, setting it apart from most misdemeanors. This blog explores the statutory nuances, legislative intent, and legal implications surrounding Maryland's two-year statute of limitations for child pornography possession, contrasting it with the one-year statute for most misdemeanors.
Statutory Framework
The statute of limitations for criminal offenses in Maryland is governed by the Maryland Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article. For most misdemeanors, the statute of limitations is explicitly stated in § 5-106(a) of the Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Code:
Maryland Law on Cannabis Odor Searches and Its Non-Retroactivity
In 2023, Maryland enacted a pivotal law preventing police officers from stopping and searching vehicles solely based on the odor of cannabis. This legislation marked a significant shift in the state's approach to cannabis-related offenses, reflecting a broader trend towards decriminalization and sensible drug policy. However, a recent ruling has clarified that this law does not apply retroactively, raising important legal questions and implications for individuals previously charged or convicted under the old legal framework.
Background of the 2023 Law
The 2023 Maryland law is part of a wave of reforms addressing the criminal justice system's handling of cannabis. Before this change, the odor of cannabis alone was sufficient grounds for law enforcement to conduct a vehicle stop and search. This policy often led to numerous traffic stops, disproportionately affecting minority communities and contributing to an overburdened legal system.
Changes in Maryland’s DUI Law: Ignition Interlocks for All Convictions
In recent years, driving under the influence (DUI) has been a significant public safety issue in Maryland, as it has been across the United States. To curb the devastating effects of drunk driving, Maryland has implemented stringent measures over the years. One of the most notable changes soon to take effect is the mandatory use of ignition interlocks for all persons convicted of DUI, including those who receive probation before judgment (PBJ).
Understanding the New DUI Legislation
Ignition interlock devices are designed to prevent a vehicle from starting if the driver has been drinking. The device requires the driver to blow into it, and if alcohol is detected above a pre-set limit, the vehicle will not start. This technology has been an essential tool in reducing repeat offenses among convicted drunk drivers.
Previously, Maryland required ignition interlocks for certain categories of DUI offenders, such as repeat offenders, those with particularly high blood alcohol content (BAC), or drivers who caused an accident while under the influence. However, the new law extends this requirement to all DUI convictions, including first-time offenders and those granted probation before judgment.
Upcoming Changes in Maryland's Rape Statutes: A New Era for Consent Laws
Maryland is on the brink of significant legal reforms regarding its rape statutes, marking a pivotal moment in the state's approach to sexual assault cases. These changes, driven by recent legislative efforts and the advocacy of various groups, aim to redefine how consent is understood and legally validated in the state.
Key Legislative Changes
- House Bill 496: Redefining Consent and Removing Force Requirement In a groundbreaking move, Maryland's General Assembly passed House Bill 496, which Governor Wes Moore is set to sign into law. This bill eliminates the requirement for prosecutors to prove "force or threat of force" in second-degree rape cases. Instead, it introduces a clear statutory definition of consent, emphasizing that sexual acts must involve clear and voluntary agreement from all parties involved (MCASA) (Maryland General Assembly).
Legal Representation for Juvenile Offenders: A Parent's Guide
In 2022, Maryland implemented significant reforms in its juvenile justice system, aimed at prioritizing rehabilitation over punishment for young offenders. These reforms included provisions requiring the presence of an attorney during juvenile interrogations and setting a minimum age for charging juvenile offenders with non-violent offenses, typically at 13 years old. Despite these positive changes, juveniles can still face serious consequences, including being charged as adults for certain crimes.
Under Maryland law, juveniles as young as 14 can be treated as adults in the criminal justice system, particularly for violent offenses or gun-related crimes. This means they may miss out on the rehabilitation opportunities offered by the juvenile system and instead face lengthy jail sentences. For instance, consider the recent case of a 14-year-old who was convicted of shooting a man in Baltimore.
Vehicle Searches in Maryland: Odor of Marijuana Alone is No Longer Probable Cause
July 1, 2023, marked a significant milestone in Maryland's cannabis legislation. On this date, the state took a bold step towards reforming its marijuana laws, effectively precluding police from searching a vehicle solely based on the odor of marijuana. This groundbreaking change has far-reaching implications for both law enforcement and individuals in Maryland, as it prioritizes personal freedoms and aligns with the evolving nationwide perspective on cannabis. Vehicle searches now require more evidence.
The Evolution of Cannabis Laws in Maryland
Maryland's journey toward cannabis reform has been marked by gradual progress. Prior to July 1, 2023, marijuana was decriminalized in the state, meaning that individuals caught possessing less than 10 grams faced civil fines rather than criminal charges. Medical marijuana was legalized in 2014, providing patients with a legal avenue for accessing cannabis products to treat various medical conditions.
Cannabis Laws Changes in Maryland Impact Drug Dog Alerts
In recent years, the landscape of cannabis laws in the United States has been rapidly evolving, with many states adopting more permissive attitudes toward its use and possession. Maryland, like several other states, has taken significant steps to decriminalize and regulate cannabis. These changes have had a profound effect on various aspects of law enforcement, including how police dogs are used to detect controlled dangerous substances (CDS) during vehicle stops. In this blog post, we will explore the recent changes in Maryland's cannabis laws and their implications for police dog alerts on vehicles suspected of carrying CDS.
Maryland's Evolving Cannabis Laws
Maryland has witnessed a transformation in its cannabis laws over the past decade. In 2013, Maryland legalized medical cannabis, allowing patients with qualifying conditions to access medical marijuana through licensed dispensaries. Subsequently, in 2014, the state decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana, making it a civil offense with a fine rather than a criminal offense. These early steps laid the groundwork for more substantial changes in the following years.
Landmark Decision: Maryland Supreme Court Curtails the Use of Bullet Evidence in Courts
In a new and groundbreaking ruling, the Maryland Supreme Court in Abruquah v. Maryland, handed down a decision that sets limits on the use of bullet evidence in courts across the state. This landmark ruling has sparked debates among legal experts and citizens alike, as it raises crucial questions about the reliability and admissibility of such evidence. In this article, we will delve into the implications of this decision and its potential impact on the criminal justice system.
Bullet evidence, often presented in the form of ballistics analysis, has long been considered a vital tool in criminal investigations and prosecutions. By matching bullets found at crime scenes to firearms, experts have played a crucial role in linking suspects to specific weapons. This evidence has been admissible in Maryland courts for years, often carrying significant weight in determining guilt or innocence.
Affirmative Defenses for Child Pornography Cases
Child pornography is a serious crime in Maryland, and those convicted of this offense can face harsh penalties, including imprisonment, fines, and registration as a sex offender. If you have been accused of possessing, distributing, or producing child pornography in Maryland, you may be wondering if there are any affirmative defenses for child pornography that could potentially help you avoid conviction.
In this blog post, we will discuss some of the affirmative defenses that may be available in Maryland for criminal child pornography charges. However, it is important to note that each case is unique, and whether or not a particular defense applies will depend on the specific circumstances of your case.
Affirmative Defenses to Child Pornography Charges
1. Lack of knowledge or intent
One possible defense to a child pornography charge is to argue that you did not know that the materials in question contained images of minors engaged in sexual activity. In order to prove that you possessed or distributed child pornography, the prosecution must demonstrate that you had knowledge of the illegal content. If you can demonstrate that you did not know that the materials contained illegal content, you may be able to avoid a conviction.
111 S. Calvert St., Suite 2805
Baltimore, MD 21202
Phone: 410-837-0020
Fax: 410-837-7230
From our law offices in Baltimore, the criminal defense law attorneys of Craig M. Kadish & Associates, LLC represent clients throughout Maryland, including Annapolis, Bel Air, Bethesda, Bowie, Catonsville, Cockeysville, Columbia, Dundalk, Ellicott City, Essex, Frederick, Gaithersburg, Greenbelt, Hagerstown, Owings Mills, Parkville, Pikesville, Randallstown, Reisterstown, Rockville, Silver Spring, Timonium, Towson, Upper Marlboro, Westminster, and White Marsh.
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
© 2025 Craig M. Kadish & Associates, LLC
