Back to Maryland

SB0661 • 2026

Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance - Intercepted Communications - Admissibility of Evidence

Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance - Intercepted Communications - Admissibility of Evidence

Crime Privacy
Passed Legislature

This bill passed both chambers and reached final enrollment, even if later executive action is not shown here.

Sponsor
Senators Love , Charles , Henson , McKay , Smith , Sydnor , Waldstreicher , West , Folden , James , and Muse
Last action
2026-03-26
Official status
In the House - Hearing 3/31 at 1:00 p.m.
Effective date
2026-10-01

Plain English Breakdown

Using official source text because the generated explanation was unavailable or could not be confirmed against the official bill text.

Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance - Intercepted Communications - Admissibility of Evidence

Authorizing a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication that is a recording or part of a recording of the commission or attempted commission of a certain crime; providing that the contents of a certain intercepted communication and evidence derived from the communication may be received in evidence in a criminal trial or hearing before the District Court or circuit court under certain circumstances; and providing for a certain affirmative defense to a charge under the wiretap statute.

What This Bill Does

  • Authorizing a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication that is a recording or part of a recording of the commission or attempted commission of a certain crime; providing that the contents of a certain intercepted communication and evidence derived from the communication may be received in evidence in a criminal trial or hearing before the District Court or circuit court under certain circumstances; and providing for a certain affirmative defense to a charge under the wiretap statute.

Limits and Unknowns

  • This entry is temporarily using official source text because the generated explanation could not be confirmed against the official bill text during the last sync.

Amendments

These notes stay tied to the official amendment files and metadata from the legislature.

643622/1

None

Favorable with Amendments { 643622/1 Adopted

Plain English: AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL 661 (First Reading File Bill) AMENDMENT NO.

  • AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL 661 (First Reading File Bill) AMENDMENT NO.
  • 1 On page 1, in the sponsor line, strike “and West” and substitute “West, Folden, James, and Muse”.
  • AMENDMENT NO.
  • 2 On page 1, in line 4, after the first “of” insert “authorizing a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication that is a recording or part of a recording of the commission or attempted commission of a certain crime; ”; in line 6, after “circumstances;” insert “ providing for a certain affirmative defense to a charge under the wiretap statute;”; and after line 7, insert: “BY repealing and reenacting, without amendments, Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings Section 10–402(a) and (b) Annotated Code of Maryland (2020 Replacement Volume and 2025 Supplement) BY adding to Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings Section 10–402(c)(12) Annotated Code of Maryland (2020 Replacement Volume and 2025 Supplement)”.

Bill History

  1. 2026-03-26 House

    Hearing 3/31 at 1:00 p.m.

  2. 2026-03-20 Senate

    Favorable with Amendments Report by Judicial Proceedings

  3. 2026-03-10 House

    Referred Judiciary

  4. 2026-03-05 Senate

    Third Reading Passed (36-2)

  5. 2026-03-04 Senate

    Favorable with Amendments { 643622/1 Adopted

  6. 2026-03-04 Senate

    Second Reading Passed with Amendments

  7. 2026-02-12 Senate

    Hearing 2/24 at 1:00 p.m.

  8. 2026-02-06 Senate

    First Reading Judicial Proceedings

  9. Maryland General Assembly

    Text - First - Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance - Intercepted Communications - Admissibility of Evidence

  10. Maryland General Assembly

    Vote - Senate - Committee - Judicial Proceedings

  11. Maryland General Assembly

    Text - Third - Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance - Intercepted Communications - Admissibility of Evidence

Official Summary Text

Authorizing a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication that is a recording or part of a recording of the commission or attempted commission of a certain crime; providing that the contents of a certain intercepted communication and evidence derived from the communication may be received in evidence in a criminal trial or hearing before the District Court or circuit court under certain circumstances; and providing for a certain affirmative defense to a charge under the wiretap statute.

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text
EXPLANATION: CAPITALS INDICATE MATTER ADDED TO EXISTING LAW.
[Brackets] indicate matter deleted from existing law.
Underlining indicates amendments to bill.
Strike out indicates matter stricken from the bill by amendment or deleted from the law by
amendment.
*sb0661*

SENATE BILL 661
E2 6lr2618

By: Senators Love, Charles, Henson, McKay, Smith, Sydnor, Waldstreicher, and
West West, Folden, James, and Muse
Introduced and read first time: February 6, 2026
Assigned to: Judicial Proceedings
Committee Report: Favorable with amendments
Senate action: Adopted
Read second time: March 4, 2026

CHAPTER ______

AN ACT concerning 1

Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance – Intercepted Communications – 2
Admissibility of Evidence 3

FOR the purpose of authorizing a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic 4
communication that is a recording or part of a recording of the commission or 5
attempted commission of a certain crime ; providing that the contents of a certain 6
intercepted communication and evidence derived from the communication may be 7
received in evidence in a certain criminal proceeding under certain circumstances; 8
providing for a certain affirmative defense to a charge under the wiretap statute; and 9
generally relating to the admissibility of intercepted communications. 10

BY repealing and reenacting, without amendments, 11
Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings 12
Section 10–402(a) and (b) 13
Annotated Code of Maryland 14
(2020 Replacement Volume and 2025 Supplement) 15

BY adding to 16
Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings 17
Section 10–402(c)(12) 18
Annotated Code of Maryland 19
(2020 Replacement Volume and 2025 Supplement) 20

BY repealing and reenacting, with amendments, 21
2 SENATE BILL 661

Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings 1
Section 10–405 2
Annotated Code of Maryland 3
(2020 Replacement Volume and 2025 Supplement) 4

SECTION 1. BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF MARYLAND, 5
That the Laws of Maryland read as follows: 6

Article – Courts and Judicial Proceedings 7

10–402. 8

(a) Except as otherwise specifically provided in this subtitle it is unlawful for any 9
person to: 10

(1) Willfully intercept, endeavor to intercept, or procure any other person 11
to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; 12

(2) Willfully disclose, or endeavor to disclose, to any other person the 13
contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know 14
that the information was obtained through the in terception of a wire, oral, or electronic 15
communication in violation of this subtitle; or 16

(3) Willfully use, or endeavor to use, the contents of any wire, oral, or 17
electronic communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was 18
obtained through the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication in violation 19
of this subtitle. 20

(b) Any person who violates subsection (a) of this section is guilty of a felony and 21
is subject to imprisonment for not more than 5 years or a fine of not more than $10,000, or 22
both. 23

(c) (12) (I) IT IS LAWFUL UNDER TH IS SUBTITLE FOR A PE RSON TO 24
INTERCEPT A WIRE, ORAL, OR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION THAT IS A RECORDING 25
OF OR IS PART OF A RECORDING OF THE COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED COMMISSION 26
OF THE FOLLOWING CRIMES AGAINST THE PERSON: 27

1. MURDER IN ANY DEGREE; 28

2. RAPE IN ANY DEGREE; OR 29

3. ASSAULT IN THE FIRST DEGREE THAT IS A 30
DOMESTICALLY RELATED CRIME, AS DEFINED IN § 6–233 OF THE CRIMINAL 31
PROCEDURE ARTICLE. 32

SENATE BILL 661 3

(II) IT IS AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO A CRIMINA L 1
PROSECUTION UNDER TH IS SUBTITLE THAT THE DEFENDANT INTERCEPTED THE 2
WIRE, ORAL, OR ELECTRONIC COMMUN ICATION BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT 3
REASONABLY BELIEVED THAT THE DEFENDANT W AS IN IMMINENT DANGE R OF 4
BECOMING THE VICTIM OF A CRIME LISTED IN SUBPARAGRAPH (I) OF THIS 5
PARAGRAPH. 6

10–405. 7

(a) Except as provided in [subsection] SUBSECTIONS (b) AND (C) of this section, 8
whenever any wire, oral, or electronic communication has been intercepted, no part of the 9
contents of the communication and no evidence derived therefrom may be received in 10
evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, 11
department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of 12
this State, or a political subdivision thereof if the disclosure of that information would be 13
in violation of this subtitle. 14

(b) If any wire , oral, or electronic communication is intercepted in any state or 15
any political subdivision of a state, the United States or any territory, protectorate, or 16
possession of the United States, including the District of Columbia in accordance with the 17
law of that jurisdiction, but that would be in violation of this subtitle if the interception was 18
made in this State, the contents of the communication and evidence derived from the 19
communication may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or 20
before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative 21
committee, or other authority of this State, or any political subdivision of this State if: 22

(1) At least one of the parties to the communication was outsid e the State 23
during the communication; 24

(2) The interception was not made as part of or in furtherance of an 25
investigation conducted by or on behalf of law enforcement officials of this State; and 26

(3) All parties to the communication were co –conspirators in a crime of 27
violence as defined in § 14–101 of the Criminal Law Article. 28

(C) (1) SUBJECT TO PARAGRAPH (2) OF THIS SUBSECTION, IF ANY WIRE, 29
ORAL, OR ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION HAS BEEN INTERCEPTED, THE CONTENTS 30
OF THE COMMUNICATION AND EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM THE COMMUNICATI ON 31
MAY BE RECEIVED IN E VIDENCE IN A CRIMINA L TRIAL OR HEARING B EFORE THE 32
DISTRICT COURT OR CIRCUIT COURT IF THE COURT DETERMINES THAT: 33

(I) THE CASE IN WHICH THE COMMUNICATION IS OFF ERED 34
INVOLVES: 35

1. A CRIME COMMITTED AGAI NST A T LEAST ONE 36
INDIVIDUAL; OR 37
4 SENATE BILL 661

2. A HATE CRIME UNDER TITLE 10, SUBTITLE 3 OF THE 1
CRIMINAL LAW ARTICLE; 2

(II) THE CONTENTS OF THE C OMMUNICATION AND EVI DENCE 3
DERIVED FROM THE COMMUNICATION ARE OFFERED AS EVIDENCE OF A MATERIAL 4
FACT; 5

(III) THE INTERCEPTION WAS NOT MADE AS PART OF OR I N 6
FURTHERANCE OF AN IN VESTIGATION CONDUCTE D BY OR ON BEHALF OF LAW 7
ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS OF THIS STATE; 8

(IV) THE CONTENTS OF THE C OMMUNICATION AND EVI DENCE 9
DERIVED FROM THE COM MUNICATION ARE MORE PROBATIVE ON TH E POINT FOR 10
WHICH THEY ARE OFFERED THAN ANY OTHER EVIDENCE THAT THE PROPONENT CAN 11
PROCURE THROUGH REASONABLE EFFORTS; AND 12

(C) (1) ANY WIRE , ORAL, OR ELECTRONIC COMMUN ICATION THAT HAS 13
BEEN INTERCEPTED AS AUTHORIZED UNDER § 10–402(C)(12) OF THIS SUBTITLE 14
MAY BE RECEIVED IN E VIDENCE IN A CRIMINA L TRIAL OR HEARING B EFORE THE 15
DISTRICT COURT OR CIRCUIT COURT IF THE COMMUNICATION: 16

(I) IS A RECORDING OR PAR T OF A RECORDING OF THE 17
COMMISSION OR ATTEMPTED COMMISSION OF A CRIME LISTED IN § 10–402(C)(12) 18
OF THIS SUBTITLE; AND 19

(II) IS USED AS EVIDENCE I N THE CHARGE OF AN O FFENSE 20
LISTED IN § 10–402(C)(12) OF THIS SUBTITLE. 21

(2) A COMMUNICATION DESCRI BED IN PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS 22
SUBSECTION MAY NOT B E ADMITTED AS EVIDEN CE OF A CRIME NOT LI STED IN § 23
10–402(C)(12). 24

(V) THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE WILL BE BEST SERV ED BY THE 25
ADMISSION INTO EVIDE NCE OF THE CONTENTS OF THE COMMUNICATION AND 26
EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM THE COMMUNICATION. 27

(2) (3) THE CONTENTS OF A COM MUNICATION AND EVIDE NCE 28
DERIVED FROM THE COMMUNICATION MAY NOT BE RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE UNDER 29
PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS SUBSECTION U NLESS THE PROPONENT PROVIDES THE 30
ADVERSE PARTY, SUFFICIENTLY IN ADVANCE OF THE TRIAL OR HEARING TO ALLOW 31
THE ADVERSE PARTY A FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO PREPARE, BUT NOT LATER THAN 14 32
CALENDAR DAYS BEFORE THE TRIAL OR HEARING, WITH: 33

SENATE BILL 661 5

(I) NOTICE OF THE INTENTI ON TO OFFER THE CONT ENTS OF 1
THE COMMUNICATION AND EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM THE COMMUNICATION; AND 2

(II) THE NA ME AND ADDRESS OF TH E PARTY WHOSE 3
COMMUNICATION WAS INTERCEPTED. 4

(4) THIS SECTION MAY NOT BE CONSTRUED TO ABROGATE OR LIMIT 5
ANY RULE RELATING TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE UNDER THE MARYLAND 6
RULES. 7

SECTION 2. AND BE IT FURTHER ENACTED, That this Ac t shall take effect 8
October 1, 2026. 9

Approved:
________________________________________________________________________________
Governor.
________________________________________________________________________________
President of the Senate.
________________________________________________________________________________
Speaker of the House of Delegates.