Real Property - Implied Warranties - Missing or Incomplete Improvements
HB0683 would create a new criminal offense for a parent, guardian, or custodian who intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, or negligently acts or fails to act in a way that results in a child committing a crime or delinquent act. A person convicted under the bill would face misdemeanor penalties, including up to 30 days in jail, a fine of up to $2,500, or both. The bill also requires the convicted adult to participate in all related court proceedings and any treatment, counseling, or diversion programs ordered for the child, and makes willful failure to do so contempt of court.
The bill further changes Maryland law governing restitution in juvenile cases. It requires courts, when ordering restitution for a child’s act, to direct payment from the child’s parent, guardian, or custodian unless the restitution is owed to that adult, in which case the child must pay. It also preserves the requirement that a parent, guardian, or custodian be given a reasonable opportunity to be heard before a restitution judgment is entered against them. The bill would take effect October 1, 2025.
HB0683 would amend provisions in the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article and the Criminal Procedure Article and add a new section to the Criminal Law Article. It expands potential legal responsibility for adults connected to a child’s offense, authorizes criminal penalties against those adults, and changes how restitution may be assessed and collected in juvenile delinquency and criminal matters. The bill would affect parents, guardians, custodians, juvenile defendants, and juvenile courts by shifting some financial and procedural obligations to adults responsible for the child.
Based on the available record, there is little direct committee or floor discussion because the hearing was canceled and no votes or transcripts are provided. The bill’s sponsors suggest a punitive and accountability-focused approach, indicating support for stronger parental responsibility in juvenile crime cases. Because there is no recorded debate in the provided materials, overall sentiment cannot be measured from committee testimony, but the bill appears to be framed as a law-and-order measure.
The main points of contention are likely to be whether it is appropriate to impose criminal liability on parents, guardians, or custodians for a child’s conduct, especially where the adult’s conduct is only negligent rather than intentional. Another likely issue is fairness and due process, including whether the bill improperly shifts punishment and financial burdens onto adults for offenses committed by minors. Supporters would likely emphasize accountability, restitution, and parental involvement, while opponents may argue that the bill could punish families for circumstances beyond their control and create hardship for low-income households.