Criminal Procedure - Victims and Witnesses - Out of Court Statement of Child to Forensic Interviewer
Summary
HB442 expands Maryland’s child-hearsay evidence rule to allow an out-of-court statement made by a child victim or witness to a qualified forensic interviewer to be admitted in juvenile court or criminal proceedings, so long as the existing statutory safeguards are met. The bill applies to children under 13 involved in specified abuse, neglect, sexual offense, or other violent-crime cases, and it preserves the requirement that the statement have particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.
To qualify, the forensic interviewer must be trained in child forensic interviewing techniques, must not be a law enforcement officer, and must work for or under contract with a child advocacy center or comparable out-of-state entity. The bill also keeps procedural protections in place, including notice to the defense, the opportunity to depose witnesses, and a judicial finding on the record regarding trustworthiness before admission of the statement.
Impact
The bill amends Criminal Procedure § 11-304 to add forensic interviewers to the list of professionals to whom a child’s statement may be made and still qualify for admission under the child-victim/child-witness hearsay exception. It broadens the evidentiary pathway for prosecutors and juvenile court proceedings involving child abuse, sexual offenses, neglect, and crimes of violence, while leaving intact the statute’s existing notice, confrontation-related procedures, and judicial reliability review. The law takes effect October 1, 2025.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received strong bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the House 133-0 and the Senate 47-0, indicating broad agreement that the change is a targeted evidentiary update intended to help child victims and witnesses communicate through specialized forensic interviewers without undermining procedural safeguards.
Contention
No committee transcript was provided, and the unanimous votes suggest there was no major recorded controversy. The main policy balance embedded in the bill is between improving the admissibility of child statements gathered in forensic interviews and preserving defendants’ and respondents’ rights through notice, deposition, and judicial trustworthiness findings. Any potential concern would likely center on hearsay reliability and due process, but the statute’s added qualifications for forensic interviewers and existing safeguards appear designed to address those concerns.