Criminal Procedure - Out of Court Statements - Vulnerable Adult Victims and Witnesses
HB 677 creates a new evidentiary rule in Maryland criminal procedure for out-of-court statements made by vulnerable adult victims or witnesses. The bill defines a “vulnerable adult” as either an adult who lacks the physical or mental capacity to provide for daily needs or any person age 68 or older. Under the bill, a court may admit such a statement for its truth if the statement is not otherwise admissible under another hearsay exception and the vulnerable adult testifies at an evaluation hearing.
The bill applies to statements offered in prosecutions involving assault, reckless endangerment, rape and sexual offenses, attempted rape, abuse or neglect of a vulnerable adult, theft, identity fraud, financial crimes against a vulnerable adult, and crimes of violence. Before admitting the statement, the court must hold an evaluation hearing and consider a detailed list of trustworthiness factors, including the declarant’s personal knowledge, consistency, timing, possible bias or coercion, and whether the statement was prompted by leading questions. The State must also give advance notice to the defense, including any recordings or the content of the statement if no recording exists, and the court must make findings on the record. The bill also expressly allows vulnerable adult testimony by remote electronic participation under Maryland court rules.
HB 677 would expand Maryland’s criminal evidence law by adding a specific hearsay pathway for statements from vulnerable adult victims and witnesses, potentially making it easier to prosecute crimes where the witness may be elderly, impaired, or otherwise difficult to bring into court. It would affect criminal proceedings involving both violent and financially exploitative offenses and would impose procedural safeguards on admissibility, including notice, a trustworthiness hearing, and on-the-record findings. The bill would take effect October 1, 2025, if enacted.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or vote history, the available record suggests a generally protective and victim-centered purpose rather than visible controversy in the materials provided. The measure appears designed to improve access to testimony from vulnerable adults while preserving defense rights through notice and judicial reliability screening. No votes or transcript excerpts are available to indicate formal support or opposition.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be evidentiary fairness and confrontation concerns versus the need to protect vulnerable adults and preserve their testimony. Defense interests may focus on the admissibility of hearsay, the breadth of the vulnerable adult definition, and whether remote testimony or recorded statements could prejudice the accused. Supporters would likely emphasize the bill’s safeguards—evaluation hearings, trustworthiness factors, notice requirements, and the requirement that the witness testify at the hearing—as balancing those concerns while helping prosecute abuse, sexual violence, theft, identity fraud, and financial exploitation.