Criminal Procedure - Victims and Witnesses - Out of Court Statement of Child to Forensic Interviewer
Summary
SB333 expands Maryland’s child-hearsay rule in criminal and juvenile proceedings by allowing a child’s out-of-court statement to be admitted when the statement was made to a qualified forensic interviewer. The bill defines a forensic interviewer as a trained professional who uses neutral, nonleading, developmentally appropriate child-interview techniques, is not a law enforcement officer, and works for or under contract with a child advocacy center or comparable out-of-state entity.
The bill applies to statements by children under 13 who are alleged victims or witnesses in cases involving child abuse, sexual offenses, attempted rape, neglect, abuse or neglect in juvenile court, neglect of a minor, or other crimes of violence. It preserves existing safeguards: the statement must be trustworthy, notice must be given to the defense, the opposing party may depose the witness, and the court must make findings on the record before admitting the statement. The law takes effect October 1, 2025.
Impact
SB333 amends Criminal Procedure § 11-304 to add forensic interviewers to the list of professionals who may receive admissible out-of-court statements from child victims or witnesses. This broadens the evidentiary pathways available to prosecutors and juvenile court petitioners in child abuse, sexual offense, neglect, and violent crime cases, while leaving the statute’s trustworthiness, notice, deposition, and judicial review requirements in place. The bill also clarifies the definition of “forensic interviewer” and ties that role to child advocacy centers, affecting how child disclosures gathered in forensic interviews may be used in court.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong, unanimous support in both chambers, with third reading passage in the Senate and House by 44-0 and 132-0, respectively. That vote pattern suggests broad bipartisan agreement that the bill is a child-protection and evidence-gathering measure. No committee transcript objections are provided, and the legislative record supplied here reflects consensus rather than division.
Contention
No specific opposition is reflected in the provided materials, but the main policy issue inherent in the bill is the balance between improving child-victim testimony and preserving defendants’ confrontation and due process rights. The statute addresses that concern by limiting admissibility to statements with particularized guarantees of trustworthiness, requiring advance notice, allowing depositions, and requiring judicial findings before admission. Any practical contention would likely center on whether forensic interviewers should be treated like other mandated professionals for hearsay purposes and whether the expanded rule could increase the use of recorded child interviews in prosecutions.