Criminal Procedure - Expungement - No Finding and Case Terminated Without Finding
HB0187 expands Maryland’s expungement law to allow a person to petition for expungement when a charge in a case was not resolved by an unequivocal conviction, but instead was disposed of by the court with a “no finding” designation or was designated as having been terminated without finding. The bill amends Criminal Procedure § 10-110 to add these dispositions as eligible for expungement, so long as the underlying offense is otherwise one of the offenses already listed in the statute. It also makes a conforming change to the unit-based eligibility rule so that the new subsection is taken into account.
The bill applies to a broad set of misdemeanor and felony offenses already covered by Maryland’s expungement statute, including certain controlled dangerous substance offenses, theft-related offenses, property crimes, public safety offenses, and other enumerated crimes. Its practical effect is to give people whose cases ended without a finding of guilt a clearer path to clearing the related record, rather than leaving those dispositions outside the expungement process. The act takes effect October 1, 2026.
HB0187 amends Maryland Criminal Procedure Article § 10-110 by adding a new category of expungeable dispositions and by cross-referencing that new category in the statute’s eligibility limitations. It does not create a new expungement process, but broadens the existing one to include cases marked “no finding” or “terminated without finding,” affecting police records, court records, and other state or local records tied to qualifying charges. The change primarily benefits individuals with qualifying criminal cases that ended without a conviction, while continuing to exclude people with pending criminal proceedings or other disqualifying convictions under the existing framework.
The bill appears to have been enacted without recorded opposition in the provided materials, and the final status shows it was approved by the Governor as Chapter 466. Based on the text alone, the measure reflects a generally reform-oriented approach to expungement and record relief, aimed at reducing the collateral consequences of criminal cases that did not end in a conviction. No committee transcripts or vote breakdowns were provided, so there is no evidence in the record here of organized opposition or divided sentiment.
The main policy issue is the scope of record relief: the bill extends expungement eligibility to cases resolved with a “no finding” designation or terminated without finding, which may be viewed as important relief for affected individuals but could raise concerns for those who prefer narrower expungement standards. Another possible point of contention is the interaction with the statute’s unit-based eligibility rule, because the bill preserves existing limits on expungement for people with other ineligible convictions, while carving out an exception for the newly covered dispositions. No specific opposing arguments or named stakeholders are included in the available discussion materials.