Criminal Procedure - No-Knock Search Warrants - Repeal
HB0464 repeals Maryland’s statutory provisions authorizing no-knock search warrants and replaces them with a rule that search warrants may not authorize law enforcement to enter a location without first giving notice of authority and purpose. The bill also revises related search-warrant procedures in the Criminal Procedure Article, including warrant execution, notice to occupants, body-worn camera use, and restrictions on the use of flashbang, stun, distraction, or similar military-style devices absent exigent circumstances.
The bill further updates the Public Safety Article by removing references to no-knock warrant training standards and eliminating reporting requirements specific to no-knock warrants. It preserves broader reporting on search warrant execution, including forcible entry, SWAT deployment, arrests, seizures, weapon discharges, and injuries or deaths during warrant service. The bill takes effect October 1, 2026.
HB0464 would amend Criminal Procedure § 1-203 to prohibit no-knock authorization in search warrants and require notice before entry, while keeping existing warrant issuance, execution, return, and property-restoration procedures in place. It would also amend Public Safety §§ 3-207 and 3-525 to remove no-knock-specific training and reporting provisions, shifting oversight toward general search-warrant execution data rather than no-knock warrant tracking. The practical effect would be to limit law enforcement tactics during warrant service and to narrow the circumstances under which forced entry can occur.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to reflect a reform-oriented approach aimed at restricting aggressive warrant execution practices. The overall tone of the bill is precautionary and civil-liberties focused, emphasizing notice, accountability, and limits on military-style entry tactics. No contrary sentiment is documented in the provided record, but the subject matter suggests the bill would likely draw interest from both criminal-justice reform advocates and law-enforcement stakeholders.
The central point of contention is the elimination of no-knock search warrants altogether. Supporters would likely view the bill as reducing the risk of violent or mistaken entries and protecting occupants, officers, and bystanders, while opponents may argue that banning no-knock warrants could hinder investigations or increase danger in situations where surprise entry is believed necessary. Related friction points include the bill’s restrictions on flashbangs and similar devices, the requirement for advance notice and a 20-second response period, and the removal of no-knock-specific training and reporting requirements.