Criminal Law - Theft and Opening of Mail and Packages
HB 767 would expand Maryland criminal law protections for mail and packages. It keeps the existing misdemeanor offense for unlawfully taking and breaking open a letter addressed to someone else, but adds a requirement that courts notify the U.S. Postmaster General when a conviction involves mail delivered or intended for delivery by the U.S. Postal Service. The bill also creates a new felony offense for knowingly or willfully, without permission, obtaining or controlling mail or a package intended for another person with the intent to deprive that person of it.
The new felony provision applies to items delivered or left for collection by the U.S. Postal Service or a delivery service company that delivers tangible personal property. A conviction under the new section would carry up to five years’ imprisonment and administrative costs tied to the Postmaster General notification requirement. The bill is set to take effect October 1, 2026.
The bill would amend Criminal Law § 3-905 and add new Criminal Law § 7-106.1 to the Maryland Code. It increases penalties for certain mail theft conduct by creating a felony offense for theft of mail or packages, while preserving the existing misdemeanor offense for opening another person’s letter. It also imposes a new court administrative duty to notify the U.S. Postmaster General after qualifying convictions involving U.S. Postal Service mail, affecting courts, prosecutors, and defendants in mail-theft cases.
Based on the available context, the bill appears to have been introduced as a public-safety and anti-theft measure, with no recorded committee testimony or votes showing opposition or support beyond its referral and hearing. The framing of the bill suggests a generally favorable policy goal of deterring mail and package theft and improving coordination with postal authorities.
The main policy issue is the severity of punishment and the scope of the new felony offense. Potential points of contention include whether package theft should be treated as a felony rather than a misdemeanor, whether the bill’s definition of covered items is broad enough to include private delivery services, and whether the Postmaster General notification requirement creates additional administrative burden for courts. No specific stakeholder objections or endorsements are included in the provided record.