STANDING COMMITTEE ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Court rules

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULES CHANGES

The Rules Committee has submitted its Two Hundred and Sixth

Report to the Court of Appeals, transmitting thereby proposed

new Rules 4-333.1, 5-617, 6-418, and 6-423; amendments to

current Rules 1-311, 2-644, 2-704, 3-513, 3-644, 3-722, 3-731,

4-211, 4-216.1, 4-231, 4-253, 4-262, 4-263, 4-325, 4-331, 4-345,

4-351, 4-601.1, 4-612, 5-611, 5-615, 6-107, 6-209, 6-311, 6-411,

6-413, 6-416, 6-434, 6-455, 6-501, 9-206, 9-308, 10-108, 10-112,

10-202, 10-301, 14-204, 14-305, 15-504, 15-1302, 16-109, 16-702,

16-913, 16-914, 16-915, 16-934, 18-402, 18-404, 18-407, 18-425,

18-437, 19-202, 19-205, 19-206, 19-207, 19-210, 19-215, 19-216,

19-217, 19-801, and 20-107; and amendments to Forms 19-A.1 and

Form 19-A.2.

The Committee’s Two Hundred and Sixth Report and the

proposed Rules changes are set forth below.

Interested persons are asked to consider the Committee’s

Report and proposed Rules changes and to forward on or before

December 30, 2020 any written comments they may wish to make to:

Sandra F. Haines, Esquire

Reporter, Rules Committee

Judiciary A-POD

580 Taylor Avenue

Annapolis, Maryland

21401

Suzanne Johnson

Clerk

Court of Appeals of Maryland

November 30, 2020

The Honorable Mary Ellen Barbera,

Chief Judge

The Honorable Robert N. McDonald

The Honorable Shirley M. Watts

The Honorable Michele D. Hotten

The Honorable Joseph M. Getty

The Honorable Brynja M. Booth

The Honorable Jonathan Biran,

Judges

The Court of Appeals of Maryland

Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building

Annapolis, Maryland 21401

Your Honors:

The Rules Committee submits this, its Two Hundredth and

Sixth Report, and recommends that the Court adopt the new Rules

and amendments to existing Rules transmitted with this Report.

The proposed changes fall into thirteen categories.

Category 1 consists of Rules changes required or helpful in

implementing legislation enacted by the General Assembly in its

2019 and 2020 Session, as follows.

Rule 4-612. The proposed amendments to Rule 4-612

implement 2020 Laws, Chapter 223, which deals with cell site

simulators, sometimes referred to as Stingrays. A copy of the

Session Law is attached as APPENDIX A.

Rule 4-612 currently provides for a court order authorizing

law enforcement officers to obtain location information from an

electronic device. The proposed amendments apply the procedures

in that Rule to the use of cell cite simulators. Cell site

simulators are portable devices that mimic or masquerade as a

cell tower. They intercept and capture identifying information

regarding electronic devices located within range of the

simulator that otherwise would be captured by the nearest cell

tower. The thrust of the statute is to require a court order

based on a showing of probable cause for law enforcement

officers to use those devices. The statute uses the term “court

order” rather than “warrant.” The statute and the Rule contain

certain requirements for an application for such an Order and

for the Order itself.

Rules 4-331, 4-333.1, and 4-345. Rule 4-333.1 is a new

Rule. That Rule and the proposed amendments to Rule 4-331

implement 2020 Laws, Chapters 126 and 127 that expand the list

of offenses for which a court may vacate a sentence upon a

finding that the defendant was a victim of human trafficking

when the offense was committed. The amendment to a crossreference in Rule 4-345 is a conforming one.

Amendments to Rule 4-263 that implement 2020 Laws, Chapter

282, pertaining to disclosure of benefits to in-custody

witnesses, have been blended into the amendments to that Rule

contained in Category 4 and are not separately set out in the

Category 1 transmittals.

Rule 4-216.1. The amendments to Rule 4-216.1 implement 2020

Laws, Chapter 41 that defines and governs pretrial risk scoring

instruments (currently known as “risk assessment tools”). The

statute takes effect July 1, 2021. The Rules Committee included

it in this Report so that it is not overlooked. The Court may

wish to give that Rule a July 1, 2021 effective date.

Rules 10-202, 10-112, and 10-301. The amendments to Rule

10-202 implement 2020 Laws, Chapter 568, which adds nurse

practitioners to the list of individuals who, together with a

licensed physician, can examine or evaluate alleged disabled

persons for purposes of guardianship proceedings. The

amendments to Rules 10-112 and 10-301 are conforming ones.

Rules 3-731 and 9-308. The amendments to Rules 3-731 and

9-308 implement 2020 Laws, Chapters 134 and 135, which (1)

permit a six-month extension of final peace orders, and (2)

automatically extend the term of a final peace order or final

protective order if a timely motion to extend the term has been

filed but a hearing on the motion cannot be held before the

expiration date. The automatic extension lasts until the

hearing is held.

Rule 9-206. The amendments to Rule 9-206 implement 2020

Laws, Chapters 142 and 143, which adjust the child support

guidelines when there is a shared physical custody arrangement.

Rules 5-611 and 5-615. The amendments to Rules 5-611 and

5-615 add a cross reference to the Court Dog and Child Witness

Program created by 2020 Laws, Chapters 161 and 162.

Rule 6-423. New Rule 6-423 implements 2020 Laws, Chapter

543 dealing with the distribution of a check for less than

$1,000 discovered after an estate has been closed.

Rules 6-107, 6-411, 6-413, 6-416, 6-418, and 6-434. The

amendments to these Rules implement 2020 Laws, Chapter 435,

which alters the laws dealing with a surviving spouse’s right to

claim a statutory elective share of a decedent’s estate and the

manner of calculating that share. In drafting these amendments,

the Committee considered the need for, and drafted, additional

Rules dealing with the situation in which the decedent also had

created a revocable trust. We were asked to defer approval of

those Rules, however, to allow consideration of them by the

Registers of Wills, who will be discussing them at their next

scheduled meeting in January. Although there is some overlap

between the two sets of Rules, the Committee believes that the

Rules submitted in this Report can be considered by the Court on

their own and, because the changes made in Chapter 435 are now

in effect and significant, these Rules should be presented now.

The amendments to Rule 6-411 provide the procedure and

forms for electing a statutory share. The amendments to Rule 6413 make clear that, except in a small estate proceeding, a

claim properly presented against the Estate preserves a claim

against the property of a revocable trust and requires the

personal representative with knowledge of a revocable trust

created by the decedent to notify the trustee of the claim.

Chapter 435 provides for cross-notices among the personal

representative, the trustee, a surviving spouse, and the person

responsible for preparing the estate tax return. The amendments

to Rule 6-416 deal with the determination of attorneys’ fees

when a surviving spouse elects a statutory share. New Rule 6418 provides for the certification of the value of an elective

share. The amendments to Rule 6-434 provide for transmitting

elective share issues to a circuit court.

Rules 16-915, 10-108, 15-1302, and 16-934. Amendments to

Rule 16-915 implement 2020 Laws, Chapter 539, requiring that

certain identifying information regarding a witness in a

criminal or juvenile delinquency case be shielded upon request

by the witness or the State and that similar information

regarding a victim be shielded on request by the State. The

amendments to the other Rules are conforming ones.

Category 2 consists of Rules regarding attorneys requested

by the State Board of Law Examiners (SBLE) or the Administrative

Office of the Courts (AOC).

Rule 19-217 and Forms 19-A.1 and 19-A.2. The amendments to

Rule 19-217 and the two Forms were requested by AOC. They expand

the information that must be provided by attorneys seeking pro

hac vice admission.

Rules 1-311 and 20-107. The amendments to Rules 1-311 and

20-107 also were requested by AOC. They require attorneys to

use the ID number registered with the Attorney Information

System.

Rules 19-202 and 19-205. The amendments to these Rules,

requested by SBLE, permits an applicant for bar admission to

withdraw a character questionnaire, which would operate to

withdraw as well the application for admission.

Rules 19-206, 19-207, 19-210, 19-215, and 19-216. The

amendments to Rules 19-206 and 19-207, requested by SBLE, adjust

the timing requirements for filing notices of intent to take the

Uniform Bar Examination in Maryland and to transfer a qualifying

score on the UBE. The amendments to the other Rules are

conforming or housekeeping ones.

Category 3. Rule 16-913

New section (e) addresses a problem brought to the

Committee’s attention by AOC. It mostly involves committees,

subcommittees, and work groups of the Judicial Council but

affects several other Judicial agencies as well. The problem

stems from a tacit decision of the Court of Appeals in 1977, as

a matter of judicial policy, to require judicial agencies to

follow transparency rules similar to those that govern Executive

Branch agencies under the Open Meetings Law (OML). To the

extent that the judicial agency would be considered a “public

body” under that law and exercises an “advisory function,” that

means that, subject to the exceptions stated in the OML, its

meetings must be open to the public, it must give public notice

of its agendas, and it must keep minutes accessible to the

public. For 43 years, judicial agencies generally have complied

with that policy.

That policy is explicit with respect to the Judicial

Council. The Council is created by Rule 16-110 which, in

section (d) makes clear that its function is strictly an

advisory one. More significant, section (f) requires that its

meetings be open to the public, that notice of its meetings be

posted on the Judiciary website, and that it keep minutes that

also are posted on the Judiciary website. The Judicial Council

operates, in large part, through committees, subcommittees, and

work groups that the Council creates. Those units would not

constitute public bodies under OML because they were not created

by statute, Rule, or Executive Order. They are not required to

hold open meetings or post public notice of their meetings and

do not do so; nor are they required by law to keep minutes of

their meetings, but they do create minutes and wish to continue

doing so.

A question has been raised whether those minutes, which

would constitute a judicial administrative record, may be

subject to public inspection under the Access to Judicial

Records Rules in Chapter 900 of Title 16. AOC desires, and the

Rules Committee believes, that those minutes, of non-public

meetings, should not be open to public inspection unless the

unit desires to make a public disclosure of something it did.

The basis for that is that the meeting itself was not open and

not required to be open and that any recommendations from a

committee, subcommittee, or work group will be presented to the

Judicial Council and will become publicly accessible at that

point.

Category 4. Eyewitness Identification Evidence

This Category consists of amendments to Rules 4-262, 4-263,

and 4-325 and new Rule 5-617. It emanates from issues raised,

in part determined, and in part left open in Small v. State, 464

Md. 68 (2019). The Court in that case confirmed a continued

adherence to the five factors set forth in Manson v. Brathwaite,

432 U.S. 98 (1977), Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (1972), and

Jones v. State, 310 Md. 569 (1987) for assessing whether

eyewitness identification evidence offered by the State in a

criminal case is so unreliable that its admission would violate

due process of law; namely:

•

The opportunity of the witness to view the criminal at

the time of the crime;

•

The witness’s degree of attention;

•

The accuracy of the witness’s prior description of the

criminal;

•

The level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at

the confrontation; and

•

The length of time between the crime and the

confrontation.

In a Concurring Opinion, three judges of the Court

expressed the view that some of those criteria were outdated and

had been shown by recent studies and case law in other States to

be factually inaccurate, misleading, or incomplete and asked

that the Rules Committee craft Rules that would take account of

the recent scientific evidence and judicial decisions elsewhere.

The decision in Small was a Constitutional one – what

standards should apply under a due process analysis in

determining the admissibility of an eyewitness identification

evidence claimed to be sufficiently unreliable as “to create a

very substantial likelihood that the witness misidentified the

culprit.” 464 Md. at 93. The Court did not appear to make any

holding as to whether, or which, other factors shown to affect

memory or the reliability of eyewitness identifications should

be considered (1) by a court in determining admissibility as a

matter of State evidence law, or (2) by the trier of fact in

determining whether to credit the identification if the court

does admit it. The Court’s holding that the Manson-Biggers

factors sufficed for due process purposes was taken by the Rules

Committee to limit any review by it to a sub-Constitutional

State law analysis.

At the request of the Concurring judges and with the

assistance of representatives of the Innocence Project, both

nationally and at the University of Baltimore Law School, the

Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction Committee of the Maryland

State Bar Association, and others, the Committee did undertake a

study of the scientific literature and emerging caselaw in other

States to consider whether additional factors, not inconsistent

with those required by the Court for due process purposes,

should be applied (1) for purposes of determining admissibility

as a matter of Maryland evidence law, and (2) in developing

appropriate pattern jury instructions in cases where the

evidence was admitted.

Without reciting all of the detail, much of which the Court

was aware of in deciding Small, the scientific literature, the

emerging caselaw, and statutes enacted by the Maryland General

Assembly have identified two categories of factors that have

been shown to affect human memory and the reliability of

eyewitness identifications. They are generally denominated as

“system variables” and “estimator variables.”

System variables are those that are within the State’s

control and deal mostly with how an identification procedure – a

line-up, a show-up, a photo array – was conducted by a law

enforcement agency. Estimator variables are beyond the control

of the criminal justice system, are more random and particular

to the circumstances of the identification, and include such

things as stress on the part of the witness, lighting, distance,

and obstructions at the time of the identification, focus by the

witness on a weapon rather than the face of the perpetrator,

and, at least to some, uncertainties in the reliability of

cross-racial identifications.

In 1999, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued

guidelines for law enforcement agencies that were intended to

“integrate a growing body of psychological knowledge regarding

eyewitness evidence with the practical demands of day-to-day

enforcement.” See Eyewitness Evidence: A Guide for Law

Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice (October 1999). The

Guidelines covered such things as answering 911 calls in a nonsuggestive manner, instructing witnesses to avoid discussing the

incident with other witnesses, preparing mug books, instructing

witnesses prior to conducting an identification procedure,

documenting the procedure, recording witness recollections and

identification results, and composing lineups and conducting

show-ups.

Although those guidelines were not intended by DOJ as a

legal mandate, in 2007, the General Assembly enacted § 3-506 of

the Public Safety Article (PS), which required each law

enforcement agency in the State to adopt written policies that

complied with DOJ standards on accurate eyewitness

identification. Following the decision in State v. Henderson,

27 A.3d 872 (N.J. 2011) and similar decisions in Alaska and

Connecticut, the Legislature enacted PS § 3-506.1 that set forth

certain specific requirements for eyewitness identification

procedures and amended § 3-506 to require every law enforcement

agency in the State to adopt a written policy that complies

either with § 3-506.1. or with the Police Training Commission’s

Eyewitness Identification Model Policy. Those legislative

mandates deal with System Variables. The Small Court took note

of those statutes but determined that they were not intended to

“dismantle [the Court’s long standing due process

jurisprudence.” Small, 464 Md. at 86, n. 18 (emphasis added).

The debate in the Rules Committee was not so much over the

genuineness of the various system or estimator variables –

whether they truly had an impact on the suggestiveness of an

eyewitness identification procedure or the reliability of the

actual identification. The Committee accepted the growing

scientific consensus and emerging case law that they could and,

at least as to some of them, likely did. The issue, rather, was

whether they should be the subject of jury instructions rather

than rulemaking. Partly in that context, the Committee worked

closely with the MSBA Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction

Committee, which has drafted and approved a set of jury

instructions dealing mostly with the estimator variables. The

Committee saw a need for Rules in three areas:

• First, in the discovery Rules (Rules 4-262 and 4-263), to

assure that the State’s current obligation to disclose “all

relevant material or information regarding . . . pretrial

identification of the defendant by a State’s witness”

includes the information required by PS §§ 3-506 and 3-506.1

(the system variables) and documents or other evidence

indicating

compliance

non-compliance

with

those

requirements.

The basis for that is the recognition that

significant non-compliance with the statutory mandate may be

grounds for a motion to suppress the identification as

sufficiently suggestive to be unreliable and inadmissible as

a matter of Maryland evidence law, retaining the factors

confirmed in Small as applicable to a due process challenge;

•

Second, new Rule 5-617, directing the court, in

determining whether eyewitness identification evidence is

suggestive or reliable for purposes of admissibility, to

consider whether there was substantial compliance with the

requirements of PS §§ 3-506 and 3-506.1; and

•

Third, a new section (e) to Rule 4-325, directing that, if

pretrial eyewitness identification evidence obtained with

the participation of a law enforcement agency has been

admitted, the court, upon request, shall instruct the

jury, as relevant, that, in considering the reliability of

the identification, the jury shall consider evidence of

(1) whether there was compliance with the requirements of

PS §§ 3-506 and 3-506.1; and (2) evidence of any other

factor that reasonably may bear on the reliability of the

identification.

With respect to that third requirement, the Committee had

before it the draft of pattern jury instructions drafted by the

MSBA Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction Committee, a copy of

which is attached as APPENDIX B.

The Committee’s view is that these four Rules are purely

procedural ones designed to make the identification procedure

more transparent, give credence, as a matter of State law, to

the statutory mandates regarding system variables, and, through

jury instructions (which the court can apply to itself in a

nonjury case), to give appropriate guidance in determining the

ultimate reliability/credibility of the identification.

Although many of the estimator variables have achieved widespread acceptance in the courts, not all of them have. The

science is ongoing, which the Pattern Jury Instruction Committee

can monitor. The Committee considered whether to make any

recommendation regarding the allowance of expert testimony

regarding the system or estimator variables but decided to leave

that to the trial court’s discretion guided by Rule 5-702 and

the caselaw interpreting that Rule.

Category 5. Miscellaneous – Title 2 Rules

Rule 2-644. The amendment to Rule 2-644 corrects a crossreference.

Rule 2-704. The amendment to Rule 2-704 (d) gives the court

discretion in scheduling the presentation of evidence regarding

an attorneys’ fee award permitted as an element of damages.

Where attorneys’ fees are part of the party’s damages, evidence

regarding the amount of those fees ordinarily must be presented

as part of the party’s case-in-chief, but there may be

circumstances in which it would be more efficient to defer that

evidence until the party has established an entitlement to such

fees. See Rule 2-703 (c)(1) governing attorneys’ fees allowed

by law.

Category 6. Miscellaneous – Title 3 Rules

Rules 3-644 and 3-722.

references.

The amendments update cross

Rule 3-513. Rule 3-513 deals with testimony by telephone.

The proposed amendment deletes what, with the massive

predominance of cell phones, are essentially obsolete references

to wired handsets, wireless handsets connected to a land line,

and speaker phones.

Category 7. Title 4 Rules

Rule 4-211. Rule 4-201 (a) provides that an offense shall

be tried only on a charging document which, in the District

Court, includes a citation when authorized by statute. Rule 4211 (a) requires that the original of a citation shall be filed

in the District Court promptly after its issuance and service.

Nearly all traffic citations are now issued in electronic form,

and, although the driver receives a paper copy, it is the

electronic data that is uploaded to the District Court. A

question has arisen as to whether that electronic data qualifies

as a charging document. See State v. Cornish (Circ. Ct. for

Wicomico Co., Case No. C-22-CR-000033) attached as APPENDIX C.

The proposed amendment to Rule 4-211 (a), requested by the Chief

Judge of the District Court, is intended to resolve that issue.

Rule 4-231. New section (e) permits the Circuit Courts to

conduct an initial appearance and a review of a District Court’s

pretrial release decision remotely in accordance with Rule 2-804

but requires that a defendant’s right to an attorney and an

interpreter and a victim’s right to be present not be infringed.

The amendments to section (d) update a cross reference.

Rule 4-351. The amendment clarifies that the court may

correct a commitment record at any time on motion or, after

notice to the parties and an opportunity to object, on the

court’s own initiative and adds a cross reference to Bratt v.

State, 468 Md. 481 (2020).

Rule 4-253. The amendment adds a reference to Hemming v,

State, 469 Md. 219 (2020).

Rule 4-601.1. The amendment expands the Rule to permit

courts to entertain applications and enter orders, except for

wiretaps, by electronic means. The Rule currently is limited to

orders for pen registers and trap and trace devices.

Category 8. Title 6 Rules

Rules 6-209, 6-311, 6-455, and 6-501.

these Rules are updating ones.

The amendments to

Category 9. Title 14 Rules

Rule 14-305. New section (c) is in the nature of an anticonflict-of-interest provision. It requires an auctioneer at a

foreclosure of judicial sale to file an affidavit that (1) it

has not paid any compensation to anyone for hiring the

auctioneer, (2) it has no interest in the property sold other

than a lawful fee for conducting the sale, and (3) it has no

agreement to conduct or assist in conducting a resale of the

property other than a resale ordered by the court.

Rule 14-204. The amendment clarifies that the priority of

filing a foreclosure action is limited to fractional owners of

the same lien instrument and not junior lienholders.

Category 10. Title 15 Rule

Rule 15-504. Section (a) is amended to take account of the

Court’s decision in Fuller v. Republican Cent. Comm., 444 Md.

613, 635-36 (2015) regarding the facts that must be shown to

justify the grant of a temporary restraining order.

Category 11. Title 16 Rules

Rule 16-109. The amendment to Rule 16-109 recognizes that,

traditionally, the educational programs conducted during

meetings of the Judicial Conferences have been under the

auspices of the educational unit of the Judiciary created by

Administrative Order of the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals,

which currently is the Judicial College.

Rule 16-702. The amendment to Rule 16-702 removes the

Executive Committee of the Conference of Circuit Judges from the

Rule but authorizes the Conference to appoint such a committee.

Rule 16-914. A cross-reference has been corrected.

Category 12. Title 18 Rules

Rule 18-402. Rule 18-402 defines a judge’s “address of

record” for purposes of Judicial Disabilities Commission

proceedings as the judge’s current home address or another

address designated in writing by the judge. All Maryland

judges, except some judges of the Orphans’ Courts are attorneys

who must register a preferred address with the Attorney

Information System (AIS) and keep that address current. See

Rule 19-802. The amendment clarifies that, if the judge is an

attorney, the address of record is the address designated by the

judge with AIS.

Rule 18-404. The proposed amendments to Rule 18-404,

requested by the Judicial Disabilities Commission (JDC), deal

with the place and method of service of a Statement of Charges

and other documents in a JDC proceeding.

Rule 18-407. The amendment to 18-407 is derived from a

proposal by JDC. It allows the Commission, when a judge resigns

or voluntarily retires prior to the resolution of a complaint

against the judge, to provide to Bar Counsel information

pertaining to conduct by the judge that may constitute a

violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a

substantial question as to the judge’s honesty, trustworthiness,

or fitness as an attorney.

Rule 18-425. The amendment to Rule 18-425 provides

consistency with Rule 18-422 (a)(4)(f), that, if a judge has not

requested notice of a complaint filed with JDC, the judge will

not be notified that a complaint has been dismissed without a

letter of cautionary advice.

Rule 18-437. At the request of JDC, the time for responding

to exceptions filed to a JDC Report in the Court of Appeals is

increased from 15 days to 30 days.

Category 13.

Title 19 Rule

Rule 19-801. Rule 19-801 is amended to add the Attorney

Grievance Commission, Bar Counsel, the Commission on Judicial

Disabilities, and Investigative Counsel as a “constituent

agency” for purposes of the Attorney Information System.

For the further guidance of the Court and the public,

following the proposed new Rules and the proposed amendments to

each of the existing Rules is a Reporter’s note describing in

further detail the reasons for the proposals. We caution that

the Reporter’s notes are not part of the Rules, have not been

debated or approved by the Committee, and are not to be regarded

as any kind of official comment or interpretation. They are

included solely to assist the Court in understanding some of the

reasons for the proposed changes.

Respectfully submitted,

Alan M. Wilner

Chair

AMW:wlp

cc: Suzanne C. Johnson, Clerk

RULE 4-612

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 600 – CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS

PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 4-612 to include cell site simulators in the

title and section (b) of the Rule, as follows:

RULE 4-612.

ORDER FOR CELL SITE SIMULATOR OR ELECTRONIC DEVICE

LOCATION INFORMATION

(a)

Definitions

The definitions in Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 1-

203.1 (a) apply in this Rule.

(b)

Issuance of Order

A court may issue an order authorizing or directing a law

enforcement officer to use a cell site simulator or obtain location

information from an electronic device if there is probable cause

to believe that a misdemeanor or felony has been or will be

committed by the owner or user of the electronic device or by an

individual about whom the information sought by the cell site

simulator or the location information is being sought, and the

information sought by the cell site simulator or the location

information being sought (1) is evidence of or will lead to

evidence of the misdemeanor or felony being investigated or (2)

RULE 4-612

will lead to the apprehension of an individual for whom an arrest

warrant has been previously issued. The application for the order,

the order issued, and the notice of the order shall conform to the

requirements of Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 1-203.1.

Source:

This Rule is new.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapter 223, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB 246) adds to Code,

Criminal Procedure Article, § 1-203.1 provisions that permit a

court to issue an order authorizing or directing a law

enforcement officer to use a cell site simulator. Proposed

amendments to Rule 4-612 add references to cell site simulators

to conform the Rule to the revised statute.

RULE 4-331

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 300 – TRIAL AND SENTENCING

AMEND Rule 4-331 to delete subsection (b)(2) regarding

motions filed pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8302 and to re-letter subsections (b)(1)(A) and (b)(1)(2) as

(b)(1) and (b)(2), as follows:

RULE 4-331.

(a)

MOTIONS FOR NEW TRIAL; REVISORY POWER

Within Ten Days of Verdict

On motion of the defendant filed within ten days after a

verdict, the court, in the interest of justice, may order a new

trial.

Cross reference: For the effect of a motion under this section

on the time for appeal see Rules 7-104(b) and 8-202(b).

(b)

Revisory Power

(1) Generally

The court has revisory power and control over the

judgment to set aside an unjust or improper verdict and grant a

new trial:

(A)(1) in the District Court, on motion filed within 90 days

after its imposition of sentence if an appeal has not been

perfected;

RULE 4-331

(B)(2) in the circuit courts, on motion filed within 90 days

after its imposition of sentence.

Thereafter, the court has

revisory power and control over the judgment in case of fraud,

mistake, or irregularity.

(2) Act of Prostitution While Under Duress

On motion filed pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure

Article, § 8-302, the court has revisory power and control over

a judgment of conviction of prostitution to vacate the judgment,

modify the sentence, or grant a new trial.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

As noted in the Reporter’s note to Rule 4-333.1, amendments

to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302 became effective on

June 1, 2020. The amended provisions of § 8-302 are

incorporated into new Rule 4-333.1. Amendments to Rule 4-331

are therefore proposed to reflect that the provisions of § 8-302

are no longer addressed by the Rule.

Proposed amendments to Rule 4-331 delete subsection (b)(2)

and re-letter subsections (b)(1)(A) and (b)(1)(2) as (b)(1) and

(b)(2) respectively.

RULE 4-333.1

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 300 – TRIAL AND SENTENCING

ADD NEW Rule 4-333.1, as follows:

RULE 4-333.1.

MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION OF HUMAN

TRAFFICKING VICTIM

(a)

Scope

This Rule applies to a motion to vacate a judgment of

conviction filed by an individual convicted of a qualifying

offense pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302 if

the individual’s participation in the offense was a direct

result of being a victim of human trafficking.

(b)

Timing

The motion shall be filed within a reasonable period of

time after the conviction.

(c)

Content

The motion shall:

(1) be in writing; and

(2) describe the evidence and include copies of any

documents showing that the movant is entitled to relief under

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302.

RULE 4-333.1

(d)

Notice

The motion shall be:

(1) served on the State’s Attorney for the jurisdiction

where the conviction for the qualifying offense occurred; and

(2) if the qualifying offense occurred within five years

before the filing of the motion, mailed to any victim’s or

victim’s representative’s last known address.

(e)

Disposition without a hearing

(1) The Court may dismiss a motion filed under this section

without a hearing if:

(i) The motion fails to assert grounds on which relief may

be granted;

(ii) The motion offers no additional evidence beyond that

which has previously been considered by the Court; or

(iii) The movant acted fraudulently or in bad faith in

filing the motion.

(2) The Court may grant a motion filed under this section

without a hearing if:

(i) The State’s Attorney consents to the motion;

(ii) No objection has been filed by a victim or victim’s

representative; and

(iii) At least 60 days have elapsed since notice and

service of the motion.

(f)

Disposition

RULE 4-333.1

The Court may grant a motion filed under this section on

finding by a preponderance of the evidence that the movant’s

participation in the qualifying offense was a direct result of

being a victim of human trafficking.

The court shall state the

reasons for its ruling on the record.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapters 126/127, 2020 Laws of Maryland, (HB 242/SB 206),

effective June 1, 2020, modified Code, Criminal Procedure

Article, § 8-302. The statute previously permitted the court to

vacate a conviction, modify the sentence, or grant a new trial

if a person convicted of prostitution was acting under duress

caused by the act of another committed in violation of Title 3,

Subtitle 11 of the Criminal Law Article or in violation of the

prohibition against human trafficking. The amendments to § 8302 provide a list of additional qualifying offenses that may

now be vacated by motion if participation in the offense was the

direct result of being a victim of human trafficking. The

revised statute also removes language permitting the court to

modify the sentence or grant a new trial based on the motion,

providing only that the court shall vacate the conviction if the

motion is granted.

The provisions of former Code, Criminal Procedure Article,

§ 8-302 are currently incorporated into Rule 4-331. Rule 4-331,

however, deals primarily with the court’s ability to order a new

trial and exercise revisory power, containing only brief

references to vacating a conviction. Rule 4-333, in contrast,

addresses vacating convictions, but applies only to motions

filed by the State’s Attorney. Criminal Procedure Article, § 8302 directs the court to vacate a conviction, but no longer

permits ordering a new trial or modifying a sentence. A motion

pursuant to § 8-302 is filed by the defendant. Accordingly, new

Rule 4-333.1 is proposed to address motions to vacate

convictions of qualifying offenses filed by the defendant

because he or she was a victim of human trafficking.

RULE 4-333.1

Section (a) sets forth the scope of Rule 4-333.1. Section

(b) states that the motion shall be filed within a reasonable

period of time after the conviction. Content requirements for

the motion are set forth in section (c). Notice requirements

for the motion are explained in section (d). Section (e)

provides the circumstances under which the court may dismiss or

grant the motion without a hearing. Section (f) provides that

the court may grant a motion filed under this section on finding

by a preponderance of the evidence that the movant’s

participation in the qualifying offense was a direct result of

being a victim of human trafficking, and that the reasons for

the ruling shall be stated on the record.

RULE 4-345

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 300 – TRIAL AND SENTENCING

AMEND Rule 4-345 to delete a portion of a cross reference,

as follows:

RULE 4-345.

SENTENCING – REVISORY POWER OF COURT

...

(f)

Open Court Hearing

The court may modify, reduce, correct, or vacate a

sentence only on the record in open court, after hearing from

the defendant, the State, and from each victim or victim’s

representative who requests an opportunity to be heard.

The

defendant may waive the right to be present at the hearing.

hearing shall be held on a motion to modify or reduce the

sentence until the court determines that the notice requirements

in subsection (e)(2) of this Rule have been satisfied.

If the

court grants the motion, the court ordinarily shall prepare and

file or dictate into the record a statement setting forth the

reasons on which the ruling is based.

Cross reference: See Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302,

which allows the court to vacate a judgment, modify a sentence,

or grant a new trial for an individual convicted of prostitution

if, when the crime was committed, the individual was acting

RULE 4-345

under duress caused by the act of another committed in violation

of Code, Criminal Law Article, § 11-303, the prohibition against

human trafficking. See Code, Criminal Law Article, § 5-609.1

regarding an application to modify a mandatory minimum sentence

imposed for certain drug offenses prior to October 1, 2017, and

for procedures relating thereto.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapters 126/127, 2020 Laws of Maryland, (HB 242/SB 206),

amending Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 8-302, became

effective on June 1, 2020. Although the prior version of § 8302 permitted the court discretion to order a new trial or

modify a sentence, the amended provisions of § 8-302 provide

that the court shall vacate the judgment if the motion is

granted. Accordingly, a reference to § 8-302 in Rule 4-345

concerning revisions of sentences is no longer relevant.

A proposed amendment to Rule 4-345 deletes the description

of § 8-302 in a cross reference after section (f).

RULE 4-216.1

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 200 – PRETRIAL PROCEDURES

AMEND Rule 4-216.1 to include the definition of a pretrial

risk scoring instrument, to add two cross references, to update

section numbering, and to make language consistent throughout

the Rule, as follows:

RULE 4-216.1.

(a)

PRETRIAL RELEASE--STANDARDS GOVERNING

Definitions

The following definitions apply in this Rule:

. . .

(5) Pretrial Risk Scoring Instrument

“Pretrial risk scoring instrument” means a tool, a

metric, an algorithm, or software that is used to assist in

determining the eligibility of a defendant for pretrial release

in a pretrial proceeding based on the defendant’s flight risk

and threat to community safety.

Cross reference:

See Code, Criminal Procedure, § 5-103.

(5)(6) Release on Personal Recognizance

“Release on personal recognizance” means a release,

without the requirement of a bond, based on a written promise by

RULE 4-216.1

the defendant (A) to appear in court when required to do so, (B)

to commit no criminal offense while on release, and (C) to

comply with all other conditions imposed by the judicial officer

pursuant to this Rule, Rule 4-216.2, or by other law while on

release.

Committee note: The principal differences between a personal

recognizance and a bond are that the former does not provide for

payment of a penalty sum if the defendant fails to appear when

required and is not subject to any financial conditions.

(6)(7) Special Condition

“Special condition” means a condition of release

required by a judicial officer, other than the conditions that

the defendant appear in court when required to do so and commit

no criminal offense while on release.

(7)(8) Special Condition of Release with Financial Terms

“Special condition of release with financial terms”

means the requirement of collateral security or the guarantee of

the defendant’s appearance by a compensated surety as a

condition of the defendant’s release.

The term does not include

(A) an unsecured bond by the defendant or (B) the cost

associated with a service that is a condition of release and is

affordable by the defendant or waived by the court.

Committee note: Examples of a condition of release that is not

a special condition of release with financial terms are

participation in an ignition interlock program, use of an

alcohol consumption monitoring system, and GPS monitoring.

(8)(9) Surety

RULE 4-216.1

“Surety” means a person other than the defendant who, by

executing a bond, guarantees the appearance of the defendant and

includes an uncompensated or accommodation surety.

(9)(10) Surety Insurer

“Surety insurer” means a person in the business of

becoming, either directly or through an agent, a surety on a

bond for compensation.

(10)(11) Uncompensated Surety

“Uncompensated surety” means an accommodation surety who

does not charge or receive compensation for acting as a surety

for the defendant.

. . .

(f)

Consideration of Factors

(1) Recommendation of Pretrial Release Services Program

In determining whether a defendant should be released

and the conditions of release, the judicial officer shall give

consideration to the recommendation of any pretrial release

services program that has made a risk assessment of the

defendant in accordance with a validated risk assessment tool

pretrial risk scoring instrument and is willing to provide an

acceptable level of supervision over the defendant during the

period of release if so directed by the judicial officer.

Cross reference: For validation requirements for pretrial risk

scoring instruments, see Code, Criminal Procedure, § 5-103 (b).

RULE 4-216.1

(2) Other Factors

In addition to any recommendation made in accordance

with subsection (f)(1) of this Rule, the judicial officer shall

consider the following factors:

(A) the nature and circumstances of the offense charged,

the nature of the evidence against the defendant, and the

potential sentence upon conviction;

(B) the defendant’s prior record of appearance at court

proceedings or flight to avoid prosecution or failure to appear

at court proceedings;

history, financial resources, reputation, character and mental

condition, length of residence in the community, and length of

residence in this State;

(D) any request made under Code, Criminal Procedure

Article, § 5-201 (a) for reasonable protections for the safety

of an alleged victim;

(E) any recommendation of an agency that conducts pretrial

release investigations;

(F) any information presented by the State’s Attorney and

any recommendation of the State’s Attorney;

(G) any information presented by the defendant or

defendant’s attorney;

RULE 4-216.1

(H) the danger of the defendant to an alleged victim,

another person, or the community;

(I) the danger of the defendant to himself or herself; and

(J) any other factor bearing on the risk of a willful

failure to appear and the safety of each alleged victim, another

person, or the community, including all prior convictions and

any prior adjudications of delinquency that occurred within

three years of the date the defendant is charged as an adult.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapter 41, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 49), effective July

1, 2021, defines a “pretrial risk scoring instrument” that may

be used to assist the court in determining the eligibility of a

defendant for pretrial release. The statute also requires that

any such tool used by a jurisdiction must have an independent

validation study conducted at least once every five years.

Amendments are proposed to Rule 4-216.1 to address the language

added by Chapter 41.

New subsection (a)(5) adds the definition of “pretrial risk

scoring instrument.” A proposed cross reference cites to Code,

Criminal Procedure, § 5-103, the source of the definition.

Former subsections (a)(5), (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9), and

(a)(10) are re-numbered as (a)(6), (a)(7), (a)(8), (a)(9),

(a)(10), and (a)(11), respectively.

Proposed amendments to section (f) replace the term

“pretrial risk assessment” with “pretrial risk scoring

instrument.” A proposed cross reference after section (f)

addresses the validation requirements for pretrial risk scoring

instruments pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 5103.

RULE 10-202

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 – GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 200 – GUARDIAN OF PERSON

AMEND Rule 10-202 by adding nurse practitioner to the list

of health care professionals who may examine an alleged disabled

person and sign a certificate required to accompany a petition

for guardianship in subsection (a)(1)(B) and (a)(3)(A), by

updating a cross reference following section (a), and by making

stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 10-202.

(a)

CERTIFICATES AND CONSENTS

Certificates

(1) Generally Required

If guardianship of the person of a disabled person is

sought, the petitioner shall file with the petition signed and

verified certificates of the following persons who have examined

or evaluated the alleged disabled person:

(A)(i) two physicians

licensed to practice medicine in the United States who have

examined the disabled person, or (B)(ii) one such licensed

physician who has examined the disabled person and one licensed

psychologist, or licensed certified social worker-clinical, or

RULE 10-202

nurse practitioner who has seen and evaluated the disabled

person.

An examination or evaluation by at least one of the

health care professionals shall have been within 21 days before

the filing of the petition.

(2) Form

Each certificate required by subsection (a)(1) of this

Rule shall be substantially in the form approved by the State

Court Administrator, posted on the Judiciary website, and

available in the offices of the clerks of the circuit courts.

(3) Absence of Certificates

(A) Refusal to Permit Examination

If the petition is not accompanied by the required

certificate and the petition alleges that the disabled person is

residing with or under the control of a person who has refused

to permit examination or evaluation by a physician, or

evaluation by a psychologist, or licensed certified social

worker-clinical, or nurse practitioner, and that the disabled

person may be at risk unless a guardian is appointed, the court

shall defer issuance of a show cause order.

The court shall

instead issue an order requiring that the person who has refused

to permit the disabled person to be examined or evaluated appear

personally on a date specified in the order and show cause why

the disabled person should not be examined or evaluated.

The

RULE 10-202

order shall be personally served on that person and on the

disabled person.

(B) Appointment of Health Care Professionals by Court

If the court finds after a hearing that examinations

are necessary, it shall appoint (i) two physicians or (ii) one

physician and one psychologist, or licensed certified social

worker-clinical, or nurse practitioner to conduct the

examinations or the examination and evaluation and file their

reports with the court.

If both health care professionals find

the person to be disabled, the court shall issue a show cause

order requiring the alleged disabled person to answer the

petition for guardianship and shall require the petitioner to

give notice pursuant to Rule 10-203.

Otherwise, the petition

shall be dismissed.

Cross reference:

§ 13-705.

See Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 13-801

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

To comply with Chapter 568, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB 576),

proposed amendments to Rule 10-202 add nurse practitioners to

the list of health care professionals who may examine or

evaluate an alleged disabled person and sign a certificate

accompanying a petition for guardianship and physician’s

certification. Previously, the law required certification from

two physicians or from a physician and either a licensed

psychologist or licensed certified social worker-clinical.

Stylistic changes to section (a) are made, and a cross reference

following the section is updated.

RULE 10-112

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 – GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 100 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 10-112, to conform to a recent statutory change,

and to make stylistic changes, as follows:

RULE 10-112.

PETITION FOR GUARDIANSHIP OF ALLEGED DISABLED

PERSON

A petition for guardianship of an alleged disabled person

shall be substantially in the following form:

. . .

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS

The required exhibits are as follows:

(a) A copy of any instrument nominating a guardian;

(b) A copy of any power of attorney (including a durable power

of attorney for health care) which the alleged disabled person

has given to someone;

professionals who have examined or evaluated the alleged

disabled person.

The health care professionals shall be either

two physicians licensed to practice medicine in the United

States who have examined the alleged disabled person, or of one

RULE 10-112

such licensed physician, who has examined the alleged disabled

person, and one licensed psychologist, or licensed certified

social worker-clinical, or nurse practitioner who has seen and

evaluated the alleged disabled person.

An examination or

evaluation by at least one of the health care professionals must

have occurred within 21 days before the filing of the petition

(see Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 13-303 and § 1-102 (a)

and (b)).

Attach additional sheets to answer all the information

requested in this petition, if necessary.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapter 568, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB 576) adds nurse

practitioners to the list of health care professionals who may

examine an alleged disabled person and sign a certificate to

required to accompany a petition for guardianship in addition to

a physician. The amendments to Rule 10-112 conform the

“Additional Instructions,” for completion of a “Petition for

Guardianship of Alleged Disabled Person” to the new statutory

requirements.

RULE 10-301

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 – GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 300 – GUARDIAN OF PROPERTY

AMEND Rule 10-301 by amending the Committee note following

subsection (d)(1), as follows:

Rule 10-301.

PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A GUARDIAN OF PROPERTY

. . .

(d)

Required Exhibits

The petitioner shall attach to the petition as exhibits a

copy of any instrument nominating a guardian and documentation

in full compliance with at least one of the following:

(1)

the certificates required by Rule 10-202;

Committee note: Rule 10-202 (a)(2) requires that a certificate

of a licensed physician, licensed psychologist, or licensed

certified social worker-clinical, or nurse practitioner be

substantially in the form approved by the State Court

Administrator, posted on the Judiciary website, and available in

the offices of the clerks of the circuit courts.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The amendment to Rule 10-301 is a conforming amendment

necessitated by proposed changes to Rule 10-202 in light of

Chapter 568, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB 576).

RULE 3-731

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 3 - CIVIL PROCEDURE - DISTRICT COURT

CHAPTER 700 - SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS

AMEND Rule 3-731 to require the filing of a motion before

modifying, rescinding, or extending a peace order, to provide

for an automatic extension under certain circumstances, and to

make stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 3-731.

(a)

PEACE ORDERS

Generally

Proceedings for a peace order are governed by Code,

Courts Article, Title 3, Subtitle 15.

(b)

Form of Petition

A petition for relief under that the statute shall be in

substantially the following form:

. . .

(c)

Modification; Rescission; Extension

Upon the filing of a motion, a judge may modify, rescind,

or extend a peace order.

Modification, rescission, and

extension of peace orders are governed by Code, Courts and

Judicial Proceedings Article, § 3-1506 (a).

If a motion to

extend a final peace order is filed before the original

expiration date of the peace order, and the hearing is not held

by that date, the peace order shall be automatically extended

RULE 3-731

until the hearing is held.

The motion shall be presented to a

judge forthwith.

Committee note: Although Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings

Article, § 3-1506 (a) automatically extends a peace order under

certain circumstances, judges are encouraged to issue an order

even when the automatic extension is applicable.

Source:

This Rule is new.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 3-731 address the modification,

rescission, and extension of peace orders. A proposed

restructuring also separates the Rule into sections.

Pursuant to Chapter 134, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 250),

effective October 1, 2020, a final peace order is automatically

extended if a motion to extend is filed and a hearing is not

held before the original expiration date of the order. A

proposed amendment to the Rule provides for this new method of

extension.

Logistical concerns were expressed by members of the

Family/Domestic Subcommittee about the implementation of this

statute. One possible solution to address some of the concerns

would be to include language in the peace order indicating that,

if a motion to extend is filed before the expiration date of the

order, the peace order will be automatically extended until a

hearing is held on the motion. A proposed Committee note also

recognizes that, even if an automatic extension applies, the

issuance of a judge’s order to extend a peace order remains the

best practice.

RULE 9-308

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 9 - FAMILY LAW ACTIONS

CHAPTER 300 - DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

AMEND Rule 9-308 to require the filing of a motion before

modifying, rescinding, or extending a protective order and to

provide for an automatic extension under certain circumstances,

as follows:

Rule 9-308.

MODIFICATION; RESCISSION; EXTENSION

Only Upon the filing of a motion, a judge may modify,

rescind, or extend a protective order.

Modification,

rescission, and extension of protective orders are governed by

Code, Family Law Article, § 4-507 (a).

If a motion to extend a

final protective order is filed before the original expiration

date of the protective order, and the hearing is not held by

that date, the protective order shall be automatically extended

until the hearing is held.

The motion shall be presented to a

judge forthwith.

Committee note: Although Code, Family Law Article, § 4-507 (a)

automatically extends a protective order under certain

circumstances, judges are encouraged to issue an order even when

the automatic extension is applicable.

Source:

This Rule is new.

RULE 9-308

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 9-308 clarify that a motion

must be filed to extend, modify, or rescind a protective order.

Pursuant to Chapter 134, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 250),

effective October 1, 2020, a protective order is automatically

extended if a motion to extend is filed and a hearing is not

held before the original expiration date of the protective

order. A proposed amendment to the Rule provides for this new

method of extension.

Concern was expressed about the implementation of this

statute by members of the Family/Domestic Subcommittee. One

possible solution to address some concerns would be to include

language in the protective order indicating that, if a motion to

extend is filed before the expiration date of the order, the

protective order will be automatically extended until a hearing

is held on the motion. A proposed Committee note also

recognizes that, even if an automatic extension applies, the

issuance of a judge’s order to extend a protective order remains

the best practice.

RULE 9-206

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 9 - FAMILY LAW ACTIONS

CHAPTER 200 - DIVORCE, ANNULMENT AND ALIMONY

AMEND Rule 9-206 to update a reference in subsection (a)(1)

to Code, Family Law Article § 12-201, to add the shared physical

custody adjustment to Worksheet B, to conform line references in

Worksheet B, to conform line references in Worksheet C, and to

make stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 9-206.

(a)

CHILD SUPPORT GUIDELINES

Definitions

The following definitions apply in this Rule:

(1) Shared Physical Custody

"Shared physical custody" has the meaning stated in Code,

Family Law Article, §12-201 (i) (n).

(2) Worksheet

"Worksheet" means a document to compute child support

under the guidelines set forth in Code, Family Law Article, Title

12, Subtitle 2.

(b)

Filing of Worksheet

In an action involving the establishment or modification of

child support, each party shall file a worksheet in the form set

forth in section (c) or (d) of this Rule.

Unless the court

RULE 9-206

directs otherwise, the worksheet shall be filed not later than the

date of the hearing on the issue of child support.

Cross reference: See Code, Family Law Article, §12-203 (a) and

Walsh v. Walsh, 333 Md. 492 (1994).

. . .

(d)

Shared Physical Custody

In cases of shared physical custody, the worksheet shall

be in substantially the following form:

In the

Circuit Court for

No.

RULE 9-206

WORKSHEET B - CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION: SHARED PHYSICAL CUSTODY

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Name of Child

Date of Birth

Parent 1 Parent 2

1. MONTHLY ACTUAL INCOME (Before

taxes)

(Code, Family Law Article, §12-201 (b))

Combined

//////

a. Minus preexisting child support

payment actually paid

//////

b. Minus alimony actually paid

//////

c. Plus/minus alimony awarded

in this case

+/-

//////

2. MONTHLY ADJUSTED ACTUAL INCOME

3. PERCENTAGE SHARE OF INCO ME

(Divide each parent's

income on Line 2 by the

combined income on Line 2.)

//////

4. BASIC CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION

(Apply Line 2 Combined Income

to Child Support Schedule.)

//////

5. ADJUSTED BASIC CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATION (Multiply Line 4

by 1.5)

//////

RULE 9-206

6. OVERNIGHTS with each parent (must

total 365)

365

7. PERCENTAGE WITH EACH PARENT

(Divide Line 6 divided by 365)

STOP HERE IF Line 7 is less than 35

25% for either parent. Shared

Physical custody does not apply.

(Use Worksheet A, instead.)

//////

8. EACH PARENT’S THEORETICAL SHARE

OF ADJUSTED BASIC CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATION (Multiply Line 5 by

Line 3 for each parent.)

9. THEORETICAL BASIC CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATION FOR TIME WITH OTHER

PARENT (Multiply Line 8A by

Line 7B; and put answer on Line

9 A.) (Multiply Line 8B by Line

7A; and put answer on Line 9B.)

//////

10. SHARED PHYSICAL CUSTODY

ADJUSMENT (If Line 7 for a

parent is more than 25%, but

less than 30%, multiply that

parent’s Line 9 by the amount

below:

# of overnights

amount

•

92-94

.10

•

95-98

.08

•

99-102

.06

•

103-105

106-109

.04

.02

RULE 9-206

11. ADJUSTED THEORETICAL BASIC

CHILD SUPPORT OBLIGATION

(If the shared physical custody

Adjustment applies, add Line

10 to that parent’s Line 9; put

the answer on Line 11.)

1012. NET BASIC CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATION (If there is no

shared physical custody adjustment:

Subtract Line 9 lesser amount

from greater amount in line 9.

and place Place answer here

under column with greater amount in

Line 9.

Shared physical custody

Adjustment: For that parent use

amount from Line 11 instead of

Line 9 when completing calculation.)

1113. EXPENSES:

//////

a. Work-Related C hil d Care

Expenses

(Code, Family Law Article,

§12-204 (g))

//////

Health Insurance Expenses

(Code, Family Law Article

§12-204 (h)(1))

c. Extraordinary

Expenses

(Code, Family

Medical

Law Article,

§12-204 (h)(2))

d. Cash Medical Support

(Code, Family Law Article,

§12-102 (c) - applies only

to a child support order

under Title IV, Part D of

the Social Security Act)

RULE 9-206

e. Additional Expenses

(Code, Family Law Article,

§12-204 (i))

1214. NET ADJUSTMENT FROM WORKSHEET

C. Enter amount from Line l,

WORKSHEET C, if applicable. If

not, continue to Line 13 15.

1315. NET BASIC CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATION (From Line 10

12, WORKSHEET B)

//////

1416. RECOMMENDED CHILD SUPPORT ORDER

(If the same parent owes money

under Lines 1214 and 1315,

add these two figures to obtain the

amount owed by that parent.

If one parent owes money under

Line 1214 and the other owes

money under Line 1315, subtract

the lesser amount from the

greater amount to obtain the

difference. The parent owing

the greater of the two amounts

on Lines 1214 and 1315 will owe

that difference as the child

support obligation.

Note: amount owed in a shared custody

arrangement may not exceed the

amount that would be owed if

the obligor parent were a

non-custodial parent. See

WORKSHEET A).

//////

Comments or special adjustments, such as any adjustment for

certain third party benefits paid to or for the child of an

obligor who is disabled, retired, or receiving benefits as a

result of a compensable claim (see Code, Family Law Article,

§12-204 (j)):

PREPARED BY:

DATE:

RULE 9-206

INSTRUCTIONS FOR WORKSHEET C: Use Worksheet C ONLY if any of

the Expenses listed in Lines 11 13 a, 11 b, 11 c, 11 d, or 11 e

is directly paid out or received by the parents in a different

proportion than the percentage share of income entered on Line

3 of Worksheet B. Example: If one One parent pays all 100% of

the day care, or parents split education/medical costs 50/50

and Line 3 is other than 50/50. If there is more than one 11

13 e expense, the make calculations on Lines i and j below must

be made for each expense.

WORKSHEET C - FOR ADJUSTMENTS, LINE 12, WORKSHEET B

Parent 1

a. Total amount of direct

payments Payments made for

Line 11 13 a expenses

multiplied by each parent's

percentage of income (Line 3,

WORKSHEET B)

(Proportionate share)

Parent 2

c. Total amount of direct payments made for

Line 11 13 b expenses multiplied by each

parent's percentage of income

(Line 3, WORKSHEET B)

b. The excess Excess amount of direct

payments made by the parent who pays

more than the amount calculated

in Line a, above.

(The difference between Subtract

proportionate share from amount paid

and proportionate share)

d. The excess amount of direct payments

made by the parent who pays more than

the amount calculated in Line c, above.

e. Total amount of direct payments made

RULE 9-206

for Line 11 13 c expenses multiplied

by each parent's percentage of income

(Line 3, WORKSHEET B)

f. The excess amount of direct

payments made by the parent who

pays more than

the amount calculated in Line e, above. $

Total amount of direct

made for Line 11 13 d

multiplied

each

percentage of income

(Line 3, WORKSHEET B)

payments

expenses

parent’s

The excess amount of direct payments

made by the parent who pays more

than the amount calculated in Line

g, above.

Total amount of direct

made for Line 11 13 e

multiplied

each

percentage of income

(Line 3, WORKSHEET B)

payments

expenses

parent’s

The excess amount of direct payments

made by the parent who pays more

than the amount calculated in Line

i, above.

k. For each parent, add Lines b, d,

f, h, and j

l. Subtract lesser amount from

greater amount in Line k, above.

Place the answer on this Line

under the amount

in Line k.

Also enter this answer on

Line 12 14 of WORKSHEET

B, in the same parent’s

RULE 9-206

Column.

Source:

This Rule is new.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapters 142/143, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 269/SB 579),

effective October 1, 2020, created the shared physical custody

adjustment to be used when calculating child support in cases

where one parent has overnights for more than 25%, but less than

30% of the year. Proposed amendments to the shared physical

custody worksheet (Worksheet B) incorporate the new adjustment.

An amendment to subsection (a)(1) updates a reference to

Code, Family Law Article § 12-201 for the definition of shared

physical custody. Conforming amendments correcting line

references in Worksheet B and Worksheet C also are made.

Additional amendments will be required at a later date to

conform the Rule to Chapter 383, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 946),

which takes effect on October 1, 2021.

RULE 5-611

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 5 – EVIDENCE

CHAPTER 600 – WITNESSES

AMEND Rule 5-611 (a) to include a cross-reference to the

Court Dog and Child Witness Program, as follows:

Rule 5-611. MODE AND ORDER OF INTERROGATION AND PRESENTATION:

CONTROL BY COURT; SCOPE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION; LEADING QUESTIONS

(a)

Control by Court. The court shall exercise reasonable

control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and

presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and

presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth, (2)

avoid needless consumption of time, and (3) protect witnesses

from harassment or undue embarrassment.

Cross reference: For the Court Dog and Child Witness Program,

see Code, Courts Article, § 9-501.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapters 161/162, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 311/SB 101),

effective October 1, 2020, create a Court Dog and Child Witness

Program in the circuit court of each participating county.

Pursuant to the statute, the program aims to provide a facility

or therapy dog to child witnesses in any circuit court

proceeding or other court process, including meetings and

interviews. A cross reference is proposed to highlight the

RULE 5-611

program in relation to the court’s control of the mode and

interrogation of witnesses.

RULE 5-615

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 5 – EVIDENCE

CHAPTER 600 – WITNESSES

AMEND Rule 5-615 (c) to include a cross-reference to the

Court Dog and Child Witness Program, as follows:

Rule 5-615. EXCLUSION OF WITNESSES

. . .

(c)

Permissive Non-Exclusion. The court may permit a child

witness’s parents or another person having a supportive

relationship with the child to remain in court during the

child’s testimony.

Cross reference: For the Court Dog and Child Witness Program,

see Code, Courts Article, § 9-501.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapters 161/162, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 311/SB 101),

effective October 1, 2020, create a Court Dog and Child Witness

Program in the circuit court of each participating county.

Pursuant to the statute, the program aims to provide a facility

or therapy dog to child witnesses in any circuit court

proceeding or other court process, including meetings and

interviews. A cross reference is proposed to highlight the

program in relation to permissive non-exclusion of witnesses

during a child’s testimony.

RULE 6-423

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 – SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

ADD new Rule 6-423, as follows:

Rule 6-423.

ADMINISTRATION AFTER CLOSING OF ESTATE — NEWLY

DISCOVERED SMALL CHECK

(a)

When New Appointment Not Necessary

Except as provided in section (d) of this Rule, if a

check payable to a decedent or the estate of a decedent for a

sum not exceeding $1,000 is discovered after an estate has been

closed and the appointment of the personal representative has

terminated pursuant to Rule 6-421, the court, on a verified

petition made by an interested person, may enter an order

authorizing the interested person to indorse and deposit the

check into the interested person’s bank account for the limited

purpose of distributing the funds in accordance with the will

or, if the decedent died intestate, in accordance with Code,

Estates and Trusts Title 3, Subtitle 1.

(b)

Petition

A petition pursuant to this Rule shall be filed in the

jurisdiction where the decedent’s estate was administered and

RULE 6-423

include the estate number, a brief description of the check, the

interest of the person filing the petition, the names and

addresses of the interested persons, a statement that the

conditions in section (d) do not apply to the requested order,

and a brief statement of the anticipated distribution of the

funds.

(c)

Exceptions

Unless a hearing is requested by an interested person,

the court may enter an order under this Rule without a hearing.

(d)

Conditions

The court may not enter an order under this Rule if:

(1) the estate of the decedent was insolvent when it closed,

(2) the value of the discovered check increases the value of

the estate above the value that qualifies under Code, Estates

and Trusts, § 5-601 for administration of a small estate, or

(3) any additional fees and inheritance taxes due as a

result of the newly discovered check are not paid with the

filing of the petition.

(e)

Distribution

The distribution of funds by an interested person under

this Rule shall be made within 60 days after the court’s order

authorizing the distribution.

(f)

Effect of Order

RULE 6-423

An order issued under this Rule does not require the

court to reopen the estate.

Cross reference:

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 10-104.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapter 239, 2020 Laws of Maryland (HB 543) allows for the

distribution of a check discovered after an estate has been

closed without reopening it. Proposed new Rule 6-423 outlines

the process for interested persons to indorse, deposit, and

distribute funds from checks made out to the decedent or his or

her estate, valued at $1,000 or less, which are discovered after

an estate has been closed and the appointment of the personal

representative has been terminated.

Proponents of the bill testified that when an estate is

closed and the decedent’s bank account has been closed, there

are limited options for dealing with a newly-discovered check,

which may come from a refund or class action settlement payment.

In the case of smaller checks, the cost of reopening the estate

often exceeds the value of the check.

The bill provides that a court may enter an order

authorizing an interested person to indorse and deposit the

check in their personal account for the limited purpose of

distributing funds in accordance with the will or, if the

decedent died intestate, with the Estates and Trusts article.

The court is prohibited from entering the order if the estate

was insolvent when it was closed, the value of the discovered

check increases the value of the estate above the value for a

small estate, or additional fees and inheritance taxes due have

not been paid.

Rule 6-423 requires the petition to include similar

information mandated by Rule 6-422, Administration After Final

Account – Newly Discovered Property, but removes the provision

about requesting a new personal representative and adds a

requirement that the petition state that the exceptions in

section (d) of this Rule do not apply.

RULE 6-107

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 100 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 6-107 by rewording a cross reference, as

follows:

Rule 6-107.

(a)

EXTENSION OF TIME

By Request to Register or Court

The court or the register, upon written request, may

extend to a specified date the time for filing an inventory

(Rule 6-402), an information report (Rule 6-404), an application

to fix inheritance tax on non-probate assets (Rule 6-405), or an

account (Rule 6-417). The request may be made ex parte.

(b)

By Petition

Except as otherwise provided in this section, when these

rules, an order of court, or other law require or allow an act

to be done at or within a specified time, the court, upon

petition filed pursuant to Rule 6-122 and for good cause shown,

may extend the time to a specified date. The court may not

extend the time for filing a claim, a caveat, or a notice of

appeal or for taking any other action where expressly prohibited

by rule or statute.

RULE 6-107

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §§ 5-304 and

5-406. For extension of time to elect statutory to take a

spousal elective share, see Rule 6-411. For extension of time to

file a final report and make distribution in a modified

administration, see Rule 6-456.

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 6-107 makes a conforming

change to the cross reference following section (b). Chapter

435, 2019 Laws of Maryland (HB 99), which is effective October

1, 2020, exclusively uses the term “elective share.”

RULE 6-411

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 - ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

AMEND Rule 6-411 by changing the title of the Rule, by

changing references from “statutory share” to “elective share,”

by specifying where an election shall be filed, by adding a

reference to the code section in the form of election, by

altering forms to allow for an unrepresented party to provide

contact information, by adding subsection (a)(2) to allow a

specifically authorized guardian or agent to make the election

with certain notice requirements, by allowing the guardian or

agent to petition for an extension of time, by adding cross

references, and by making stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 6-411.

(a)

ELECTION TO TAKE STATUTORY ELECTIVE SHARE

Form of Election

(1) By Surviving Spouse

A surviving spouse may elect to take a statutory an

elective share by the timely filing of an election in the court

in which the personal representative of the decedent was

appointed.

If the election is filed prior to the appointment of

the personal representative, the spouse may file with the

RULE 6-411

any county in which the decedent resided on the date of the

decedent’s death or in which real property or a leasehold

interest in real property of the decedent is located.

The election shall be substantially in the following form:

[CAPTION]

ELECTION TO TAKE STATUTORY ELECTIVE SHARE OF ESTATE

I, _______________________________________________________,

surviving spouse of ___________________________________________,

late of the County (City) of __________________________________,

renounce all provisions of my spouse’s will pertaining to myself

and elect to take my statutory elective share of the decedent’s

estate subject to election under § 3-403 of the Estates and

Trusts Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland.

Witness:

________________________

________________________________

Surviving Spouse

Date: __________________________

________________________

Attorney

If There is No Attorney:

________________________

Address

_____________________________

Surviving Spouse’s Address

________________________

Telephone Number

_____________________________

Surviving Spouse’s

Telephone Number

________________________

Facsimile Number

_____________________________

Surviving Spouse’s

RULE 6-411

Facsimile Number

________________________

E-mail Address

Cross reference:

408.

_____________________________

Surviving Spouse’s

E-mail Address

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-203 § 3-

(2) By the Guardian or Agent

(A) Subject to subsection (B), a specifically authorized

guardian or agent of the surviving spouse may exercise the right

of the surviving spouse to elect to take an elective share by

timely filing the election substantially in the following form:

[CAPTION]

ELECTION TO TAKE ELECTIVE SHARE OF ESTATE

I, _______________________________, in my capacity as the

specifically authorized guardian or agent of __________________,

surviving spouse of____________________________________________,

late of the County (City) of __________________________________,

elect to take the surviving spouse’s elective share of the

decedent’s estate subject to election under § 3-403 of the

Estates and Trusts Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland.

Witness:

________________________

________________________________

Guardian/Agent Signature

Date: __________________________

________________________

If There is No Attorney:

RULE 6-411

Attorney

________________________

Address

_____________________________

Guardian or Agent’s Address

________________________

Telephone Number

_____________________________

Guardian or Agent’s

Telephone Number

________________________

Facsimile Number

_____________________________

Guardian or Agent’s

Facsimile Number

________________________

E-mail Address

_____________________________

Guardian or Agent’s

E-mail Address

Cross reference:

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-405 (b).

(B) Prior to or concurrent with the filing of an election

pursuant to subsection (a)(2)(A) of this Rule, the guardian or

agent promptly shall deliver notice of the election to (i) all

interested persons in the decedent’s estate and (ii) all persons

who would inherit from the surviving spouse if the surviving

spouse died intestate and unmarried at the time the election is

made.

agent is valid unless (i) within 30 days after delivery of

notice under subsection (a)(2)(B) a person with standing makes

an objection in the court in which the election was filed and

(ii) following a hearing the court finds that the election is

not in the best interests of the surviving spouse.

Cross reference:

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-405 (c).

RULE 6-411

(b)

Time Limitation for Making Election

An election to take a statutory an elective share shall

be filed within the later of nine months after the date of the

decedent’s death or six months after the date of the first

appointment of a personal representative under a will, unless

extended pursuant to this Rule.

Cross reference:

(c)

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-407.

Extension of Time for Making Election

Within the period for making an election, the surviving

spouse or the specifically authorized guardian or agent of the

surviving spouse may file with the court a petition for an

extension of time.

The petitioner shall deliver or mail a copy

of the petition to the personal representative.

For good cause

shown, the court may grant extensions not to exceed three months

at a time, provided each petition for extension is filed before

the expiration of the period originally prescribed or before the

expiration of any period extended by a previous order.

The

court may rule on the petition without a hearing or, if time

permits, with a hearing.

If an extension is granted without a hearing, the register

shall serve notice on the personal representative and such other

persons as the court may direct.

following form:

The notice shall be in the

RULE 6-411

[CAPTION]

NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME

TO ELECT STATUTORY ELECTIVE SHARE

On the ____ day of __________, __________, an extension

(month)

(year)

of time to elect a statutory an elective share of the estate was

granted to _______________________, the decedent’s surviving

spouse or specifically authorized guardian or agent of the

surviving spouse.

The extension expires on the ____ day of

__________, __________.

(month)

(year)

If you believe there is good cause to object to the

extension, within 20 days after service of this notice you may

file with the court, in writing, a petition to shorten the time

for filing an election.

A copy of the petition shall be served

on the surviving spouse or specifically authorized guardian or

agent of the surviving spouse.

(d)

Withdrawal

The surviving spouse or the specifically authorized

guardian or agent of the surviving spouse may file with the

RULE 6-411

expiration of the time, or any extension thereof granted by the

court, for filing an election.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 6-411 implement Chapter 435,

2019 Laws of Maryland (HB 99), which is effective October 1,

2020.

The Code exclusively uses the term “elective share,” rather

than “statutory share,” and Rule 6-411 has been amended to

conform terminology to the law. The form in subsection (a)(1)

is amended to comply with the statute and modified to allow for

a pro se surviving spouse to provide contact information. New

subsection (a)(2)(A) creates a process for a specifically

authorized guardian or agent to make the election and includes a

form modeled after (a)(1). Subsections (a)(2)(B) and (a)(2)(C)

incorporate the notice and objection procedure from the Code.

Sections (c) and (d) are amended to allow a guardian or agent to

petition for an extension or to withdraw the election.

RULE 6-413

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 – SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

AMEND Rule 6-413 by changing the title of the Rule, by

adding new subsection (a)(2), by adding a cross-reference after

subsection (a)(2), by adding new section (d) providing for a

certain notice to the trustee of a certain revocable trust, by

adding to section (f) notice to the trustee of a certain

revocable trust of disallowance of a claim, and by allowing a

certain trustee to file a petition pursuant to section (g), as

follows:

RULE 6-413.

(a)

CLAIM AGAINST ESTATE DECEDENT – PROCEDURE

Presentation of Claim

(1) A claimant may make a claim against the estate, within

the time allowed for presenting claims, (1)(A) by serving it on

the personal representative, (2)(B) by filing it with the

(3)(C) by filing suit.

If the claim is filed prior to the

appointment of the personal representative, the claimant may

file the claim with the register in the county in which the

decedent was domiciled or in any county in which the decedent

resided on the date of the decedent’s death or in which real

RULE 6-413

property or a leasehold interest in real property of the

decedent is located.

(2) Except in a small estate proceeding, a claim properly

presented under this Rule preserves a claim against property of

a trust that was revocable at the death of the decedent-settlor,

subject to disallowance pursuant to section (f).

Cross reference: See Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 14.5508 (b)(1) for preservation of claims against revocable trust

property.

(b)

Content of Claim

A claim against the decedent’s estate shall indicate (1)

the basis of the claim, (2) the name and address of the

claimant, (3) the amount claimed, (4) if the claim is not yet

due, the date when it will become due, (5) if the claim is

contingent, the nature of the contingency, and (6) if the claim

is secured, a description of the security. Unless the claim is

made by filing suit, it shall be verified.

(c)

Form of Claim

A claim against a decedent’s estate may be filed or made

substantially in the following form:

In the Estate of:

Estate No.__________

________________________________________ Date _______________

CLAIM AGAINST DECEDENT’S ESTATE

RULE 6-413

The claimant certifies that there is due and owing by the

decedent in accordance with the attached statement of account or

other basis for the claim the sum of $________.

I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury that the

contents of the foregoing claim are true to the best of my

knowledge, information, and belief.

___________________________

_______________________________

Name of Claimant

Signature of claimant or person

authorized to make verifications

on behalf of claimant

___________________________

________________________________

Name and Title of Person

Signing Claim

Address

________________________________

_________________________________

Telephone Number

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this ___ day of __________ (month),

_____ (year), I [ ] delivered or [ ] mailed, first class,

postage prepaid, a copy of the foregoing Claim to the personal

representative,

____________________

(name and address)

____________________

Signature of Claimant

RULE 6-413

Instructions:

1. This form may be filed with the Register of Wills upon

payment of the filing fee provided by law.

A copy must also be

sent to the personal representative by the claimant.

2. If a claim is not yet due, indicate the date when it will

become due.

If a claim is contingent, indicate the nature of

the contingency.

(d)

If a claim is secured, describe the security.

Notice to Trustee of Revocable Trust

(1) If the personal representative has knowledge of the

existence of a revocable trust for which the decedent was

settlor, the personal representative shall notify the trustee of

the existence of a claim.

(2) Prior to allowance of a claim in whole or in part, the

personal representative shall notify the trustee of the intended

allowance.

A trustee who wishes to dispute the allowance shall

petition the court to intervene within 20 days after receipt of

the notice.

(d)(e)

Disallowance of Claim or Petition for Determination of

Validity

If the claim or any part thereof is not to be allowed, the

personal representative shall either disallow the claim in whole

or in part in the manner provided by section (e)(f) of this

Rule, or petition the court for determination of the validity of

the claim.

RULE 6-413

(e)(f)

Form of Disallowance of Claim

Upon disallowing a claim the personal representative shall

file with the register and mail to the claimant and the trustee

of each revocable trust known to the personal representative for

which the decedent was settlor a notice in the following form:

[CAPTION]

NOTICE OF DISALLOWANCE

Your claim has been allowed in the amount of $________ and

disallowed in the amount of $________.

Your claim in the amount

disallowed will be forever barred against the estate and any

revocable trust of the decedent-settlor unless within 60 days

after the mailing of this notice you file a petition for

allowance of the disallowed amount in the Orphans’ Court or a

suit against the personal representative.

If your claim has not

been filed timely pursuant to the Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, § 8-103, your claim will not be paid and it is forever

barred.

___________________________________

Personal Representative

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that the disallowance of claim was mailed, postage

prepaid, this _____________________ day of

(year)

(month)

, to _________, claimant, at _________.

RULE 6-413

_________________________

Personal Representative/Attorney

__________________________

Name (printed)

__________________________

Address

__________________________

Telephone Number

(f)(g)

Claimant’s Petition

(1) No Action Taken

If no action has been taken by the personal

representative disallowing the claim in whole or in part, the

claimant or trustee of a revocable trust of the decedent-settlor

may petition the court for determination of the validity of the

claim.

(2) After Disallowance

A claimant whose claim has been disallowed in whole or

in part may file with the court a petition for allowance within

60 days after mailing of the notice of disallowance.

(g)(h)

Hearing

Upon the filing of a petition by the personal

representative or a claimant, the court shall hold a hearing on

RULE 6-413

the petition after notice to the personal representative, the

claimant, and such other persons as the court may direct.

(h)(i)

Notice to Register of Suit

If suit is filed against the personal representative by a

claimant whose claim is disallowed in whole or in part, the

personal representative shall notify the register in writing of

the pendency of the suit within ten days after being served with

the complaint.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

Chapter 100, 2015 Laws of Maryland (HB 666) added to Code,

Estates and Trusts Article, § 14.5-508 provisions to protect the

property, trustee, and beneficiaries of a trust that was

revocable at the time of the death of the settlor from claims of

creditors not presented within the time periods in § 8-103 or

within six months of publication of notice by the trustee if a

proceeding for a regular or modified estate has not been

commenced. The law was designed to allow trustees to avail

themselves of the same protections afforded to personal

representatives rather than subject them to limitations periods

of anywhere from three to twelve years.

Proposed amendments to Rule 6-413 seek to clarify the

process for personal representatives, trustees, and creditors

where an estate other than a small estate is open and a creditor

wishes to preserve the creditor’s claim against the decedentsettlor’s trust property.

New subsection (a)(2) states that a properly presented

claim under the Rule preserves a claim against trust property.

A cross reference to the Code section is added after subsection

(a)(2).

RULE 6-413

New section (d) requires notice of a claim to the trustee

and notice prior to the allowance of a claim, in whole or in

part. Subsection (d)(2) allows the trustee to intervene to

dispute the validity of the claim.

Re-lettered section (f) is amended to require the personal

representative to mail notice of disallowance to the trustee.

The Committee is advised that often the representative and

trustee are the same individual; however, if there is a thirdparty trustee, the added notice provisions ensure that the

trustee is alerted to the claim.

The notice of disallowance form in section (f) informs the

creditor that claims against the estate and any revocable trust

property will be barred unless the creditor acts within the

specified time. Subsection (g)(1) allows the creditor or

trustee to petition the court to determine the validity of a

claim if the personal representative does not act.

RULE 6-416

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 - ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

AMEND Rule 6-416 by adding new subsection (a)(1)(A) to

describe the general contents of a petition for compensation, by

requiring that a petition state anticipated or previously

allowed fees in connection with an elective share, by adding new

subsection (a)(1)(B) to describe the contents of a petition for

additional fees and commissions in connection with an elective

share, by adding a Committee note after subsection (a)(1)(B)

stating that such compensation is presumed reasonable under

certain circumstances, by adding new subsection (b)(1)(A) to

describe the procedure for obtaining payment of compensation by

consent, by specifying that payment of additional compensation

in connection with an elective share may be obtained by consent

in certain circumstances, by altering the form in subsection

(b)(2)(B) to delineate compensation for regular estate

administration and for additional compensation in connection

with an elective share, and by making stylistic changes, as

follows:

RULE 6-416.

ATTORNEY’S FEES OR PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE’S

COMMISSIONS

RULE 6-416

(a)

Subject to Court Approval

(1) Contents of Petition

(A) Generally

When a petition for the allowance of attorney’s fees

or personal representative’s commissions is required, it shall

be verified and shall state in reasonable detail the basis for

the current request and (A)(i) the amount of all fees or

commissions previously allowed, (B)(ii) the amount of fees or

commissions that the petitioner reasonably estimates will be

requested in the future, (C)(iii) the amount of fees or

commissions currently requested, (iv) any additional fees or

commissions anticipated or previously allowed in connection with

an election by or on behalf of a surviving spouse to take an

elective share, and (E)(v) that the notice required by

subsection (a)(3) of this Rule has been given.

(B) Compensation in Connection with an Elective Share

When a petition for the allowance of additional

attorney’s fees or personal representative’s commissions in

connection with an election by or on behalf of a surviving

spouse to take an elective share under Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, § 7-603(b) is required, it shall be verified and shall

state in reasonable detail the basis for the current request and

(i) the amount of all fees or commissions previously allowed,

(ii) the amount of fees or commissions that the petitioner

RULE 6-416

reasonably estimates will be requested in the future, (iii) the

amount of fees or commissions currently requested, (iv) the

amount of fees or commissions under this subsection consented to

by all interested persons, and (v) that the notice required by

subsection (a)(3) of this Rule has been given.

A petition under

this subsection may be combined with a petition under subsection

(a)(1)(A) of this Rule.

Committee note: Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7-603

(b)(2) states that the amount of compensation or attorney’s fees

consented to by all interested persons is presumed to be

reasonable.

(2) Filing – Separate or Joint Petitions

Petitions for attorney’s fees and personal

representative’s commissions shall be filed with the court and

may be filed as separate or joint petitions.

(3) Notice

The personal representative shall serve on each unpaid

creditor who has filed a claim and on each interested person a

copy of the petition accompanied by a notice in the following

form:

NOTICE OF PETITION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES OR PERSONAL

REPRESENTATIVE’S COMMISSIONS

You are hereby notified that a petition for allowance of

attorney’s fees or personal representative’s commissions has

been filed.

You have 20 days after service of the petition

RULE 6-416

within which to file written exceptions and to request a

hearing.

(4) Allowance by Court

Upon the filing of a petition, the court, by order,

shall allow attorney’s fees or personal representative’s

commissions as it considers appropriate, subject to any

exceptions.

(5) Exception

An exception shall be filed with the court within 20

days after service of the petition and notice and shall include

the grounds therefor in reasonable detail.

A copy of the

exception shall be served on the personal representative.

(6) Disposition

If timely exceptions are not filed, the order of the

court allowing the attorney’s fees or personal representative’s

commissions becomes final.

Upon the filing of timely

exceptions, the court shall set the matter for hearing and

notify the personal representative and other persons that the

court deems appropriate of the date, time, place, and purpose of

the hearing.

(b)

Payment of Attorney’s Fees and Personal Representative’s

Commissions Without Court Approval

(1) Payment of Contingency Fee for Services Other Than

Estate Administration

RULE 6-416

Payment of attorney’s fees may be made without court

approval if:

(A) the fee is paid to an attorney representing the estate

in litigation under a contingency fee agreement signed by the

decedent or by a previous personal representative;

(B) the fee is paid to an attorney representing the estate

in litigation under a contingency fee agreement signed by the

current personal representative of the decedent’s estate

provided that the personal representative is not acting as the

retained attorney and is not a member of the attorney’s firm;

fee agreement;

(D) a copy of the contingency fee agreement is on file

with the register of wills; and

(E) the attorney files a statement with each account

stating that the scope of the representation by the attorney

does not extend to the administration of the estate.

(2) Consent in Lieu of Court Approval

(A) Procedure

Upon the filing of a completed Consent to Compensation

for Personal Representative and/or Attorney form substantially

in the form set forth in subsection (b)(2)(B) of this Rule,

Payment payment of attorney’s fees and personal representative’s

commissions may be made without court approval if the combined

RULE 6-416

sum of all payments of attorney’s fees and personal

representative’s commissions authorized under Code, Estates and

Trusts Article, § 7-603(a) does not exceed the amounts provided

in Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7-601; and.

In addition,

attorney’s fees and personal representative’s commissions

authorized under Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7-603(b)

may be included in the Consent form and paid without court

approval if the total combined sum of all payments of attorney’s

fees and personal representative’s commissions authorized under

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §§ 7-603(a) and 7-603(b) does

not exceed the amounts provided in Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, § 7-601.

(B) Form of Consent

a written The consent stating the amounts of the

payments shall be signed by (i) each creditor who has filed a

claim that is still open and (ii) all interested persons, is and

filed with the register substantially in the following form:

BEFORE THE REGISTER OF WILLS FOR _____________, MARYLAND

IN THE ESTATE OF:

__________ Estate No.

__________________

CONSENT TO COMPENSATION FOR

PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE AND/OR ATTORNEY

I understand that the law, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7601, provides a formula to establish the maximum total

commissions to be paid for personal representative’s

RULE 6-416

commissions.

If the total compensation for personal

representative’s commissions and attorney’s fees being requested

falls within the maximum allowable commissions, and the request

is consented to by all unpaid creditors who have filed claims

and all interested persons, this payment need not be subject to

review or approval by the Court.

A creditor or an interested

party may, but is not required to, consent to these fees.

The formula sets total compensation at 9% of the first

$20,000 of the adjusted estate subject to administration PLUS

3.6% of the excess over $20,000.

Based on this formula, the

adjusted estate subject to administration known at this time is

__________.

The total allowable statutory maximum commission

based on the adjusted estate subject to administration known at

this time is __________, LESS any personal representative’s

commissions and attorney’s fees previously approved as required

by law and paid.

To date, $ __________ in personal

representative’s commissions and $ __________ in attorney’s fees

have been paid.

IF ALL REQUIRED CONSENTS ARE NOT OBTAINED, A PETITION SHALL

BE FILED, AND THE COURT SHALL DETERMINE THE AMOUNT TO BE PAID.

Cross reference:

See 90 Op. Att’y. Gen. 145 (2005).

Total combined fees being requested are $_________, including

$_________ under Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7-603(a)

RULE 6-416

and $_________ under Code, Estates and Trusts Article § 7603(b), to be paid as follows:

Amount

Name of Personal Representative/Attorney

______________

_________________________________________

______________

_________________________________________

______________

_________________________________________

______________

_________________________________________

I have read this entire form and I hereby consent to the

payment of personal representative and/or attorney’s fees in the

above amount.

Date

Signature

Name (Typed or Printed)

________________________________________________________________

____________________________

Attorney

____________________________

Personal Representative

_____________________________

Address

_____________________________

Personal Representative

_____________________________

Telephone Number

_____________________________

Facsimile Number

_____________________________

RULE 6-416

Email Address

Committee note: Nothing in this Rule is intended to relax

requirements for approval and authorization of previous

payments.

(3) Designation of Payment

When rendering an account pursuant to Rule 6-417 or a

final report under modified administration pursuant to Rule 6455, the personal representative shall designate any payment

made under this section as an expense.

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §§ 7-502, 7601, 7-602, 7-603, and 7-604.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 6-416 implement Chapter 435,

2019 Laws of Maryland (HB 99), which permits a petition for

attorney’s fees or personal representative’s commissions to seek

additional fees or commissions in connection with an election to

take an elective share by or on behalf of a surviving spouse.

Subsection (a)(1) is restructured to create new subsection

(a)(1)(A), which contains the current required contents of a

petition for the allowance of fees and commissions. The

subsection is reorganized and a reference to additional fees and

commissions anticipated in connection with the elective share

election is added to the requirements.

New subsection (a)(1)(B) outlines the required contents of

a petition for the allowance of the additional fees, which

mirrors the requirements in (a)(1)(A) but also asks the

petitioner to state the amount of the additional fees and

commissions to which the interested persons have consented. A

Committee note following subsection (a)(1)(B) highlights the

presumption in the statute that consented-to compensation is

reasonable. A petition under subsection (a)(1)(B) may be

combined with a petition under subsection (a)(1)(A).

RULE 6-416

Subsection (b)(2) is amended to add subsection (b)(2)(A),

outlining the procedure for payment of attorney’s fees and

personal representative’s commissions that are consented to by

interested persons and creditors and that do not exceed the

statutory maximums in Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 7-601.

The subsection specifies that the consent process can include

additional fees and commissions related to the elective share so

long as the combined payments of all fees and commissions do not

exceed the statutory maximums.

Subsection (b)(2)(B) is restyled to describe the form of

consent, and the form is amended to include references to

compensation under Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §§ 7-603(a)

and 7-603(b).

RULE 6-418

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 - ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

ADD New Rule 6-418, as follows:

Rule 6-418.

(a)

STATEMENT AND CERTIFICATION OF ELECTIVE SHARE

Statement of Elective Share

(1) On final payment, the personal representative of the

decedent, the trustee of any revocable trust of the decedent, or

the person responsible for filing the estate tax return, as

appropriate, shall file with the register a signed statement

verified by the surviving spouse stating the value of the

elective share and that the elective share has been paid in

full.

(2) The statement of the elective share shall be served on

each person entitled to request a certification under section

(b) prior to filing.

(3) On request of the surviving spouse, personal

representative, trustee of any revocable trust of the decedent,

or the person responsible for filing the estate tax return, the

(b)

Certification of Accuracy

RULE 6-418

(1) The surviving spouse, the personal representative of the

decedent, the trustee of any revocable trust of the decedent,

the person responsible for filing the estate tax return, any

payor of any portion of the elective share, and any other person

having an interest in the assets from which the elective share

has been paid may request that the register certify in writing

the accuracy of the calculation and payment of the portion of

the augmented estate subject to election.

(2) A request for certification shall be filed no more than

30 days from the date of service of the statement of the

elective share.

(3) If a certification is requested, the register may

request in writing information and documentation the register

deems necessary to verify the calculation and payment.

Cross reference:

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-412.

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed new Rule 6-418 implements Chapter 435, 2019 Laws

of Maryland (HB 99) and establishes the process for filing a

statement of the elective share after it has been paid and for

an interested party to seek certification of accuracy of the

calculation and payment, pursuant to Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, § 3-412.

Subsection (a)(1) states the requirement from the statute.

Subsection (a)(2) requires the filer to serve the statement on

individuals who are entitled to request certification of

RULE 6-418

accuracy of calculation and payment of the elective share. Once

the statement is served, individuals authorized by the statute

have 30 days to request the register certify the accuracy of the

calculation and payment of the elective share. Attorneys,

including one involved in the drafting of the legislation,

advised that there should be a time period to request

certification and suggested 30 days.

If certification is requested, subsection (b)(3) permits

the register to make written requests for information and

documentation. The statute does not specify how the register

can request the necessary information, and attorneys recommended

specifying that the request be in writing.

RULE 6-434

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 100 – ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

AMEND Rule 6-434 by restyling section (a) to refer to

transmitting issues on petition, by adding new section (b) to

allow for transmission of elective share issues, by clarifying a

reference to the orphans’ court in section (c), and by making

stylistic changes as follows:

RULE 6-434.

(a)

TRANSMITTING ISSUES

Petition Transmitting on Petition

In any proceeding, the orphans’ court, upon petition by a

person with standing, may transmit contested issues of fact

within its jurisdiction for trial to the circuit court of the

county in which the orphans’ court is located.

(1) Contents

The petition shall set forth separately each issue to be

transmitted.

Each issue shall present a single, definite, and

material question of fact.

(b)(2) Response

RULE 6-434

A response may include objections to the issues set

forth in the petition and offer additional issues.

(b)

Transmitting Elective Share Issues

In a proceeding where the surviving spouse has made an

election under Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-403, the

court, on its own initiative, may transmit issues of fact

relating to the value or sources of payment of an elective share

for trial to the circuit court of the county in which the

election is filed.

Cross reference:

(c)

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 3-413.

Framing of Issues

The orphans’ court, by order, shall frame the issues to

be transmitted and transmit them to the appropriate circuit

court. The order may designate the plaintiff and defendant for

purposes of trial in the circuit court.

(d)

Amendment, Modification or Supplementation of Issues

Upon petition, the orphans’ court may amend, supplement

or modify issues previously transmitted to a circuit court.

the change is made within 15 days of a scheduled trial date,

leave of the circuit court must be obtained.

Cross reference:

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, § 2-105.

Committee note: See Nugent v. Wright, 277 Md. 615 (1976)

(issues of law are impermissible). See also Hill v. Lewis, 21

Md. App. 121 (1974). Section (d) changes the rule set forth in

Pegg v. Warford, 4 Md. 385 (1853), and recently reaffirmed in

Kao v. Hsia, 309 Md. 366 (1987).

RULE 6-434

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 6-434 implement Chapter 435,

2019 Laws of Maryland (HB 99). Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, § 3-413 permits an orphans’ court, on its own

initiative, to transmit issues of fact relating to the elective

share to the appropriate circuit for trial. New section (b)

provides for this power in addition to section (a), which allows

for transmission of issues on petition of a party.

RULE 16-915

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 – COURT ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 900 – ACCESS TO JUDICIAL RECORDS

DIVISON 2. LIMITATIONS ON ACCESS

AMEND Rule 16-915 to indicate that the State may request

shielding of certain information, to add a section addressing

shielding of information for witnesses, and to re-letter

subsequent sections, as follows:

RULE 16-915.

CASE RECORDS – REQUIRED DENIAL OF INSPECTION –

SPECIFIC INFORMATION

Except as otherwise provided by law, the Rules in this

Chapter, or court order, a custodian shall deny inspection of a

case record or part of a case record that would reveal:

. . .

(c)

The address, telephone number, and e-mail address of a

victim or victim’s representative in a criminal action, juvenile

delinquency action, or an action under Code, Family Law Article,

Title 4, Subtitle 5, who has requested, or the State has

requested, that such information be shielded.

Such a request

may be made at any time, including in a victim notification

RULE 16-915

request form filed with the clerk or a request or petition filed

under Rule 16-934.

(d)

The address, telephone number, and e-mail address of a

witness in a criminal or juvenile delinquency action, who has

requested, or the State has requested, that such information be

shielded.

Such a request may be made at any time, including a

request or petition filed under Rule 16-934.

(d)(e)

Any part of the Social Security or federal tax

identification number of an individual.

(e)(f)

A trade secret, confidential commercial information,

confidential financial information, or confidential geological

or geophysical information.

(f)(g)

Information about a person who has received a copy of

a case record containing information prohibited by Rule 1-322.1.

(g)(h)

The address, telephone number, and e-mail address of a

payee contained in a Consent by the payee filed pursuant to Rule

15-1302 (c)(1)(F).

Cross reference: See Rule 16-934 (h) concerning information

shielded upon a request authorized by Code, Courts Article,

Title 3, Subtitle 15 (peace orders) or Code, Family Law Article,

Title 4, Subtitle 5 (domestic violence) and in criminal actions.

For obligations of a filer of a submission containing restricted

information, see Rules 16-916 and 20-201.1.

Source:

This Rule is derived from former Rule 16-908 (2019).

RULE 16-915

REPORTER’S NOTE

On October 1, 2020, Chapter 539, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB

213) became effective. The new legislation adds to Code,

Criminal Procedure Article, § 11-205 by noting that, upon

request, the address or telephone number of a victim, victim’s

representative, or witness to a domestically related crime may

be withheld before the trial or an adjudicatory hearing, unless

a judge finds good cause to release the information. The

previous version of § 11-205 referred only to cases involving

felonies or delinquent acts that would be felonies if committed

by an adult.

The revisions to § 11-205 prompted consideration of Code,

Criminal Procedure Article, § 11-301 and review of the access

Rules regarding withholding the telephone number and address of

certain persons. Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 11-301

also addresses withholding the address or phone number of a

victim or witness during a criminal trial or a juvenile

delinquency adjudicatory hearing if such shielding is requested

by the State, the victim, or the witness. Rules 16-915 and 16934 reference shielding the contact information for a victim, a

victim’s representative, or a witness.

Rule 16-915 concerns the denial of inspection of specific

information in a case record. Proposed amendments to Rule 16915 aim to make the Rule’s language consistent with the

withholding of information permitted by Code, Criminal Procedure

Article, § 11-205 and § 11-301.

In section (c), the proposed amendment clarifies that the

State, not just the victim or the victim’s representative, may

request that the address, telephone number, and e-mail address

of a victim or victim’s representative in a criminal action,

juvenile delinquency action, or an action under Code, Family Law

Article, Title 4, Subtitle 5, be shielded.

Proposed new section (d) provides for the potential

shielding of witnesses’ information as permitted by the Criminal

Procedure Article.

Current sections (d), (e), (f), and (g) are re-lettered as

(e), (f), (g), and (h), respectively.

RULE 10-108

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 – GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 100 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 10-108 to conform a Committee note after

subsection (a)(2) to amendments to Rule 16-915, as follows:

Rule 10-108.

(a)

ORDERS

Order Appointing Guardian

. . .

(2) Confidential Information

Information in the order or in papers filed by the

guardian that is subject to being shielded pursuant to the Rules

in Title 16, Chapter 900 shall remain confidential, but, in its

order, the court may permit the guardian to disclose that

information when necessary to the administration of the

guardianship, subject to a requirement that the information not

be further disclosed without the consent of the guardian or the

court.

Committee note: Disclosure of identifying information to

financial institutions and health care providers, for example,

may be necessary to further the purposes of the guardianship.

Cross reference:

(d)(e).

See Rule 16-914 (e) and (i) and Rule 16-915

RULE 10-108

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

An amendment to the cross reference after subsection (a)(2)

is proposed to conform with the re-lettering of sections in Rule

16-915.

RULE 15-1302

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 15 – OTHER SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS

CHAPTER 1300 – STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT TRANSFERS

AMEND Rule 15-1302 to conform a cross reference after

subsection (c)(1)(F) to amendments to Rule 16-915, as follows:

Rule 15-1302.

PETITION FOR APPROVAL

. . .

(c)

Contents of Petition

In addition to any other necessary averments, the

petition shall:

(1) subject to section (d) of this Rule, include as

exhibits:

(A) a copy of the structured settlement agreement;

(B) a copy of any order of a court or other governmental

authority approving the structured settlement;

payments under the structured settlement agreement or, if any

such annuity contract is not available, a copy of a document

from the annuity issuer or obligor evidencing the payments

payable under the annuity policy;

(D) a copy of the transfer agreement;

RULE 15-1302

(E) a copy of any disclosure statement provided to the

payee by the transferee;

(F) a written Consent by the payee substantially in the

form specified in Rule 15-1303;

Cross reference: For shielding requirements applicable to

identifying information contained in the payee’s Consent, see

Rule 16-915 (f)(h).

(G) an affidavit by the independent professional advisor

selected by the payee, in conformance with Rule 15-1304;

(H) a copy of any complaint that was pending when the

structured settlement was established; and

(I) proof of the petitioner’s current registration with

the Office of the Attorney General as a structured settlement

transferee or a copy of a pending application for registration

as specified in Code, Courts Article, § 5-1107, if the Office of

the Attorney General has not acted within the time specified in

Code, Courts Article, Title 5, Subtitle 11.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

An amendment to the cross reference after subsection

(c)(1)(F) is proposed to correct a reference to Rule 16-915 and

to account for the re-lettering of sections in Rule 16-915.

RULE 16-934

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 – COURT ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 900 – ACCESS TO JUDICIAL RECORDS

DIVISON 4. RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES

AMEND Rule 16-934 to include juvenile delinquency

proceedings in section (h), as follows:

RULE 16-934.

CASE RECORDS – COURT ORDER DENYING OR PERMITTING

INSPECTION NOT OTHERWISE AUTHORIZED BY RULE

. . .

(h)

Request to Shield Certain Information

(1) This subsection applies to a request, filed by an

individual entitled to make it, (A) to shield information in a

case record that is subject to shielding under Code, Courts

Article, Title 3, Subtitle 15 (peace orders) or Code, Family Law

Article, Title 4, Subtitle 5 (domestic violence) or (B) in a

criminal or juvenile delinquency action, to shield the address

or telephone number of a victim, victim’s representative or

witness.

(2) The request shall be in writing and filed with the

person having custody of the record.

RULE 16-934

(3) If the request is granted, the custodian shall deny

inspection of the shielded information.

The shield shall remain

in effect until terminated or modified by order of court.

Any

person aggrieved by the custodian’s decision may file a petition

under section (b) of this Rule.

Committee note: If a court or District Court Commissioner

grants a request to shield information under section (h) of this

Rule, no adversary hearing is held unless a person seeking

inspection of the shielded information files a petition under

section (b) of this Rule.

Source:

This Rule is derived from former Rule 16-912 (2019).

REPORTER’S NOTE`

As noted in the Reporter’s note to Rule 16-915, Chapter

539, 2020 Laws of Maryland (SB 213) became effective on October

1, 2020. The new legislation prompted review of the Criminal

Procedure Article and the access Rules regarding the withholding

of the telephone number and address of a victim, victim’s

representative or witness.

Rule 16-934 addresses the shielding of information upon

request. A proposed amendment to section (h) adds that requests

to shield the address or telephone number of a victim, victim’s

representative or witness may be filed in a juvenile delinquency

adjudicatory hearing, as provided for in the Criminal Procedure

Article.

RULE 19-217

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-217 by requiring certain information be

included in a motion for special admission, by requiring the

attorney to be admitted to disclose certain previous special

admissions and unique identifying numbers provided by Judiciary

units, and by requiring a record of attorneys granted or denied

special admission be maintained in the Attorney Information

System, as follows:

RULE 19-217.

SPECIAL ADMISSION OF OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEYS PRO

HAC VICE

(a)

Motion for Special Admission

(1) Generally

A member of the Bar of this State who (A) is an attorney

of record in an action pending (i) in any court of this State,

or (ii) before an administrative agency of this State or any of

its political subdivisions, or (B) is representing a client in

an arbitration taking place in this State that involves the

application of Maryland law, may move that an attorney who is a

member in good standing of the Bar of another state be admitted

RULE 19-217

to practice in this State for the limited purpose of appearing

and participating in the action as co-counsel with the movant.

Committee note: “Special admission” is a term equivalent to

“admission pro hac vice.” It should not be confused with

“special authorization” permitted by Rules 19-218 and 19-219.

(2) Where Filed

(A) If the action is pending in a court, the motion shall

be filed in that court.

(B) If the action is pending before an administrative

agency, the motion shall be filed in the circuit court for the

county in which the principal office of the agency is located or

in any other circuit court in which an action for judicial

review of the decision of the agency may be filed.

arbitration panel, the motion shall be filed in the circuit

court for the county in which the arbitration hearing is to be

held or in any other circuit court in which an action to review

an arbitral award entered by the arbitrator or panel may be

filed.

(3) Other Requirements

The motion shall be in writing and shall include the

following:

(A) the full name, address, telephone number, and email

address of the attorney to be specially admitted; and

RULE 19-217

(B) the movant’s certification that copies of the motion

have been served on the agency or the arbitrator or arbitration

panel, and all parties of record.

[(C) The motion shall be substantially in the form

provided in Appendix 19-A, Form A.1.]

Cross reference: See Appendix 19-A following Title 19, Chapter

200 of these Rules for Forms 19-A.1 and 19-A.2, providing the

form of a motion and order for the Special Admission of an outof-state attorney.

(b)

Certification by Out-of-State Attorney

The attorney whose special admission is moved shall

certify in writing:

(1) the number of times the attorney has been specially

admitted during the twelve months five years immediately

preceding the filing of the motion and the courts that granted

admission, and

(2) each unique identifying number previously issued to the

attorney by the Attorney Information System, Client Protection

Fund, or Maryland Judicial Information Systems (JIS) for use

with Maryland Electronic Courts (MDEC).

The certification [shall be substantially in the form

provided in Appendix 19-A, Form A.1 and] may be filed as a

separate paper or may be included in the motion under an

appropriate heading.

(c)

Order

RULE 19-217

The court by order may admit specially or deny the

special admission of an attorney.

In either case, the clerk

shall forward a copy of the order to the State Court

Administrator, who shall maintain a docket record of all

attorneys granted or denied special admission in the Attorney

Information System.

When the order grants or denies the special

admission of an attorney in an action pending before an

administrative agency, the clerk also shall forward a copy of

the order to the agency.

(d)

Limitations on Out-of-State Attorney’s Practice

An attorney specially admitted pursuant to this Rule may

act only as co-counsel for a party represented by an attorney of

record in the action who is admitted to practice in this State.

The specially admitted attorney may participate in the court or

administrative proceedings only when accompanied by the Maryland

attorney, unless the latter’s presence is waived by the judge or

administrative hearing officer presiding over the action.

attorney specially admitted is subject to the Maryland

Attorneys’ Rules of Professional Conduct during the pendency of

the action or arbitration.

Cross reference: See Code, Business Occupations and Professions

Article, § 10-215.

Committee note: This Rule is not intended to permit extensive

or systematic practice by attorneys not admitted in Maryland.

Because specialized expertise or other special circumstances may

be important in a particular case, however, the Committee has

100

RULE 19-217

not recommended a numerical limitation on the number of special

admissions to be allowed any out-of-state attorney.

Source:

This Rule is derived from former Rule 19-214 (2018).

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 19-217 expand on the required

information that must be provided about an attorney seeking

special admission. New processes within the Judiciary require

attorneys to have an attorney number assigned through the

Attorney Information System prior to obtaining an MDEC account.

The attorney number for admitted attorneys is now assigned

on admission as a unique identifier by the Court of Appeals

through the AIS rather than the Client Protection Fund.

Judicial Information Systems will now require specially admitted

attorneys who do not have an AIS number yet to obtain one, and

it remains their unique identifier for future admissions in

Maryland. Attorneys previously admitted for limited purposes

may have been assigned an alphanumeric identifier for using MDEC

prior to the creation of AIS.

Proposed amendments to subsection (a)(3) outline the

contact information the moving attorney must provide for the

out-of-state attorney. New subsection (a)(3)(C) provides the

option to require the motion for special admission be in the

form provided in the appendix.

Proposed amendments to section (b) require the out-of-state

attorney seeking admission to report previous admissions in the

last five years, previously twelve months, and the Maryland

court where they were admitted. New subsection (b)(2) calls for

the out-of-state attorney to provide unique identifying numbers

previously assigned by the Maryland Judiciary through AIS, CPF,

or JIS.

Section (c) now requires the State Court Administrator to

maintain a record of all attorneys granted or denied special

admission in AIS.

101

FORM 19-A.1

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Form 19-A.1. by removing the address line from the

existing form, by requiring that the moving attorney provide

contact information for an out-of-state attorney seeking special

admission, by correcting a statutory reference, and by requiring

the disclosure of certain previous special admissions and

previously issued unique identifying numbers assigned to an outof-state attorney, as follows:

FORM 19-A.1.

MOTION FOR SPECIAL ADMISSION OF OUT-OF-STATE

ATTORNEY UNDER RULE 19-217

(Caption)

MOTION FOR SPECIAL ADMISSION OF OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEY

UNDER RULE 19-217

I, ................., attorney of record in this case, move

that the court admit, ...................................... of

(name)

........................................................., an

(address)

102

FORM 19-A.1

out-of-state attorney who is a member in good standing of the

Bar of .................................., for the limited

purpose of appearing and participating in this case as cocounsel with me.

Out-of-State Attorney Information:

..................................

(Full Name)

..................................

(Address)

..................................

(Telephone)

..................................

(Email Address)

Unless the court has granted a motion for reduction or

waiver, the $100.00 fee required by Code, Courts and Judicial

Proceedings Article, § 7-202 (e)(f) is included with this

motion.

I [ ] do [ ] do not request that my presence be waived

under Rule 19-217 (d).

..................................

Signature of Moving Attorney

..................................

Name

..................................

103

FORM 19-A.1

Address

..................................

Telephone

..................................

Email Address

Attorney for .....................

CERTIFICATE AS TO SPECIAL ADMISSIONS

I, ....................................., certify on this

.......... day of ..............., ....., that during the

preceding twelve months five years, I have been specially

admitted in the State of Maryland .......... times by the

following courts:.

Date

Court

..........

..................................

..........

..................................

..........

..................................

I have previously been issued the following unique

identifying numbers by the Maryland Judiciary:

Attorney Information System ...................................

Client Protection Fund ........................................

Maryland Electronic Courts (MDEC)..............................

104

FORM 19-A.1

..................................

Signature of Out-of-State Attorney

..................................

Name

..................................

Address

..................................

Telephone

..................................

Email Address

(Certificate of Service)

Source:

This Form is derived from former Form RGAB-14/M (2016).

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendments to Form 19-A.1. conform it to Rule

19-217, which requires additional information about an attorney

seeking special admission.

The amended motion form requires contact information for

the out-of-state attorney seeking special admission. The

amended certification by the out-of-state attorney requires

disclosure of admissions in Maryland in the last five years and

previously issued unique identifying numbers.

In addition, a statutory reference to Code, Courts Article,

§ 7-202 (e) is updated to § 7-202 (f).

105

FORM 19-A.2

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Form 19-A.2. by adding a reference to certain unique

identifying numbers assigned to out-of-state attorneys and by

requiring a judge’s name to be typed, as follows:

FORM 19-A.2.

ORDER

It is this .......... day of .............., ......, by the

.............................. Court for ......................,

Maryland, ORDERED that

[ ] ..............................

Name

..................................

Address

..................................

Telephone

..................................

Email Address

..................................

Attorney Number/

106

FORM 19-A.2

Client Protection Fund ID

..................................

Maryland Electronic Courts (MDEC) ID

is admitted specially for the limited purpose of appearing and

participating in this case as co-counsel for ..................

The presence of the Maryland attorney [ ] is [ ] is not waived.

[ ] The Special Admission of

[ ] ..............................

Name

..................................

Address

..................................

Telephone

..................................

Email Address

..................................

Attorney Number/

Client Protection Fund ID

..................................

Maryland Electronic Courts (MDEC) ID

is denied for the following reasons: ...........................

107

FORM 19-A.2

................................................................

and the Clerk shall return any fee paid for the Special

Admission.

It is further ORDERED, that the Clerk forward a true copy

of the Motion and of this Order to the State Court

Administrator.

...............................

Name of Judge (Typed)

...............................

(Signature) Judge

Source:

This Form is derived from former Form RGAB-14/O (2016).

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Form 19-A.2. conform it to Rule 19217 by including reference to previously issued unique

identifying numbers provided by the Judiciary or its units to an

out-of-state attorney. Additionally, the judge’s name is

required to be typed on the order so that the State Court

Administrator’s Office can record the information.

108

RULE 1-311

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 1 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 300 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 1-311 (a) by altering a reference to the

identifying number attorney-filers must include in a signature,

as follows:

RULE 1-311.

(a)

SIGNING OF PLEADINGS AND OTHER PAPERS

Requirement

Every pleading and paper of a party represented by an

attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney who has been

admitted to practice law in this State and who complies with

Rule 1-312.

Every pleading and paper of a party who is not

represented by an attorney shall be signed by the party.

Every

pleading or paper filed shall contain (1) the signer’s address,

telephone number, facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address,

if any, and (2) if the pleading or paper is signed by an

attorney pursuant to Rule 20-107, the attorney’s Client

Protection Fund ID number identifying Attorney Number registered

with the Attorney Information System.

Committee note: The requirement that a pleading contain a

facsimile number, if any, and e-mail address, if any, does not

alter the filing or service rules or time periods triggered by

109

RULE 1-311

the entry of a judgment.

(2001).

See Blundon v. Taylor, 364 Md. 1

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 1-311 (a) updates the

reference to the identifying number an attorney must include in

his or her electronic signature. The unique identifying number

now is assigned by the Court of Appeals through the Attorney

Information System rather than by the Client Protection Fund.

The CPF number assigned to previously admitted attorneys now is

referred to as their Attorney Number.

110

RULE 20-107

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 20 – ELECTRONIC FILING AND CASE MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 100 – GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 20-107 by altering reference to the identifying

number attorney-filers must include in a signature, as follows:

RULE 20-107.

(a)

MDEC SIGNATURES

Signature by Filer; Additional Information Below

Signature

Subject to sections (b), (c), and (d) of this Rule, when

a filer is required to sign a submission, the submission shall:

(1) include the filer’s signature on the submission, and

(2) provide the following information below the filer’s

signature:

the filer’s address, e-mail address, and telephone

number and, if the filer is an attorney, the attorney’s Client

Protection Fund ID number attorney’s identifying Attorney Number

registered with the Attorney Information System.

That

information shall not be regarded as part of the signature.

signature on an electronically filed submission constitutes and

has the same force and effect as a signature required under Rule

1-311.

. . .

111

RULE 20-107

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 20-107 updates the reference

to the identifying number an attorney must include in his or her

electronic signature. The unique identifying number now is

assigned by the Court of Appeals through the Attorney

Information System, not the Client Protection Fund. The CPF

number assigned to previously admitted attorneys is now referred

to as their Attorney Number.

112

RULE 19-202

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-202 (b) by clarifying that the withdrawal of

a character questionnaire constitutes a withdrawal of an

application for admission, as follows:

RULE 19-202.

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION

. . .

(b)

Withdrawal of Application

At any time, an applicant may withdraw an application by

filing with the Board written notice of withdrawal.

Where an

individual has filed a character questionnaire pursuant to Rule

19-205 (c) without then filing a Notice of Intent, withdrawal of

the character questionnaire pursuant to Rule 19-205 (f) shall

constitute withdrawal of the application.

No fees will be

refunded.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-202 (b) clarifies that a

character questionnaire filed then later withdrawn pursuant to

Rule 19-205 (f) constitutes withdrawal of an application,

113

RULE 19-202

whether a notice of intent has been filed pursuant to Rule 19206 or 19-207.

114

RULE 19-205

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-205 by adding new section (f), as follows:

RULE 19-205.

(a)

CHARACTER QUESTIONNAIRE

Who May File

An individual who meets the requirements of Rule 19-

201(a)(1) may commence an application for admission to the Bar

of this State by filing with the Board a completed Character

Questionnaire and the prescribed fee.

Cross reference: See Rule 19-206 (Notice of Intent to Take the

UBE in Maryland) and Rule 19-207 (Notice of Intent to Transfer a

Qualifying UBE Score).

(b)

Form of Questionnaire

(1) Generally

The character questionnaire shall be on a form

prescribed by the Board and shall be answered under oath.

The

questionnaire shall elicit the information the Board considers

appropriate concerning the applicant’s character, education, and

eligibility to become an applicant and (A) require the applicant

to provide the applicant’s Social Security number, and (B)

include an authorization to release confidential information

115

RULE 19-205

pertaining to the applicant’s character and fitness for the

practice of law to a Character Committee, the Board, and the

Court.

(2) Pre-legal education

The character questionnaire shall be accompanied by

satisfactory evidence that the applicant meets the pre-legal

education requirements of Rule 19-201 (a)(1).

(c)

Time for Filing

The character questionnaire shall be filed prior to or

contemporaneously with any Notice of Intent to Take the UBE in

Maryland pursuant to Rule 19-206 or any Notice of Intent to

Transfer a Qualifying UBE Score pursuant to Rule 19-207.

(d)

Preliminary Determination of Eligibility

On receipt of a character questionnaire, the Board shall

determine whether the applicant is eligible to file a character

questionnaire pursuant to section (a) of this Rule.

If the

Board concludes that the requirements have been met, it shall

forward the character questionnaire to a Character Committee.

If the Board concludes that the requirements have not been met,

it shall promptly notify the applicant in writing.

(e)

Updated Character Questionnaire

If a character questionnaire has been pending for more

than three years since the date of the applicant’s most recent

character questionnaire or updated character questionnaire, the

116

RULE 19-205

applicant shall file with the Board an updated character

questionnaire contemporaneously with filing any Notice of Intent

to Take the UBE in Maryland or any Notice to Transfer a

Qualifying UBE Score.

The updated character questionnaire shall

be under oath, filed on the form prescribed by the Board, and

accompanied by the prescribed fee.

(f)

Withdrawal of Character Questionnaire

At any time, an applicant may withdraw a character

questionnaire by filing with the Board written notice of

withdrawal.

Withdrawing a character questionnaire shall result

in withdrawal of the application for admission under Rule 19-202

(b).

No fees will be refunded.

Source: This Rule is new in part and derived from former Rule

19-202 (2018) in part.

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed new section (f) to Rule 19-205 explains the

effect of the withdrawal of a character questionnaire. An

application for admission consists of a notice of intent

pursuant to either Rule 19-206 or 19-207 and a character

questionnaire.

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-202 (b) clarifies that

the withdrawal of a character questionnaire, which can be filed

contemporaneously to the notice of intent, constitutes

withdrawal of an application. The proposed amendment to Rule

19-205 re-states this concept.

117

RULE 19-206

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-206 by clarifying the prerequisites for

filing a notice of intent in subsection (a)(3), by adding

certain requirements to the filing procedure in section (a), by

correcting an internal reference in section (b) and a cross

reference following section (b), and by making stylistic

changes, as follows:

RULE 19-206.

(a)

NOTICE OF INTENT TO TAKE THE UBE IN MARYLAND

Filing

An applicant may file a Notice of Intent to Take the UBE

in Maryland if the applicant:

(1) meets the pre-legal educational requirements of Rule 19201 (a)(1),;

(2) unless the requirements of Rule 19-201 (a)(2) have been

waived pursuant to Rule 19-201 (b), meets the legal education

requirements of Rule 19-201 (a)(2), or will meet those

requirements before the first day of taking the UBE in

Maryland,; and

118

RULE 19-206

(3) contemporaneously files, or has previously filed, a

completed character questionnaire pursuant to Rule 19-205 that

has not been withdrawn pursuant to Rule 19-202 (b) 19-205 (f),

and the applicant has not withdrawn or been denied admission

pursuant to Rule 19-203, or rejected pursuant to Rule 19-204.

The Notice of Intent shall be under oath, filed on the

form prescribed by the Board, and accompanied by the prescribed

fee.

(b)

Request for Test Accommodation

An applicant who seeks a test accommodation under the ADA

for the bar examination shall indicate that request on the

Notice of Intent to Take the UBE in Maryland, and shall file

with the Board an “Accommodation Request” on a form prescribed

by the Board, together with the supporting documentation that

the Board requires.

The form and documentation shall be filed

no later than the deadline stated in section (c)(d) of this Rule

for filing the Notice of Intent to Take the UBE in Maryland.

The Board may reject an accommodation request that is (1)

substantially incomplete or (2) filed untimely.

The Board shall

notify the applicant in writing of the basis of the rejection

and shall provide the applicant an opportunity to correct any

deficiencies in the accommodation request before the filing

deadline for the current examination or, if the current deadline

119

RULE 19-206

has passed, before the filing deadline for the next

administration of the examination.

Committee note: An applicant who may need a test accommodation

is encouraged to file an Accommodation Request as early as

possible.

Cross reference: See Rule 19-205 19-208 for the procedure to

appeal a denial of a request for a test accommodation.

. . .

Source:

This Rule is derived from former Rule 19-204 (2018).

REPORTER’S NOTE

Proposed amendments to Rule 19-206 (a)(3) clarify the

prerequisites for filing a notice of intent, which can only be

filed if the applicant has contemporaneously or previously filed

a character questionnaire which has not been withdrawn and their

application has not been denied pursuant to the character review

process. The amendment references new Rule 19-205 (f), which

states the effect of the withdrawal of a character

questionnaire. A requirement that the filing be made under

oath, in the form prescribed, and accompanied by the prescribed

fee makes the Rule consistent with Rule 19-207 and Rule 19-102

(h).

Procedures pertaining to the appeal of a denial of a

request for a test accommodation, formerly in Rule 19-205, have

been transferred to Rule 19-208. Proposed amendments to Rule

19-206 correct an internal reference in section (b) and update

the cross reference following section (b) to reflect the new

location of the procedures for appeal.

120

RULE 19-207

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-207 by clarifying the prerequisites for

filing a notice of intent in subsection (a)(3), by adding new

section (c) pertaining to time for filing, and by making

stylistic changes, as follows:

RULE 19-207.

NOTICE OF INTENT TO TRANSFER A QUALIFYING UBE

SCORE

(a)

Filing

Beginning on July 1, 2019, an applicant may file a Notice

of Intent to Transfer a Qualifying UBE Score if the applicant:

(1) meets the pre-legal educational requirements of Rule 19201 (a)(1) to become admitted to the Maryland Bar,;

(2) unless the requirements of Rule 19-201 (a)(2) have been

waived pursuant to Rule 19-201 (b), meets the legal education

requirements of Rule 19-201 (a)(2),;

(3) contemporaneously files or has previously filed a

completed character questionnaire pursuant to Rule 19-205 that

has not been withdrawn pursuant to Rule 19-202 (b) 19-205 (f),

121

RULE 19-207

and the applicant has not withdrawn or been or denied admission

pursuant to Rule 19-204,; and

(4) has achieved a qualifying UBE score in another UBE

State.

The Notice of Intent shall be under oath, filed on the

form prescribed by the Board, and accompanied by the prescribed

fee.

(b)

Verification of Legal Education

The applicant shall cause the Board to receive an

official transcript that reflects the date of the award to the

applicant of a qualifying law degree under Rule 19-201 (a) prior

to or contemporaneously with filing the Notice of Intent to

Transfer a Qualifying UBE Score, unless the official transcript

already is on file with the Board or the applicant has received

a waiver under Rule 19-201 (b).

(c)

Time for Filing

An applicant who intends to apply for admission by

transferring a qualifying UBE score shall file the Notice of

Intent to Transfer a Qualifying UBE Score no later than the last

day that the transferred score constitutes a qualifying UBE

score as defined by Board Rule.

Source:

This Rule is new.

122

RULE 19-207

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-207 (a)(3) clarifies the

prerequisites for filing a Notice of Intent, which can only be

filed if the applicant has contemporaneously or previously filed

a character questionnaire which has not been withdrawn and their

application has not been denied pursuant to the character review

process. The amendment references proposed new section (f) of

Rule 19-205, which states the effect of the withdrawal of a

character questionnaire.

Proposed new section (c) clarifies that the time for filing

a Notice of Intent to Transfer a Qualifying UBE Score expires

when the score no longer constitutes a qualifying UBE Score as

defined by Board Rule.

123

RULE 19-210

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-210 by adding a reference to Rule 19-206, as

follows:

RULE 19-210.

(a)

RE-EXAMINATION AFTER FAILURE

Notice of Intent to Take Another Scheduled UBE in

Maryland

An unsuccessful applicant may file another Notice of

Intent to Take the UBE in Maryland pursuant to Rule 19-206.

The

Notice of Intent shall be on the form prescribed by the Board

and shall be accompanied by the required examination fee.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-210 clarifies that the

Rule 19-206 prerequisites for filing a notice of intent apply to

a re-examination application. Amendments to Rule 19-206 explain

the character questionnaire requirements which must be met

contemporaneously to or prior to filing a notice of intent.

124

RULE 19-215

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-215 (c) by correcting a reference to Rule 19216, as follows:

RULE 19-215.

ELIGIBILITY OF OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEY FOR ADMISSION

WITHOUT EXAMINATION

. . .

(c)

Practitioner of Law

(1) Subject to subsections (c)(2) and (3) of this Rule, a

practitioner of law is an individual who has regularly engaged

in the authorized practice of law:

(A) in a state;

(B) as the principal means of earning a livelihood; and

have been sufficient to satisfy the Board that the individual

should be admitted under this Rule and Rule 19-213 19-216.

(2) As evidence of the requisite professional experience,

for purposes of subsection (c)(1)(C) of this Rule, the Board may

consider, among other things:

125

RULE 19-215

(A) the extent of the individual’s experience in the

practice of law;

(B) the individual’s professional duties and

responsibilities, the extent of contacts with and responsibility

to clients or other beneficiaries of the individual’s

professional skills, the extent of professional contacts with

practicing attorneys and judges, and the individual’s

professional reputation among those attorneys and judges; and

has written.

(3) The Board may consider, as the equivalent of practice of

law in a state, practice outside the United States if the Board

concludes that the nature of the practice makes it the

functional equivalent of practice within a state.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-215 (c) corrects a

reference to the process for admission of out-of-state

attorneys. The applicant must have sufficient professional

experience to be admitted under Rules 19-215 and 19-216.

126

RULE 19-216

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

AMEND Rule 19-216 by correcting subsection numbering in

section (a), as follows:

RULE 19-216.

ADMISSION OF OUT-OF-STATE ATTORNEY WITHOUT

EXAMINATION – PROCEDURE

(a)

Petition

(1) Beginning on July 1, 2019, an individual eligible

pursuant to Rule 19-215 may file with the Board a petition under

oath on a form prescribed by the Board.

The petition shall be

accompanied by (A) the fees required by the Board and the costs

assessed for the character and fitness investigation and report

by the National Conference of Bar Examiners, and (B) the

supporting documents and information required by the Board as to

the petitioner’s professional experience and character and

fitness to practice law in Maryland.

(2) The petitioner shall list (A) each state in which the

petitioner has been admitted to the Bar and whether each

admission was by examination, by diploma privilege or on motion;

and (B) the additional facts showing that the petitioner meets

127

RULE 19-216

the requirements of section (a)(3) of Rule 19-215 or should be

qualified under section (e) of Rule 19-215.

(4)(3) The petitioner shall be under a continuing obligation

to report to the Board any material change in information

previously furnished.

. . .

REPORTER’S NOTE

The proposed amendment to Rule 19-216 (a) corrects the

numbering to remove a blank subsection.

128

RULE 16-913

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 – COURT ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 900 – ACCESS TO JUDICIAL RECORDS

DIVISION 2. LIMITATIONS ON ACCESS

AMEND Rule 16-913 by adding a new section (i) pertaining to

notes, memoranda, and minutes of meetings of certain entities

and by adding a Committee note after section (i), as follows:

Rule 16-913.

(a)

ACCESS TO ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS

Records Pertaining to Jurors

(1) A custodian shall deny inspection of an administrative

record used by a jury commissioner in the jury selection

process, except (i) as otherwise ordered by a trial judge in

connection with a challenge under Code, Courts Article, §§ 8-408

and 8-409; or (ii) as provided in subsections (a)(2) and (a)(3)

of this Rule.

(2) Upon request, the trial judge may authorize a custodian

to disclose the names and zip codes of the sworn jurors

contained on a jury list after the jury has been impaneled and

sworn.

Cross reference:

See Rule 4-312 (d).

(3) After a source pool of qualified jurors has been emptied

and re-created in accordance with Code, Courts Article, § 8-207,

129

RULE 16-913

and after every individual selected to serve as a juror from

that pool has completed the individual’s service, a trial judge,

upon request, shall disclose the name, zip code, age, gender,

education, occupation, marital status, and spouse’s occupation

of each person whose name was selected from that pool and placed

on a jury list, unless, in the interest of justice, the trial

judge determines that this information should remain

confidential in whole or in part.

(4) A jury commissioner may provide jury lists to the Health

Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office as required by that

Office in carrying out its duties, subject to any regulations of

that office to ensure against improper dissemination of juror

data.

Cross reference:

See Rule 4-312 (d).

(5) At intervals acceptable to the jury commissioner, a jury

commissioner shall provide to the State Board of Elections and

State Motor Vehicle Administration data about prospective,

qualified, or sworn jurors needed to correct erroneous or

obsolete information, such as that related to a death or change

of address, subject to the Board’s and Administration’s adoption

of regulations to ensure against improper dissemination of juror

data.

(b)

Personnel Records — Generally

(1) Not Open to Inspection

130

RULE 16-913

Except as otherwise permitted by the PIA or by this

Rule, a custodian shall deny to a person, other than the person

who is the subject of the record, inspection of the personnel

records of an employee of the court, other judicial agency, or

special judicial unit, or of an individual who has applied for

employment with the court, other judicial agency, or special

judicial unit.

(2) Open to Inspection

The following records or information are not subject to

this exclusion and, unless sealed or otherwise shielded pursuant

to the Maryland Rules or other law, shall be open to inspection:

(A) the full name of the individual;

(B) the date of the application for employment and the

position for which application was made;

(D) the name, location, and telephone number of the court,

other judicial agency, or special judicial unit to which the

individual has been assigned;

(E) the current and previous job titles and salaries of

the individual during employment by the court, other judicial

agency, or special judicial unit;

(F) the name of the individual’s current supervisor;

(G) the amount of monetary compensation paid to the

individual by the court, other judicial agency, or special

131

RULE 16-913

judicial unit and a description of any health, insurance, or

other fringe benefit that the individual is entitled to receive

from the court or judicial agency;

(H) unless disclosure is prohibited by law, other

information authorized by the individual to be released; and

(I) a record that has become a case record.

Committee note: Although a judicial record that has become a

case record is not subject to the exclusion under section (d) of

this Rule, it may be subject to sealing or shielding under other

Maryland Rules or law.

(c)

Personnel Records — Retirement

Unless inspection is permitted under the PIA or the

record has become a case record, a custodian shall deny

inspection of a retirement record of an employee of the court,

other judicial agency, or special judicial unit.

(d)

Administrative Record Prepared by or for a Judge or Other

Judicial Personnel

A custodian shall deny inspection of an administrative

record that is:

(1) prepared by or for a judge or other judicial personnel;

(2) either (A) purely administrative in nature but not a

local rule, policy, or directive that governs the operation of

the court or (B) a draft of a document intended for

consideration by the author or others and not intended to be

final in its existing form; and

132

RULE 16-913

(3) not filed with the clerk and not required to be filed

with the clerk.

Cross reference: For judicial or other professional work

product, see Rule 16-911 (d).

(e)

Educational and Training Materials

A custodian shall deny inspection of judicial records

prepared by, for, or on behalf of a unit of the Maryland

Judiciary for use in the education and training of Maryland

judges, magistrates, clerks, and other judicial personnel.

(f)

Procurement Records

Inspection of judicial records in the form of procurement

documents shall be governed exclusively by the Procurement

Policy of the Judiciary approved by the Chief Judge of the Court

of Appeals and posted on the Judiciary website.

This Rule

applies whether the procurement is funded by the federal, State,

or local government.

(g)

Interagency and Intra-agency Memoranda

A custodian may deny inspection of all or any part of an

interagency or intra-agency letter or memorandum that would not

be available by law to a private party in litigation with the

custodian or the unit in which the custodian works.

(h)

Problem-Solving Court Program Records

A custodian shall deny inspection of all or any part of a

judicial record maintained in connection with a participant in a

133

RULE 16-913

problem-solving court program operating pursuant to Rule 16-207

that is not contained in a case record.

Committee note: Problem-solving court programs often provide

for professionals in various fields working with a judge or

other judicial official as a team to deal with participants in

the program. That may result in the judge or other judicial

official coming into possession of documents that identify the

participant and contain sensitive information about the

participant — health information, school records, drug testing,

psychological evaluations. Some of that information may

ultimately end up as a case record, and, if it does, public

inspection will be determined by the Rules governing access to

case records. To the extent the information does not become a

case record but is used in private discussions among the therapy

team, it will be shielded under this Rule, even though it also

may be shielded under other Rules as well. Subsection (h)does

not apply to judicial records regarding the creation,

governance, or evaluation of problem-solving court programs that

do not identify participants.

(i)

Notes, Memoranda, and Minutes of Meetings of Committees,

Subcommittees, or Work Groups Not Public Bodies

A custodian shall deny inspection of notes, memoranda,

and minutes of a meeting of a judicial committee, subcommittee,

or work group that is not a public body as defined in Code,

General Provisions Article, § 3-101.

Committee note: There exist committees, subcommittees, or work

groups that are sub-units within a larger judicial entity that

constitutes a public body as defined in Code, General Provisions

Article, § 3-101. The predominant function of those committees,

subcommittees, and work groups is to investigate issues within

their jurisdiction and develop recommendations for the parent

entity to consider. The committees, subcommittees, and work

groups are not “public bodies” subject to the Open Meetings Law,

as they do not meet the definition of that term in Code, General

Provisions Article, § 3-101(h). See, in particular, § 3101(h)(3)(ix). They therefore are permitted, as a matter of

judicial policy, to hold meetings not open to the public and are

not required to keep minutes of their meetings. It is not

134

RULE 16-913

uncommon, however, for a committee, subcommittee, or work group

member or staff person to keep notes of what occurred at

meetings of those committees, subcommittees, or work groups and

to circulate them to their members. Those notes, whether or not

designated as minutes, represent the author’s perception of what

was discussed or what occurred and are in the nature both of the

author’s work product and an intra-agency memorandum. Section

(i) of this Rule clarifies that those notes or memoranda,

whether or not in the form of minutes, are not required to be

open to public inspection. Any recommendations or decisions of

the committee, subcommittee, or work group submitted to and

considered by the parent body will be reflected in the minutes

of the parent body, subject to any exceptions allowed in these

Rules.

Source: This Rule is derived in part from former Rule 16-905

(2019) and in part from Code, General Provisions Article, § 4344, and in part is new. See also Stromberg Metal Works, Inc.

v. University of Maryland, 382 Md. 151, 163 (2004).

REPORTER’S NOTE

Rule 16-913 is proposed to be amended by the addition of

new section (i), together with a Committee note following

section (i), to clarify that notes, memoranda, and minutes of a

meeting of a judicial committee, subcommittee, or work group

that is not a public body are not subject to public inspection.

135

RULE 4-262

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 4 – CRIMINAL CAUSES

CHAPTER 200 – PRETRIAL PROCEDURES

AMEND 4-262 by adding to subsection (d)(2)(C)(ii) a

requirement that the State’s Attorney, upon written request,

disclose specific information to the defense regarding pretrial

identifications involving participation by law enforcement

agency personnel, as follows:

Rule 4-262.

(a)

DISCOVERY IN DISTRICT COURT

Applicability

This Rule governs discovery and inspection in the

District Court.

Discovery is available in the District Court in

actions that are punishable by imprisonment.

Committee note: This Rule also governs discovery in actions

transferred from District Court to circuit court upon a jury

trial demand made in accordance with Rule 4-301(b)(1)(B). See

Rule 4-301(c).

. . .

(d)

Disclosure by the State’s Attorney

(1) Without Request

Without the necessity of a request, the State’s Attorney

shall provide to the defense all material or information in any

136

RULE 4-262

form, whether or not admissible, that tends to exculpate the

defendant or negate or mitigate the defendant’s guilt or

punishment as to the offense charged and all material or

information in any form, whether or not admissible, that tends

to impeach a State’s witness.

Cross reference: See Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963);

Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (1995); Giglio v. U.S., 405 U.S.

150 (1972); U.S. v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976); Thomas v. Stat

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.