2008 Legislative Agenda

From: Dorothy Lennig, Legal Clinic Director

HB 183 authorizes a judge to order law enforcement to use all reasonable and necessary force to enforce a custody provision of a protective order passed.

HB 182 allows a permanent protective order under certain circumstances also passed. This bill was significantly amended to restrict it to cases where the defendant was convicted of and served a jail term of at least 5 years.

Unfortunately, SB 42, the bill to allow judges to remove firearms at the temporary protective order, was narrowly defeated.  Several delegates who we have been working closely with did not support the bill. To find out how your delegates voted, please email dlennig@hruthmd.org.  

The following is a short summary of the bills that we tracked during the Session. 

HB 181/SB 394 - Pre-Trial Release – Violation of No Contact – Penalty – This bill would criminalize a violation of a pre-trial release order requiring the defendant to stay away from the victim in a domestic violence criminal case. Under current law, if the defendant is arrested and is ordered to stay away from the victim as a condition of his bail, violating the stay away order is not a crime.  The only remedy is another court hearing to revoke the defendant’s bail.  A bail revocation can only occur during normal business hours and does not protective the victim if the violation occurs when the courts are closed.  Unfavorable report House Judiciary Committee

HB 182/SB 393 – Domestic Violence – Permanent Protective Order After Conviction and Imprisonment – This bill allows a judge to order a permanent protective order if a respondent is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for attempted first degree murder, attempted second degree murder, first degree assault, and second degree assault of the victim.  PASSED

HB 183/SB 392 – Enforcement of Protective Order – This bill authorizes a judge to order a law enforcement officer to use all reasonable and necessary force to enforce a temporary custody provision of a final protective order.  PASSED

HB 640/SB 42 – Family Law Temporary Protective Orders – Surrender of Firearms This bill would allow a judge to order the removal of firearms at the temporary protective order hearing.  Under current law, firearms may only be removed at the final protective order hearing.  Was amended and passed in the Senate on a vote of 29 -17.  Unfavorable report by House Judiciary Committee.

HB 849/SB 586 – Public Safety – Restrictions on Possession of Firearms – Conviction of Disqualifying Crime and Protective Order Respondent – This bill would make it illegal for the respondent in a protective order case to possess all firearms, including long guns, not just regulated firearms.  Under federal law, the respondent in a protective order cannot possess any firearms, but under Maryland law the court can only order the removal of “regulated” firearms.  This bill would harmonize state law with federal law.  Unfavorable report by the House Judiciary Committee and Unfavorable report by the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee.

HB 1448 – Family Law – Final Protective Orders – Surrender of Firearms -  This bill would require respondents in final protective orders to surrender firearms.  Under the current law, judges can order this, but do not have to.  This would bring Maryland into compliance with federal law.  Unfavorable report by the House Judiciary Committee

 HB 1257/SB 615 - Stalking and Domestic Violence – Cruelty Toward a Pet or Service Animal – This bill authorizes a court in an interim, temporary, or final protective order to order a respondent to remain away from a specified pet or refrain from cruelty or aggravated cruelty toward a pet.  Senate amended the bill to remove the stalking sections and passed it by a vote of 42 – 5.  The House Judiciary Committee is currently considering amendments.

HB 1147 - Family Law – Child Custody Determinations– This bill would codify existing custody law.  Currently, all of the custody laws in Maryland are set out in case law.  During the last several years, there has been a lot of criticism that custody law in not written in the statute books.  This is an attempt to codify all of the custody case law into one written statute to make it easier for non-lawyers to navigate.  This bill is, in part, an attempt to respond to some of the concerns raised at the hearings on joint custody.  Reported unfavorably by the House Judiciary Committee.

HB 1105 -Family Law – Interim Protective Orders –Petitions File by Law Enforcement – This bill would authorize and require law enforcement to file for an interim protective order on behalf of a victim when the abuser has been arrested for a domestic violence crime.  We believe there are two important reasons to support this bill.  First, the time of separation is the most dangerous time for victims of domestic violence. By having a protective order automatically issued at the time of an arrest, it gives the victim an added protective that s/he does not have. The victim would not have to do anything to be protected.  Second, by serving the respondent with the interim protective order at the bond hearing, law enforcement would not have to personally serve him/her again in the protective order process. So many resources are spent by law enforcement trying to serve protective orders. This would eliminate the time and money law enforcement would spend on cases where the abuser has been arrested. In addition, the victim would not have to come back to court multiple times waiting for law enforcement to try to serve the respondent.  Withdrawn by sponsor

HB500/SB516 – Family Law – Denial of Paternity, Custody, and Visitation – This bill would, under certain circumstances, exclude a man as the father of a child if the pregnancy was the result of a rape.  Hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on February 14 at 1:00 p.m.  Hearing before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee on March 4 at 1:00 p.m.

If you would like to determine which District you are in or how to contact your representatives, please e-mail dlennig@hruthmd.org with your home street address. Throughout the course of the session, you will be asked to contact your representatives, particularly if they are on the House Judiciary Committee or the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. Please include your address on all correspondence so that your representative knows you live in her/his district.