Summary — HB 366: Juvenile Law — Police Record Concerning a Child — Confidentiality Exception (Maryland)
Status & Key Dates
- Introduced: January 16, 2025 (Delegate Embry).
- Assigned to Judiciary.
- Effective date in bill text: October 1, 2025.
- Companion: SB 404 (Judicial Proceedings).
- Fiscal notes: Multiple analyses conclude the bill has no material state or local fiscal impact.
Purpose / Intent
- To create a narrow public‑disclosure exception to juvenile confidentiality rules that permits the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), in connection with Independent Investigations Division (IID) investigations of police‑involved incidents that result in a child’s death or injury, to release the child’s name and age — but only with the express consent of the child’s parent or guardian.
What the bill changes
- Amends Article — Courts and Judicial Proceedings, § 3‑8A‑27(a) (juvenile police records confidentiality).
- Adds a specific exception allowing the OAG, when conducting an independent investigation under § 6‑602 of the State Government Article (IID investigations of police‑involved incidents resulting in death or injury of a child), to release to the public the child’s name and age.
- The release is permitted only if the child’s parent or guardian gives express consent.
- All other existing confidentiality protections for police records concerning children remain intact (including existing limited exceptions for missing children, escapees, and certain warrant/arrest situations).
Who is affected
- Office of the Attorney General / IID: gains explicit authority to disclose limited identifying information (name and age) in a narrow investigative context.
- Children who are victims of police‑involved incidents and their parents/guardians: control whether that limited identifying information is shared publicly.
- Law enforcement, courts, media, and the public: potential access to a child’s name/age in covered IID investigations when parents consent.
- Fiscal impact: none materially to State or local budgets per fiscal notes.
Practical effect and considerations
- Provides a limited transparency mechanism for high‑profile IID investigations involving child death or injury, while preserving the general confidentiality framework for juvenile records.
- Balances public information needs against juvenile privacy by restricting disclosures to name and age and requiring parental/guardian consent.
- Existing statutory safeguards and prior exceptions for public safety (e.g., missing children) remain unchanged.
Notes
- Several documents supplied referenced unrelated HB 366 bills from other states (Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, etc.); this summary focuses on the Maryland HB 366 (Delegate Embry) as enacted/amended in the Maryland legislative record.
