In Maryland, approximately 1,455,712 adult women and 522,486 adult men have experienced some form of sexual violence in their lifetime.[1] In 2020 alone, 1,891 rapes were reported in the state, yet only 505 people were arrested for the crime.[2] Although the gap between reported rapes and arrests is startling, there are reasonable explanations for why so few cases move forward.[3] Indeed, the ultimate decision about whether to bring criminal charges is up to prosecutors – a decision that often comes down to their ability to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.[4]

Prosecutors may decline to press charges for a number of reasons, including “a lack of evidence, an inability to identify the perpetrator,” or a victim’s decision not to participate in the prosecution.[5] However, victims do not always know the reasons behind a prosecutor’s decision not to pursue a case.[6] The Sexual Assault Legal Institute, a Maryland legal services provider for victims of sexual assault, reports that “[a] shocking number” of victims report the crime and never hear from prosecutors.[7] Fortunately, the Maryland legislature has presented Governor Wes Moore with a bill that would address this lack of prosecutorial transparency.[8]

Maryland Senate Bill 391 (“S.B. 391”), if enacted,[9] would require a prosecutor to meet with a victim of sexual assault at the victim’s request to explain the decision not to proceed with the case.[10] Senator Karen Lewis Young drafted the legislation after learning of a constituent’s reporting experience.[11] The constituent disclosed that after she reported a sexual assault, prosecutors never contacted her to explain why they declined to file charges.[12] Under the proposed law, the prosecutor must meet with the victim within twenty days after receiving the victim’s request to meet and “explain the justification for not filing a charging document or for dismissing the charges.”[13]

In testimony submitted in support of the bill, Senator Lewis Young recognized that reporting a sexual assault to police and prosecutors is a “daunting task”[14] and other advocates called on prosecutors to “have the courage to face [victims] to help [them] understand” the decision not to prosecute.[15] While proponents of S.B. 391 acknowledge that it is difficult to successfully prosecute a case of sexual assault and “prosecutors must make hard choices about when to pursue a case and when to dismiss one,” they also believe that the proposed law is necessary to enforce “what should be a standard practice and support for survivors.”[16] Thus, Maryland’s enactment of S.B. 391 would “make a statement of support for sexual assault survivors by reforming and improving [the] process”[17] to ensure prosecutors give them “the respect of being heard” that they so clearly deserve.[18]  

---

Lindsay Keough is a third-year day student at the University of Baltimore School of Law and an Associate Editor for Law Forum. Lindsay received a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology and a minor in Spanish language and culture from the University of Maryland, College Park. In the past, she has worked as a law clerk at the Law Offices of Elsa W. Smith, LLC in Annapolis and the Office of the State’s Attorney for Anne Arundel County. Last semester, she practiced as a Rule 19 Student Attorney at the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office as part of the Criminal Practice Clinic. Upon graduation, Lindsay will serve as a Judicial Law Clerk for the Honorable Judge Donna M. Schaeffer in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. She hopes to pursue a career in criminal law.

Read more: Proposed Bill Seeks Prosecutorial Transparency in Sexual Assault Cases

[1] Sexual Assault in Maryland, Md. Coal. Against Sexual Assault, https://mcasa.org/assets/files/Sexual_Assault_in_MD_Fact_Sheet_2021.12.pdf (Dec. 2021).

[2] Id.

[3] See What to Expect from the Criminal Justice System, RAINN, https://www.rainn.org/articles/what-expect-criminal-justice-system (last visited Mar. 16, 2023).

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6] See Criminal Procedure – Victims of Sexually Assaultive Behavior: Hearing on S.B. 391 Before the S. Comm. on Jud. Proc., 2023 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2023) (testimony of Lisae C. Jordan, Exec. Dir. & Couns., Md. Coal. Against Sexual Assault), https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/cmte_testimony/2023/jpr/14494_02202023_154258-693.pdf [hereinafter Hearings].

[7] Id.

[8] S.B. 391, 2023 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2023).

[9] On April 6, 2023, S.B. 391 was passed by the Maryland General Assembly and sent to Governor Wes Moore for his approval. SB0391, Md. Gen. Assemb., https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/sb0391?ys=2023RS (Apr. 6, 2023, 12:18 PM). If signed by Governor Moore, S.B. 391 will become law and will take effect on October 1, 2023. See The Legislative Process: How a Bill Becomes a Law, Md. State Archives (Sept. 14, 2022), https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/07leg/html/proc.html; S.B. 391, 2023 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2023).

[10] S.B. 391, 2023 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2023).

[11] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Sen. Karen Lewis Young, Member, S. Comm. on Educ., Energy, & the Env’t).

[12] Id.

[13] S.B. 391, 2023 Leg., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2023).

[14] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Sen. Karen Lewis Young, Member, S. Comm. on Educ., Energy, & the Env’t).

[15] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Cecilia Plante, Co-chair, Md. Leg. Coal.).

[16] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Lisae C. Jordan, Exec. Dir. & Couns., Md. Coal. Against Sexual Assault).

[17] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Sen. Karen Lewis Young, Member, S. Comm. on Educ., Energy, & the Env’t).

[18] Hearings, supra note 6 (testimony of Cecilia Plante, Co-chair, Md. Leg. Coal.).