Recording Law for Police & Civil Rights in Maryland

Maryland has no law that explicitly says you can record on-duty officers, but two things make it legal: First, a 2010 trial-court decision in Harford County, State v. Graber, dismissed wiretapping charges against a motorcyclist who recorded a state trooper during a public traffic stop, ruling the officer had no reasonable expectation of privacy in statements made while performing public duties. Second, Maryland sits in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which has recognized a First Amendment right to record police performing their duties in public, as it held in Sharpe v. Winterville Police Dep’t (2023). Together, these mean you can record officers during traffic stops, arrests, or other public encounters without breaking Maryland’s wiretapping law, as long as you don’t interfere with their work.

Maryland’s wiretapping law only regulates the interception of "wire, oral, or electronic communications." A silent video recording doesn’t intercept any "communication" as defined by the law, so it’s unrestricted. For in-person speech, the law defines an "oral communication" as spoken words exchanged in a conversation where the parties have a reasonable expectation of privacy; without that expectation, no consent is required. The moment your recording includes audio, the law treats it as an "oral communication" and requires consent from all parties unless the conversation is public and has no reasonable expectation of privacy. That means if you’re recording a public traffic stop or street encounter, the audio is treated the same as the video — no consent needed. But if you’re recording a private conversation between officers or between an officer and someone else in a private space, you must get everyone’s consent or risk felony charges. Phone calls and texts are always treated as "wire" or "electronic communications" and require all-party consent regardless of where they occur or whether anyone expected privacy.

Maryland courts use a two-part test to decide whether a conversation is "private" enough to require consent: (1) did the speaker have a subjective expectation of privacy, and (2) would society recognize that expectation as reasonable? Public speech loses protection when it’s loud or open enough that bystanders can naturally hear it — like a shouted argument on a sidewalk or a heated exchange during a traffic stop on a public road. Maryland’s leading case, Malpas v. State (1997), involved a third party’s loud, profane statements made in his own apartment but audible through a shared wall to a neighbor, who recorded them on a handheld device; the court held the statements were "the functional equivalent of statements knowingly exposed to the public," so no reasonable expectation of privacy existed. Location alone doesn’t decide it — volume, openness, and whether the speaker tried to exclude others matter more. Phone calls and texts are always protected by the all-party-consent rule regardless of volume or setting.

Maryland’s wiretapping law treats phone calls and electronic messages differently from in-person speech. For phone calls or texts, consent from all parties is required regardless of where the conversation happens or whether anyone expected privacy. Maryland’s wiretapping law makes it illegal to intercept a "wire communication" — which includes phone calls — without all parties’ prior consent, regardless of where the call takes place or whether anyone expected privacy. The same rule applies to "electronic communications" like emails or direct messages. So if you’re recording a phone call with an officer or capturing their text messages, you must get their consent first or you could face felony charges.

Recording a private conversation without everyone’s consent in Maryland is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine per violation under the wiretapping law. Even if you didn’t intend to break the law, the penalty remains the same. There’s also a private right of action — meaning the person you recorded can sue you for $100 per day (minimum $1,000) plus punitive damages and attorney’s fees. These penalties apply even if you only shared the recording with a few people, not the public. The only exception is if you recorded a public conversation with no reasonable expectation of privacy — like a traffic stop on a public road — in which case no consent is required and these penalties don’t apply.

Imagine you’re pulled over on a public highway, and you start recording with your phone. The officer is giving instructions to you and speaking to dispatch over the radio. Your video-only recording is unrestricted because it’s silent. If you turn on audio, the officer’s public statements during the stop are treated as a public conversation with no reasonable expectation of privacy, so no consent is required. But if the officer steps aside and has a quiet, private conversation with a backup officer out of earshot of passersby, that conversation may still be private and require consent — recording it without consent could be a felony. The key is whether the conversation is loud or open enough that an ordinary bystander could naturally hear it — if so, you can record without consent; if not, you need everyone’s permission.