|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PARRIS N. GLENDENING, Governor
|
|
Ch. 26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
effected by Md. Rule 2-301, which mandates "one form of action known as
the 'civil action'".
In subsection (e)(1) of this section, the reference to enjoining conduct
proscribed by this "section" is substituted for the former reference to
enjoining conduct proscribed by this "article" for consistency within
subsection (e) of this section.
In subsection (e)(2) of this section, the reference to "the proceeding for
injunctive relief" is substituted for the former reference to "any such
proceeding" for clarity.
Also in subsection (e)(2) of this section, the reference to any person found
guilty of "violating" this section is substituted for the former reference to
any person found guilty of "actions made unlawful by" this section for
brevity and consistency with language used in subsection (e)(1) of this
section.
Former Art. 27, § 580A2 is deleted as unconstitutional in light of the ruling
of the Court of Appeals in State v. Schuller, 280 Md. 305 (1977). The
Criminal Law Article Review Committee notes, for consideration by the
General Assembly, that the Court in State v. Schuller found that former
Art. 27, § 580A2 was invalid on its face as violating the right to freedom of
speech guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the federal
Constitution. The court also found that former Art. 27, § 580A2, when
coupled with the exemption provided for labor-related picketing contained
in former Art. 27, § 580A4(1) (revised as subsection (b)(1) of this section),
deprived persons of the right to equal protection of the laws guaranteed by
the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution. The Attorney
General reached a similar conclusion in a letter of advice to the Criminal
Law Article Review Committee, in which the Attorney General stated that
removal of § 580A2 was imperative, and further recommended deletion of
the balance of § 580A as well due to the stated constitutional defects. The
Attorney General also noted that more limited legislative regulation of
residential picketing might be possible under federal precedent. See Letter
of Advice from Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr. to Judge Alan M.
Wilner, pp. 8-10 (October 17, 2000).
Defined term: "Person" § 1-101
3-905. OPENING LETTER WITHOUT PERMISSION.
(A) PROHIBITED.
A PERSON MAY NOT TAKE AND BREAK OPEN A LETTER THAT IS NOT ADDRESSED
TO THE PERSON WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE PERSON TO WHOM THE LETTER IS
ADDRESSED OR THE PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ADDRESSEE'S ESTATE.
(B) PENALTY.
A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTION IS GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AND
ON CONVICTION IS SUBJECT TO IMPRISONMENT FOR 6 DAYS AND A FINE OF $15.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 313 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
