Knowledge

JurisdictionMaryland

V. Knowledge

Knowledge is a general intent mental state, which may involve subjective fault and/or objective fault. Lawrence v. State, 475 Md. 384, 257 A.3d 588 (2021).

A. Subjective test

In Maryland, and in a majority of jurisdictions, knowledge usually requires that the defendant possess actual knowledge or, in the alternative, possess one of the legal equivalents of actual knowledge. See Greenway v. State, 8 Md. App. 194, 196 (1969); LaFave § 5.1(a), supra at 254. Knowledge includes (1) actually knowing a fact; (2) being aware of the existence of that fact; (3) being practically certain of that fact; and (4) having a high degree of certainty of that fact. Knowledge includes "believing that [stolen property] probably has been stolen. . . ." Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 7-104(c); MPJI-Cr 4:32.2.

Knowledge includes when the defendant lacks actual knowledge, but lacks that knowledge solely because of a conscious effort to avoid learning the truth, when correctly suspecting what would be learned. In State v. McCallum, 321 Md. 451, 458-60 (1991), the Court of Appeals recognized that "deliberate ignorance" is a "form of knowledge." In Rice v. State, 136 Md. App. 593, 606 (2001), the Court of Special Appeals held that "deliberate ignorance" or "willful blindness" is sufficient to establish knowledge for the offense of driving while suspended.

B. Objective test

In a minority of jurisdictions (and occasionally in a majority jurisdiction), knowledge requires only that the defendant have a reason to know. In other words, the Defendant is deemed to know what a reasonable person should have known under the circumstances.

Maryland is generally a majority jurisdiction on knowledge as the mental state, thus requiring actual knowledge. However, a few Maryland statutes permit knowledge to be established by objective knowledge, i.e., should have known. In rape and sex offense cases, in which the defendant claims consent, if the victim suffers from a mental or physical incapacity that renders the victim incapable of giving consent, the defendant is guilty if the defendant knew or should have known of the victim's incapacity. Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 3-304(a)(2) (second degree rape); and id. § 3-307(a)(2) (third-degree sex offense).

C. Knowledge in conjunction with specific intent

Knowledge is sometimes part of a two-part mental state, coupled with a specific intent. For example, for common law receiving stolen goods, the mental state was knowledge and specific intent...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT