Text of the Fourth Amendment and Md. Decl. of Rights Art. 26

• Jurisdiction: Maryland

I. Text of the Fourth Amendment and MD. DECL. OF RIGHTS art. 26

A. Fourth Amendment

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized.

B. Md. Decl. of Rights art. 26

Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights provides:

All warrants, without oath or affirmation, to search suspected places, or to seize any person or property, are grievous and oppressive; and all general warrants to search suspected places, or to apprehend suspected persons, without naming or describing the place, or the person in special, are illegal and ought not to be granted.

The Court of Appeals generally interprets Article 26 in pari materia with the Fourth Amendment, meaning it is generally interpreted the same as the Supreme Court interprets the Fourth Amendment. See, e.g., King v. State, 434 Md. 472, 482 (2013) (stating proposition and collecting cases).The Court has done so "[n]otwithstanding [Article 26's] lack of textual consistency with the Fourth Amendment," Scott v. State, 366 Md. 121, 139 (2001), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 940 (2002), and its position on the matter predates incorporation of the Fourth Amendment, see Givner v. State, 210 Md. 484, 492 (1956). The Court, however, has carefully left open the possibility of divergent interpretations by "repeatedly" noting that "each provision is independent, and that a violation of one is not necessarily a violation of the other." King, 434 Md. at 482 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

The Court of Appeals' treatment of Article 26 is in line with its treatment of other provisions in the Maryland Constitution that have federal counterparts. In Doe v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services, 430 Md. 535 (2013), the Court stated:

Many provisions of the Maryland Constitution . . . have counterparts in the United States Constitution. We have often commented that such state constitutional provisions are in pari materia with their federal counterparts or are the equivalent of federal constitutional provisions or generally should be interpreted in the same manner as federal provisions. Nevertheless, we have also emphasized that, simply because a Maryland constitutional provision

...