241 A.3d 997
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2020Background
- Heather Myers, an unlicensed in-home daycare provider, cared for 2-year-old Madi; Myers had used heroin the night before, experienced withdrawal, fell asleep, and the child suffered catastrophic brain injury after a fall.
- Myers delayed/failed to summon prompt emergency care after finding the child unconscious.
- Myers was charged with child neglect under Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 3-602.1, which defines “neglect” as the intentional failure to provide necessary assistance/resources for a minor’s physical needs or mental health that creates a substantial risk of harm.
- Myers moved to dismiss, claiming the statute was unconstitutionally vague (facially and as applied); the circuit court denied the motion.
- Myers entered a conditional guilty plea preserving the vagueness challenge; on appeal the Court of Special Appeals reviewed de novo and affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Myers) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CR § 3-602.1 is unconstitutionally vague (facial and as-applied) | Statute fails to give fair notice or enforceable standards; terms like “necessary assistance,” “physical needs,” and “substantial risk” are indeterminate; criminalizes parental discretion and may chill rights to rear a child | The statute provides adequate notice and standards; prior Court of Appeals opinions in Hall (concurring/dissenting views) support constitutionality and are persuasive; intent element limits scope and prevents unfair application | Court: § 3-602.1 is not unconstitutionally vague either facially or as applied. Myers’ conduct (drug use, falling asleep, leaving child unsupervised, delayed emergency care) was reasonably within the statute’s proscription; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (1977) (governs interpreting fractured opinions)
- State v. Falcon, 451 Md. 138 (2017) (describes Maryland approach to fractured Court of Appeals decisions)
- Hall v. State, 448 Md. 318 (2016) (fractured decision reversing conviction; concurring/dissenting opinions concluded § 3-602.1 not void for vagueness)
- Galloway v. State, 365 Md. 599 (2001) (vagueness analysis and fair-notice standard)
- McCree v. State, 441 Md. 4 (2014) (de novo review of statute constitutionality)
- Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015) (two-pronged vagueness test: notice and arbitrary enforcement)
- Kolender v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983) (statute must define offense with sufficient definiteness for ordinary persons to understand prohibited conduct)