Marylands vague knife laws, specifically balisongs

Joined
Jun 13, 2015
Messages
193
About 6 months ago I was stopped and arrested for carrying a butterfly knife. I politely informed the officer that the knife was perfectly legal, but he would t hear anything of it. He took me into the station, and read the law to me, which says nothing whatsoever about butterfly knives. He then wrote me up for possession of a deadly weapon. Department of justice dismissed my case, but then somehow reopened it so I'm waiting for a court date. What's up with this bullshit. I wasn't carrying concealed, I wasn't flipping the knife in public. The cop just decided he was right and that my knife was illegal. I wish officers were better informed on knife laws
 
You know about this, but others may be interested.

In Re Daryl L, 68 Md. App. 375, 511 A.2d 1108 (Spcial App. 1986)

This appeal followed, with the request that we answer a solitary question: "Does a folding knife without switchblade but with a locking device for the protection of the user fall within the exception for `penknife without switchblade' in Article 27, § 36(a)?" Our affirmative response mandates reversal of the circuit court's judgment.
...
Mackall v. State, 283 Md. 100, 387 A.2d 762 (1978), makes clear that the State bears the burden of showing that the knife carried by appellant was "not a penknife without switchblade in order to prove the corpus delecti of the crime charged." Id. at 111, 387 A.2d at 768. Mackall also instructs that "[p]enknives today are commonly considered to encompass any knife with the blade folding into the handle, some very large." Id. at 113 n. 13, 387 A.2d at 769 n. 13 (emphasis added).
...
[A] penknife is (except in certain circumstances not found here) specifically excluded from the coverage of § 36(a). In our view, the locking mechanism of appellant's knife, described by both appellant and the knife's manufacturer (Buck Knives, Inc.) as a protective feature, does not cause the knife in question be other than a penknife. It lacks the additional offensive qualities of a switchblade or a gravity knife which make those instruments instantly available for any violent design at the command of the user. The lockback knife exacts the same time and motion for opening as is required for any other penknife.
 
You may also be interested in this:

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Unpublished/011565.U.pdf

Long story short: Cops sometimes are wrong about the law on knives, but they do so at there peril. The case ruled that a cop in Maryland who is wrong about the law is liable in federal court. Sort it out, sue his sorry bum, and let us know what happened. If the matter is as you say and there are not other circumstances, the officer will be lucky to leave this matter with his badge.

EDIT: Also probably worth mentioning that three of the officers in the Freddie Gray case were arrested and are currently awaiting trial for false imprisonment specifically because they arrested Gray for a legal folding knife.

"Officers Miller and Nero then placed Mr. Gray in a seated position and subsequently found a knife clipped to the inside of his pants pocket. The blade of the knife was folded into the handle. The knife was not a switchblade, and is lawful under Maryland law."
...
"Lt Rice, Officer Miller and Officer Nero failed to establish probable cause for Mr. Gray's arrest, as no crime had been committed by Mr. Gray. Accordingly, Lt Rice, Officer Miller and Officer Nero illegally arrested Mr. Gray."
 
Last edited:
You may also be interested in this:

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Unpublished/011565.U.pdf

Long story short: Cops sometimes are wrong about the law on knives, but they do so at there peril. The case ruled that a cop in Maryland who is wrong about the law is liable in federal court. Sort it out, sue his sorry bum, and let us know what happened. If the matter is as you say and there are not other circumstances, the officer will be lucky to leave this matter with his badge.

EDIT: Also probably worth mentioning that three of the officers in the Freddie Gray case were arrested and are currently awaiting trial for false imprisonment specifically because they arrested Gray for a legal folding knife.

Up there in Maryland, have they (local officials) publicly identified the actual brand/model yet in Mr. Gray's case? I haven't seen anything and wondered if I missed it some way.
 
According to a fox article today they havnt released pictures or description other than that it was an assisted knife. I guess when they release pictures we can see if Freddie was a knife guy or not
 
I'd love to see statistics on how many people are actually assaulted with a butterfly / automatic knife every year.
 
I'd love to see statistics on how many people are actually assaulted with a butterfly / automatic knife every year.
Ironically every cop in every state I have asked about it says the majority of knife robberies, assaults and murders are done with kitchen knives. From a criminology standpoint, knives are more akin to weapons of opportunity, like a claw hammer or pipe wrench, that might be grabbed at the scene or obtained cheaply and hastily before a premeditated crime. Very rarely does a real life criminal carry around a dedicated knife to use as a weapon.

The cop you encountered sounds like he's been watching too many action movies with those "dangerous ethnic people" that wield butterfly knives. That, or your did something else to make him dislike you and the butterfly knives was a "excuse charge."
 
...
EDIT: Also probably worth mentioning that three of the officers in the Freddie Gray case were arrested and are currently awaiting trial for false imprisonment specifically because they arrested Gray for a legal folding knife.

One has the impression that the death of Mr. Gray, specifically, was the primary reason for any arrests being made.

The police keep arguing the arrest was righteous. How can that be?
 
One has the impression that the death of Mr. Gray, specifically, was the primary reason for any arrests being made.
Hey I'm just quoting the State's Attorney. Yes, police being arrested or even charged (as opposed to sued) for making a false arrest is very rare and this instance was likely motivated by the overall matter resulting in a negligent death. But each individual charge technically is decided separately. Theoretically they could be found innocent of all the negligence charges and still found guilty of false imprisonment for making an arrest of a non-crime.

According to a fox article today they havnt released pictures or description other than that it was an assisted knife. I guess when they release pictures we can see if Freddie was a knife guy or not

The police keep arguing the arrest was righteous. How can that be?

This is true, we don't know other than the State's Attorney's opinion it was not a switchblade under state law. The police's argument is actually that the knife was a switchblade under Baltimore City Ordinances, because that ordinance uses a different, much broader definition of "switchblade." Having reviewed both laws, an assisted opening knife definitely does not fit the state law's definition, but it could possibly meet the City Code's due to the way it's phrased. So far I have seen some lawyers say it does, and some say it doesn't (including the State's Attorney). So we'll see what happens.

I am still anxious to see the outcome of CynicalFascist's case, and if the charges are dismissed, I highly encourage him to sue under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Retain counsel and definitely do not sign anything without his or her guidance. I have heard that sometimes courts will agree to dismiss the charges if you sign a paper saying you can't sue them for false arrest. Don't do it. Cops that legislate from the badge are a threat to everyone's freedom and deserve to be punished.
 
There is a 1964 precedent in MD law where a gravity knife was found to be a "dangerous weapon" and hence, illegal to carry.

Mentioned here:
http://www.knifeup.com/maryland-knife-laws/

"The case of Savoy v. State in 1964 found that a gravity knife is similar enough to a switchblade that it is a dangerous weapon per se. .... Now we know that gravity knives, switchblades, dirks, and Bowies are always illegal to carry concealed."

Couldn't find writeup of original case, but here is where it was appealed, and the original conviction affirmed:

http://www.ecases.us/case/md/2187326/savoy-v-state

- OS
 
There is a 1964 precedent in MD law where a gravity knife was found to be a "dangerous weapon" and hence, illegal to carry.

Mentioned here:
http://www.knifeup.com/maryland-knife-laws/

"The case of Savoy v. State in 1964 found that a gravity knife is similar enough to a switchblade that it is a dangerous weapon per se. .... Now we know that gravity knives, switchblades, dirks, and Bowies are always illegal to carry concealed."

Couldn't find writeup of original case, but here is where it was appealed, and the original conviction affirmed:

http://www.ecases.us/case/md/2187326/savoy-v-state

- OS

Technically Savoy only covered true gravity knives and described them using language blatently inconsistent with a butterfly knife:

A gravity knife was described below as being similar to a switch-blade knife, in that, when a button is pressed, the blade drops out.

Should be noted that it was also written back when the knife statute was Art. 27, sec. 36(a), instead of the modern day Criminal Code Title 4, Section 101. The language of the statute itself is different now. Furthermore, Mackall v State 1978, quoted in the aforementioned Sorrell v McGuigan, established a binding precedent for the meaning of the term "penknife" in statute, which are exempt from the restrictions of the law. This definition supplied easily encompasses a butterfly knife:

Penknives today are commonly considered to encompass any knife with the blade folding into the handle, some very large.
...
In short, the Maryland Court of Appeals clearly defined penknife as any knife whose blade folds into the handle. It is undisputed that the blade of Sorrell’s knife folded into the handle and that it was not a switchblade.

Even further, Anderson v. State 1992 established that the burden lies with the state, not the defendant, to prove an item not explicitly listed is in fact a weapon with the meaning of the statute and that it is not a “penknife without a switchblade.”

The fact that the SA either stetted or put "nolle prosequi" is already very telling in that regard. They know they don't have a case.
 
Back
Top