Virginia
Virginia Phone Call Recording Laws: What You Need to Know
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 1, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of November 1, 2026. · 6 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
Virginia is a one-party consent state for phone call recording. Under Va. Code 19.2-62, you may record any phone call you participate in without notifying the other party. However, secretly recorded calls are generally not admissible in Virginia civil court under Va. Code 8.01-420.2.
Virginia's phone call recording laws are built on two key statutes that work in tension. Va. Code Ann. 19.2-62 establishes one-party consent, making it legal to record any phone call you participate in. But Va. Code Ann. 8.01-420.2 restricts the use of those recordings in civil court, creating a situation where a recording can be perfectly legal to make but inadmissible as evidence.
This guide covers every aspect of phone call recording in Virginia, including what calls you can record, the civil admissibility limitation, cross-state recording concerns, business call recording, VoIP and digital communications, and the penalties for illegal interception.
One-Party Consent for Phone Calls
The Basic Rule
Under Va. Code Ann. 19.2-62, it is not a criminal offense to intercept a wire communication when the person intercepting is a party to the communication or one of the parties has given prior consent. For phone calls, this means:
- You can record any phone call you are on
- You do not need to tell the other person
- You do not need a warrant or court order
- Your participation in the call is sufficient consent
This applies regardless of who initiated the call, the subject matter of the conversation, or the recording device used.
Types of Calls Covered
Virginia's one-party consent rule covers all forms of telephone communication:
| Call Type | Can You Record? | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Landline to landline | Yes | Standard one-party consent applies |
| Cell phone calls | Yes | No additional restrictions |
| VoIP calls (Zoom, Teams, Skype) | Yes | Treated as wire or electronic communications; the same one-party rule applies |
| Video calls with audio | Yes | Audio portion follows phone recording rules |
| Conference calls | Yes | Your participation covers the entire call |
| Three-way calls | Yes | You must be a participant |
Recording Calls You Are Not Part Of
Recording a phone call between two other people without the consent of at least one participant is a Class 6 felony under Va. Code 19.2-62. This includes:
- Using a phone extension to secretly listen in and record
- Installing call-recording software on someone else's phone
- Using a wiretap device to intercept calls on a phone line
- Having a third party record a call without any participant's consent
The Civil Admissibility Limitation (Va. Code 8.01-420.2)
What the Statute Says
Va. Code Ann. 8.01-420.2 is the provision that sets Virginia apart from most other one-party consent states. It provides that no evidence obtained from the recording of any telephone conversation shall be admissible in any civil proceeding unless:
- All parties to the conversation knew it was being recorded, as demonstrated by a declaration at the beginning of the recorded portion of the conversation offered in evidence, or
- The recorded conversation contains evidence of admissions of criminal conduct that is the basis for the civil action, and at least one party to the conversation knew it was being recorded
The Divorce Exception to the Exception
The criminal conduct exception described above does not apply in civil cases involving divorce, separate maintenance, or annulment. This means that in Virginia divorce cases, a secretly recorded phone call is essentially never admissible in civil court, regardless of its content.
What This Means Practically
| Scenario | Recording Legal? | Admissible in Civil Court? |
|---|---|---|
| You record your own call, other party unaware | Yes | Generally NO |
| You record your call after announcing "this is recorded" | Yes | Yes (all parties aware) |
| You record a call that captures admissions of the criminal conduct the civil case is based on (not a divorce, separate maintenance or annulment case) | Yes | Yes (criminal conduct exception) |
| You record your call in a divorce matter, other party unaware | Yes | NO (divorce exception blocks it) |
| You record your call, used in criminal case | Yes | Yes (8.01-420.2 only applies to civil cases) |
How to Establish "Awareness"
The statute requires awareness to be demonstrated by a "declaration at the beginning of the recorded portion of the conversation to be admitted into evidence" stating that the conversation is being recorded. This means:
- A simple verbal announcement at the start of the call satisfies the requirement
- An automated message that says "this call may be recorded" may not be enough, because it does not say the call is being recorded; "this call is being recorded" is safer
- The declaration must come at the beginning of the recorded portion and be captured on the recording itself, so notice in a contract, handbook, website policy or on-screen pop-up does not meet the test on its own
- Starting to record mid-call without an initial declaration may not satisfy the statute
What 8.01-420.2 Does NOT Restrict
This admissibility limitation applies only to:
- Telephone conversations (not in-person recordings)
- Civil proceedings (not criminal cases)
The following uses are not restricted:
- Phone recordings used in criminal prosecutions
- In-person recordings used in any type of case
- Phone recordings used for personal documentation (not court evidence)
- Whether the limit reaches administrative hearings has not been settled; the statute says "any civil proceeding" and does not define the term
Cross-State Phone Call Recording
The Critical Maryland Border Issue
Virginia shares a long border with Maryland, and millions of phone calls cross between the two states daily. This creates a significant legal concern because Maryland is an all-party consent state under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 10-402, requiring everyone on the call to consent to recording.
When you are in Virginia recording a call with someone in Maryland:
- Your recording is legal under Virginia law
- The recording may violate Maryland law
- You could face a claim under Maryland law
- The Maryland penalty for illegal recording is a felony with up to 5 years in prison
Best practice: When calling someone in Maryland, announce that you are recording or obtain their consent.
Other Neighboring States
| State | Consent Requirement | Risk Level |
|---|---|---|
| West Virginia | One-party | Low (same standard) |
| Kentucky | One-party | Low (same standard) |
| Tennessee | One-party | Low (same standard) |
| North Carolina | One-party | Low (same standard) |
| District of Columbia | One-party | Low (same standard) |
| Maryland | All-party | HIGH |
Which Law Applies?
Courts have not uniformly resolved which state's law applies when a phone call crosses state lines. Different courts have applied:
- The law of the state where the recording was made
- The law of the state where the recorded party is located
- The law with the most significant relationship to the communication
Several courts have applied the law of the place where the recording was made, but that is not a uniform rule. The safest approach is to get consent before recording anyone in one of the 13 all-party consent states: California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Washington. Connecticut's and Nevada's all-party rules cover phone calls, Oregon's covers in-person conversations, and Delaware's statutes conflict.
Business Phone Call Recording in Virginia
Employer Recording of Business Calls
Virginia businesses can record phone calls for:
- Quality assurance and training
- Compliance monitoring (financial services, healthcare)
- Customer dispute documentation
- Internal investigations
While Virginia's one-party consent law does not require businesses to notify callers, many businesses provide notice through:
- Automated announcements ("This call may be recorded...")
- Contract terms and conditions
- Employee handbook provisions
- Website privacy policies
Only one form of notice meets the all-party exception in Va. Code 8.01-420.2: a declaration at the beginning of the recorded portion that the call is being recorded. Contract terms, handbook provisions and website policies are not captured on the recording, and a "may be recorded" message may not be enough.
Employee Recording of Business Calls
Employees can record their own business calls under one-party consent. This includes calls with customers, vendors, coworkers, and supervisors. However, employer policies may restrict recording, and violating those policies can result in termination even though the recording is legal.
Industry-Specific Requirements
Certain industries have additional phone recording requirements:
- Financial services: FINRA rules require broker-dealers to maintain records of certain communications
- Healthcare: HIPAA does not directly address phone recording, but recorded calls containing protected health information (PHI) must be stored and handled according to HIPAA security rules
- Legal services: Recording attorney-client calls raises ethical considerations, and illegal interception of such calls carries enhanced civil damages under Va. Code 19.2-69
VoIP and Digital Communication Recording
VoIP Calls
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) calls, including Zoom, Microsoft Teams, Google Meet, Skype, and similar platforms, are treated as wire or electronic communications under Virginia law. The same one-party consent rule applies.
Many VoIP platforms have built-in recording features. When you use the platform's recording function in a meeting you are participating in, you are complying with Virginia's one-party consent requirement. Some platforms notify participants when recording begins, but an on-screen notice is not a declaration on the recording itself. To meet the civil admissibility exception, say at the start of the recording that the call is being recorded.
Voicemail
Recording someone leaving you a voicemail does not raise wiretapping concerns because the caller is voluntarily transmitting a message to your phone system. You are not intercepting a communication between two other parties.
Call Recording Apps
Smartphone apps that record phone calls are legal to use in Virginia as long as you are a participant in the call. Popular call recording apps work by either recording directly on the device or by creating a conference call with a recording server. Both methods are legal under one-party consent.
Penalties for Illegal Phone Call Recording
Criminal Penalties
Illegally recording a phone call in Virginia is a Class 6 felony under Va. Code 19.2-62:
| Offense | Classification | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Illegal interception of phone call | Class 6 felony | 1 to 5 years prison, or up to 12 months jail and/or a fine up to $2,500 |
| Disclosing contents of illegally intercepted call | Class 6 felony | Same as above |
| Using contents of illegally intercepted call | Class 6 felony | Same as above |
Civil Damages
Under Va. Code 19.2-69, victims can sue for:
- Actual damages, but never less than $400 per day of violation or $4,000, whichever is higher
- Punitive damages
- Attorney fees and costs
The floor rises to $800 per day or $8,000 when the intercepted call was between spouses, attorney and client, a licensed practitioner of the healing arts and patient, a licensed counselor, clinical social worker, psychologist or marriage and family therapist and client, or a clergy member and a person seeking spiritual counsel.
Exclusionary Rule
Under Va. Code 19.2-65, illegally intercepted phone conversations and evidence derived from them are inadmissible in any proceeding.
Phone Recording in Family Law Cases
Custody Disputes
Phone recordings between co-parents are common in Virginia custody disputes. While making the recording is legal under one-party consent, using it in court is complicated by Va. Code 8.01-420.2. If the other parent was not aware of the recording, the phone call recording is generally inadmissible in the civil custody proceeding.
In-person recordings of co-parent conversations do not face this restriction and may be more strategically valuable as evidence.
Divorce Cases
The divorce exception in Va. Code 8.01-420.2 makes secretly recorded phone calls essentially inadmissible in Virginia divorce proceedings. Even if the recording captures admissions of criminal conduct, the criminal conduct exception does not apply in divorce, separate maintenance, or annulment cases.
This creates a strong incentive for Virginia divorce litigants to either:
- Record in-person conversations instead of phone calls
- Announce recording at the start of any phone conversation they want to preserve as evidence
- Rely on other forms of evidence
Protective Orders
Phone recordings documenting threats, harassment, or stalking may be relevant in protective order proceedings. While Va. Code 8.01-420.2 applies to civil proceedings, protective order hearings involve both civil and quasi-criminal elements. Courts may evaluate the admissibility of phone recordings in this context on a case-by-case basis.
More Virginia Recording Laws
Audio Recording | Video Recording | Voyeurism and Hidden Cameras | Workplace Recording | Recording Police | Phone Call Recording | Security Cameras | Recording in Public | Landlord-Tenant Recording | Dashcam Laws | School Recording | Medical Recording
Back to Virginia Recording Laws
More Virginia Recording Topics
More Virginia Laws
- Virginia AI Meeting Recording Laws
- Virginia Dashcam Laws
- Virginia Data Privacy Laws
- Virginia Deepfake Laws
- Virginia Employee Monitoring Laws
- Virginia GPS Tracking Laws
- Virginia Police Bodycam Laws
- Virginia Smart Glasses Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I record a phone call in Virginia without the other person knowing?
Yes. Virginia is a one-party consent state under Va. Code 19.2-62. You can record any phone call you participate in without telling the other person. However, the recording may not be admissible in Virginia civil court unless all parties were aware of the recording (Va. Code 8.01-420.2).
Can a secretly recorded phone call be used in a Virginia divorce case?
Generally no. Va. Code 8.01-420.2 restricts the admissibility of recorded phone conversations in civil proceedings. The limited exception for criminal conduct admissions does not apply in divorce, separate maintenance, or annulment cases. In-person recordings face no such restriction.
Is it legal to record a call between Virginia and Maryland?
The recording is legal under Virginia law (one-party consent), but it may violate Maryland law (all-party consent). Courts have not settled which state's law governs a call between the two. The safest approach is to tell the Maryland participant you are recording.
Do businesses in Virginia have to tell callers they are recording?
Virginia law does not require businesses to notify callers about recording. However, to meet the all-party exception in Va. Code 8.01-420.2, the recording itself must begin with a statement that the call is being recorded. A "may be recorded" message may not be enough, and notice in a contract or policy does not meet the test on its own.
Can I record a Zoom or Teams call in Virginia?
Yes. VoIP calls are treated as wire or electronic communications under Virginia law. The same one-party consent rule applies. If you are a participant in the call, you can record it. Many platforms notify other participants when recording begins, but for civil court, Va. Code 8.01-420.2 looks for a statement at the start of the recording that the call is being recorded.
Updates
Matched a paraphrase of Va. Code 8.01-420.2 to the statute: the recording declaration must come at the start of the portion offered in evidence.
Corrected the quotation of Va. Code 8.01-420.2's declaration requirement, clarified that the criminal-conduct exception covers only admissions of the conduct the civil case is based on, and corrected the Class 6 felony alternative to jail, a fine of up to $2,500, or both.
We removed the claim that courts apply the stricter state's law to interstate calls and listed all 13 all-party consent states, corrected what counts as notice for Virginia's civil evidence rule (a statement at the start of the recording that the call is being recorded, not a handbook, contract, pop-up or "may be recorded" message), noted that the rule's reach to administrative hearings is unsettled, and stated the damages figures as a floor on actual damages.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Code of Virginia, Title 19.2: Criminal Procedure
§ 19.2-62Interception, disclosure, etc., of wire, electronic or oral communications unlawful; penalties; exceptionsIn forcecited in 21 of our articles
A. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who: 1. Intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, electronic or oral communication; 2. Intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical or other device to intercept any oral communication; 3. Intentionally discloses, or endeavors to disclose, to any other person the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or 4. Intentionally uses, or endeavors to use, the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication; shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. B. 1.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-24 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 11 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts read Section 19.2-62 in step with the federal wiretap act. Global Policy Partners, LLC v. Yessin (2009) held that accessing email stored on a destination server is not an intercept, and Wilks v. Commonwealth (1977) held a conversation police recorded through a cooperating coconspirator was not a protected oral communication.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Belmer v. Commonwealth (Court of Appeals of Virginia 2001, 36 Va. App. 448)✓A juvenile arrested for robbery whispered to his mother's boyfriend in a police interview room while a detective listened in; the court found no reasonable expectation of privacy, so Chapter 6, which carries the Section 19.2-62 ban, did not bar the detective's testimony.
- Wilks v. Commonwealth (Supreme Court of Virginia 1977, 217 Va. 885)✓An arson conspirator agreed to be wired and drew the defendant into a taped shop-talk about the fires; the court held the defendant had no justifiable expectation of noninterception, so the talk was not an oral communication protected by Chapter 6 and the tape was admissible.
- Bartnicki v. Vopper (Supreme Court of the United States 2001, 532 U.S. 514)“…16.02 (Supp. 2001); Utah Code Ann. § 77 23a4 (1982); Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-62 (1995); W. Va. Code § 62 -1D-3 (2000)…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Is It Illegal to Video Record Someone Without Their Consent? (2026), Virginia Smart Glasses Recording Laws, US Recording Laws by State (2026): All 50 States Explained
§ 19.2-65When intercepted communications and evidence derived therefrom not to be received in evidenceIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
Whenever any wire or oral communication has been intercepted, no part of the contents of such communication and no evidence derived therefrom may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, commission, regulatory body, legislative committee or other agency of this Commonwealth or a political subdivision thereof if the disclosure of that information would be in violation of this chapter.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2011
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Wilks v. Commonwealth (Supreme Court of Virginia 1977, 217 Va. 885)“…nce if the disclosure would be in violation of the chapter. Va. Code § 19.2-65. But it is not a violation for a person…”
- United States v. Clenney (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2011, 631 F.3d 658)“…te court obtained in violation of the statutory procedures. Va. Code Ann. § 19.2-65. But Virginia law does not attempt to d…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Virginia Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Consent Rules, Virginia Audio Recording Laws: One-Party Consent Rules and Penalties
§ 19.2-69Civil action for unlawful interception, disclosure, or useIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
Any person whose wire, electronic, or oral communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of this chapter shall (i) have a civil cause of action against any person who intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person to intercept, disclose, or use, such communications and (ii) be entitled to recover from any such person: 1. Actual damages but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $400 a day for each day of violation or $4,000, whichever is higher, provided that liquidated damages shall be computed at the rate of $800 a day for each day of violation or $8,000, whichever is higher, if the wire, electronic, or oral communication intercepted, disclosed, or used is between (i) persons married to each other; (ii) an attorney and client; (iii) a licensed practitioner of the healing arts and patient; (iv) a licensed professional counselor, licensed clinical social worker, licensed psychologist, or licensed marriage and family therapist and client; or (v) a clergy member and person seeking spiritual counsel or advice; 2. Punitive damages; and 3. A reasonable attorney fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Few (District Court, E.D. Virginia 2026)“…ing a civil claim for damages under Va. Code § 19.2-69. See Dkt. 1 at 1-3. Cc. Stat…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Virginia Landlord-Tenant Recording Laws: Surveillance and Privacy Rights, Virginia Medical Recording Laws: Patient Rights and Healthcare Privacy, Virginia Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Penalties and Protections
Code of Virginia, Title 8.01: Civil Remedies and Procedure
§ 8.01-420.2Limitation on use of recorded conversations as evidenceIn forcecited in 16 of our articles
No mechanical recording, electronic or otherwise, of a telephone conversation shall be admitted into evidence in any civil proceeding unless (i) all parties to the conversation were aware the conversation was being recorded or (ii) the portion of the recording to be admitted contains admissions that, if true, would constitute criminal conduct which is the basis for the civil action, and one of the parties was aware of the recording and the proceeding is not one for divorce, separate maintenance or annulment of a marriage. The parties' knowledge of the recording pursuant to clause (i) shall be demonstrated by a declaration at the beginning of the recorded portion of the conversation to be admitted into evidence that the conversation is being recorded. This section shall not apply to emergency reporting systems operated by police and fire departments and by emergency medical services agencies, nor to any communications common carrier utilizing service observing or random monitoring pursuant to § 19.2-62.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at law.lis.virginia.gov
Cited in 2 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 1991
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Leitman v. McAusland (Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 1991, 934 F.2d 46)“…transcript could not be admitted into evidence pursuant to Va.Code § 8.01-420.2. 5 A state evidentiary rule, such as…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Virginia Dashcam Laws: Installation, Audio, and Evidence Rules, Virginia Laws on Recording in Public: Rights and Restrictions, Virginia School Recording Laws: Student, Parent, and Teacher Rights
United States Code Title 18
§ 2511Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibitedIn forcecited in 441 of our articles
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter any person who— intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to intercept or endeavor to intercept, any wire, oral, or electronic communication; intentionally uses, endeavors to use, or procures any other person to use or endeavor to use any electronic, mechanical, or other device to intercept any oral communication when— such device is affixed to, or otherwise transmits a signal through, a wire, cable, or other like connection used in wire communication; or such device transmits communications by radio, or interferes with the transmission of such communication; or such person knows, or has reason to know, that such device or any component thereof has been sent through the mail or transported in interstate or foreign commerce; or such use or endeavor to use (A) takes place on the premises of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign commerce; or (B) obtains or is for the purpose of obtaining information relating to the operations of any business or other commercial establishment the operations of which affect interstate or foreign…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-17 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 2,045 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Griggs-Ryan v. Smith (1990) applied the Section 2511(2)(d) prior-consent exception, treating a tenant repeatedly told that all incoming calls were taped as having impliedly consented. United States v. United States District Court (1972) read the then-current Section 2511(3) as conferring no presidential surveillance power.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Mitchell v. Forsyth (Supreme Court of the United States 1985, 472 U.S. 511)✓The Attorney General authorized a warrantless 1970 national security wiretap that caught the plaintiff's calls; the Court held the since-repealed Section 2511(3) disclaimer left the tap lawful under Title III, and that Mitchell had qualified immunity.
- United States v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan (Supreme Court of the United States 1972, 407 U.S. 297)✓The Attorney General approved warrantless wiretaps on members of a domestic group accused of bombing a CIA office; the Court read Section 2511(3) as a congressional disclaimer conferring no surveillance power, then held the Fourth Amendment required prior judicial approval.
- Forsyth v. Barr (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 1994, 19 F.3d 1527)✓Dallas police used, in an internal affairs probe of an officer, calls private parties allegedly intercepted illegally; assuming that was unlawful, the Fifth Circuit held Section 2517(1) and (2) allowed the disclosure and use, defeating the Section 2511(1)(c) and (d) claims.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Can an Employer Record Conversations Without Consent? (2026), Can I Record My Boss Harassing Me? State-by-State Legal Guide (2026), Can I Sue Someone for Recording Me on Private or Public Property?
Sources and References
- Va. Code Ann. 19.2-62(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov
- Va. Code Ann. 8.01-420.2(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov
- Va. Code Ann. 19.2-69(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov
- Va. Code Ann. 19.2-65(law.lis.virginia.gov).gov
- FCC - Recording Telephone Conversations(fcc.gov).gov
- 18 U.S.C. 2511 - Federal Wiretap Act(law.cornell.edu)
- Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. 10-402 - Maryland all-party consent(mgaleg.maryland.gov).gov