Is Sexting Illegal in Maryland

It depends on the ages of the people involved and on what was sent. Images of adults exchanged consensually are treated differently from images of a minor, and a minor who sends an image of themselves can still fall within statutes written about child sexual abuse material. Maryland never enacted a provision called a sexting law, so your exposure comes from statutes drafted for other purposes: Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-207, Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208, and Md. Code, Crim. Law § 3-809. They ask different questions. The statutes ask who appears in the image, how old that person is, whether you kept the image or passed it along, and whether you sent it onward to hurt the person shown in it. If a Maryland investigation or charge already touches you, Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C. defends these matters statewide, and you can request a consultation through a 24/7 phone intake at (888) 437-7747.

On this page

When Everyone in the Exchange Is an Adult

Consensual exchanges between adults do not fall under the Maryland statutes that address images of children, because those statutes begin with the age of the person depicted. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208 reaches representations of a child under 16. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-207 reaches representations of a minor. Neither description covers a picture of an adult who agreed to send it.

What changes the analysis is what happens next. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 3-809 prohibits knowingly distributing a visual representation of another identifiable person with intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual activity, with intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten or coerce, knowing the person did not consent. Consent to receive an image is not consent to spread it. A violation is a misdemeanor carrying up to 2 years or a $5,000 fine, and 2025 Md. Laws ch. 219, effective July 1, 2025, added a statutory civil cause of action.

The statute names the elements plainly, which cuts in both directions. The State has to prove the intent and the knowledge, not just the sending. A picture forwarded carelessly, or shared in a context the person had accepted, does not match the statutory description the way a message sent to humiliate someone does.

When a Minor Appears in the Image

Once a minor appears in the picture, the age of the sender stops controlling the outcome. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-207 prohibits causing or knowingly allowing a minor to engage as a subject in the production of obscene matter, photographing or filming a minor engaging in sadomasochistic abuse or sexual conduct, using a computer to depict such conduct, and knowingly promoting, distributing, or possessing with intent to distribute such matter. A violation is a felony. A first violation carries up to 10 years or a $25,000 fine, and each subsequent violation carries up to 20 years or $50,000.

Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208 covers the receiving end. The statute prohibits knowingly possessing and intentionally retaining, or knowingly accessing and intentionally viewing, a representation showing an actual child under 16 engaged in sadomasochistic abuse, sexual conduct, or a state of sexual excitement. A violation is a misdemeanor carrying up to 5 years or a $2,500 fine, and a person previously convicted under this section is guilty of a felony, up to 10 years or a $10,000 fine.

Registration follows the statute. Section 11-207 is a Tier II registration offense, and Section 11-208 is a Tier I registration offense if the victim is a minor. Md. Code, Crim. Proc. § 11-701 sets the tier I, tier II, and tier III classifications.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it illegal for adults in Maryland to exchange intimate photos?

A consensual exchange between adults does not fall under the Maryland statutes that address images of children, because those provisions start with the age of the person depicted. Exposure appears if someone later distributes the picture. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 3-809 requires knowing distribution, intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten or coerce, and knowledge that the person did not consent. A violation is a misdemeanor carrying up to 2 years or a $5,000 fine.

What if you are a minor and you send an image of yourself?

Md. Code, Crim. Law §§ 11-207 and 11-208 describe the age of the person depicted, not the age of the sender, so a minor who creates or sends such an image can fall inside statutory language written about child sexual abuse material. Section 11-208 also carries an affirmative defense for prompt good-faith destruction or a report to law enforcement, which can matter for a recipient who acted quickly.

Does it matter that you never asked for the picture?

It can matter a great deal. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208 requires knowing possession joined to intentional retention, or knowing access joined to intentional viewing. An image that arrived unsolicited and that you never opened does not answer that description in the way a saved file does. The State still has to prove each part of the statutory phrase, so the wording of the count matters as much as the file itself.

What if you deleted the image as soon as you saw it?

Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208 contains an affirmative defense for a person who promptly and in good faith destroyed the material or reported it to law enforcement. Both the speed and the good faith of your response carry the argument. Keeping an accurate account of what you did, and when you did it, protects that defense before anyone asks you about it.

Is forwarding a picture treated differently from keeping it?

Yes. Keeping material sits in Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208, a misdemeanor carrying up to 5 years or a $2,500 fine. Knowingly promoting, distributing, or possessing with intent to distribute sits in Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-207, a felony carrying up to 10 years or a $25,000 fine for a first violation. The statutes also assign different registration tiers.

Does Maryland law reach AI-generated or edited images?

Yes, within limits the statutes state. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 11-208 covers a computer-generated image indistinguishable from an actual and identifiable child under 16. Md. Code, Crim. Law § 3-809 defines a visual representation to include a computer-generated image indistinguishable from the person, and it excludes drawings, cartoons, sculptures and paintings. The 2025 Md. Laws ch. 219 amendment added that definition effective July 1, 2025.

Is revenge porn the name of the Maryland statute?

No. Revenge porn is not the statutory name. Maryland titles the provision nonconsensual distribution of intimate images and places it at Md. Code, Crim. Law § 3-809. The popular label misleads people about the elements, because the statute turns on knowing distribution, on intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten or coerce, and on knowledge that the person did not consent, rather than on a motive for revenge.

What should you do if law enforcement asks about your phone?

You can decline to answer questions and ask to speak with a lawyer before any conversation continues. Statements given early shape the charging decision, and an explanation offered to sound cooperative can supply an element the State otherwise had to prove. Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C. answers a 24/7 phone intake at (888) 437-7747, and you can request a consultation before you respond.

Mr. Sris, Owner and Founder of Law Offices Of SRIS, P.C., is a former prosecutor and is admitted in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York. The firm has practiced since 1997 and concentrates in criminal defense, including Maryland matters built on phones, messaging applications, and stored images. Mr. Sris and the firm’s Of Counsel attorneys read each count against the statutory language it rests on, separate what the State can prove from what it assumes, and weigh any resolution against the registration tier that Md. Code, Crim. Proc. § 11-701 attaches to the statute of conviction. Clients reach the firm through its Maryland locations. Request a consultation.

This page provides general information and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Case results depend on a variety of factors unique to each case. Results may vary.

Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.