Maryland court rules rap lyrics admissible as evidence

On Dec. 23, 2020, the Maryland Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, ruled that a Maryland resident’s rap lyrics were admissible as evidence against him. Prosecutors used the lyrics to convict the man of murder and related charges, for which he received a sentence of 50 years in prison. 

Key Players

Maryland resident Lawrence Montague was convicted of murder and related charges on Nov. 1, 2017. While awaiting trial, Montague rapped a verse into a recorded jail phone while speaking with a friend. In the months that followed, prosecutors used these lyrics as evidence against him. 

When Montague appealed the admission of the lyrics as evidence, Maryland’s Court of Appeals denied his motion. The court argued that although rap lyrics cannot be used to vilify a defendant, Montague’s description so closely mirrored the alleged crime that it served as “direct proof” of his guilt. 

Further Details

In October 2017, Montague was arrested and incarcerated in Maryland for gun and murder charges. Complex reported that the charges against him included second-degree murder, first-degree assault, use of a firearm in a crime of violence, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and carrying a handgun on the person. 

While awaiting trial, he was recorded rapping over a jail phone with a friend. According to Complex, the verse contained the lines: 

“I’ll be playin’ the block bitch 

And if you ever play with me 

I’ll give you a dream, a couple shots snitch  

It’s like hockey pucks the way I dish out this 

It’s a .40 when that bitch goin’ hit up shit”

According to court records, Montague’s friend warned him about these lyrics. Montague replied, “I’m gucci. It’s a rap. Fuck can they do for — about a rap?” 

On several different occasions, higher courts have overturned convictions after ruling that rap lyrics are protected under the First Amendment; prominent examples include Elonis v. United States, Skinner v. New Jersey, and Oduwole v. Illinois. Montague’s comments suggested he believed his rap lyrics were protected Free Speech. 

On Nov. 1, 2017, the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, found Montague guilty. He was sentenced to 50 years–30 for the murder and 20 for the use of a firearm, according to Complex.  

On Sep. 14, 2020, Montague appealed the admission of the lyrics, but Maryland’s Court of Appeals denied his motion on Dec. 23, Courthouse News Service reported.

In an explanation of the decision, Maryland Court of Appeals Judge Joseph Getty wrote that although the court remains wary of admitting such evidence, the details contained in Montague’s lyrics were uniquely relevant to the case and therefore must be considered as evidence. “While rap lyric evidence often has prejudicial effect as improper propensity evidence of a defendant’s bad character,” Getty wrote, “those concerns are diminished when the lyrics are so akin to the alleged crime that they serve as ‘direct proof’ of the defendant’s involvement.” 

Getty also said Montague’s decision to use lyrics threatening “snitches” just three weeks before the trial posed serious concerns regarding witness intimidation. He noted that the .40 caliber bullets mentioned by Montague matched those used in the murder. 

Outcome

Montague’s defense, social justice advocates criticize ruling

Following the court’s decision endorsing use of the lyrics, Montague’s trial lawyer, Tyler Mann claimed the lyrics were “the sole piece of evidence” for Montague’s alleged guilt, according to Complex. Mann also noted that the key witness against Montague had schizophrenia and, according to Mann, did not get a good look at the perpetrator of the crime.

“[The witness] was there to buy drugs and ran away from the scene. I would say they didn’t necessarily get a look at my client,” Mann said. “They relied on her, but really the sole evidence that they relied on in their closing was this rap.”

Mann also called the ruling a dangerous precedent, in an interview with Complex. He complained that it can now be cited by other courts, which may use vague lyrics as a confession or admission of guilt in future cases. 

Additionally, critics of the decision claim the ruling highlights law enforcement’s continued misunderstanding — and vilification — of the rap genre. Hip-hop, they say, emerged in response to poverty, unemployment, gang violence, and isolation from the mainstream United States. Rather than glorify these social issues, the genre reflects artists’ attempts to confront them while creating something artistic and productive. 

Some assert that the ruling lays bare discrimination within the United States’ broader court system. The Guardian reported that thousands of defendants have had rap lyrics used against them by prosecutors. Critics claim that while rap, an art form drawn from Black Americans’ lived experience, is routinely used as court evidence, virtually no other genre of music has been similarly used in criminal cases. 

In a recent column in Variety, veteran attorney Dina LaPolt called Maryland’s decision a clear example of the United States’ uninformed and prejudiced criminal justice system: “This blatantly racist decision is a travesty,” she said.