Montague v. State: From Bars to Bars - A Riff for Narrow Interpretation of Hip-Hop Lyrics in Criminal Prosecutions

Michael A. Gregory

Hip-hop as a musical genre has proven its longevity by becoming an integral part of American society. Hip-hop music has not only become an avenue for musical entertainment on its face, but has also developed as a means for self-expression. This artform is consistently raising cultural awareness while communicating messages about social topics ranging from violence to discrimination and everything in-between. Recently, hip-hop music has become increasingly intertwined with criminal prosecutions, as prosecutors have begun offering defendant-authored lyrics during criminal trials as substantive evidence of guilt. Although the admissibility of defendant-authored rap lyrics has been discussed by various state and federal courts throughout the early 21st century, the Maryland Court of Appeals had not directly addressed the issue until its precedential case in Montague v. State in 2020. In Montague, the Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s admission of defendant-authored lyrics as substantive evidence of a defendant’s guilt in a murder trial, holding that the lyrics were both relevant to the alleged crime and not unduly prejudicial. Specifically, the Court of Appeals held that the lyrics bore a sufficiently close “factual and temporal nexus” to the details of the alleged crime and that they retained heightened probative value sufficient to outweigh any potential prejudice arising from the lyrics’ admission.

This Note first argues that the Court of Appeals erred in Montague by affirming the admission of the lyrics at issue because the lyrics were irrelevant. Specifically, the lyrics were identifiably distinct from the details of the alleged crime and contained repeated references to general rap music themes, rather than parallels to the alleged crime. Next, acknowledging that the evidentiary threshold for relevance is low, this Note argues that any probative value contained within the lyrics was minimal and substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice given the proven psychological impact that violent lyrics have when presented to jurors in criminal trials. Finally, this Note suggests a framework that courts, including the Court of Appeals, should employ when analyzing the admissibility of defendant-authored lyrics in criminal trials to ensure that their inherently prejudicial effects on jurors are mitigated. Such a framework should include verifying the lyrics’ author, comparing the lyrics and alleged crime for an unmistakable factual connection, and evaluating whether less inherently prejudicial evidence is available.