Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Criminal Law (115)
- Constitutional Law (57)
- Courts (29)
- Evidence (27)
- Civil Procedure (14)
-
- Law and Society (14)
- Law Enforcement and Corrections (11)
- Fourth Amendment (10)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (9)
- Civil Law (7)
- Judges (7)
- Litigation (7)
- Jurisprudence (5)
- Legal Profession (5)
- Legislation (4)
- Fourteenth Amendment (3)
- Legal Education (3)
- Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility (3)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (2)
- Juvenile Law (2)
- Law and Gender (2)
- Law and Race (2)
- Medical Jurisprudence (2)
- Public Interest (2)
- State and Local Government Law (2)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Conflict of Laws (1)
- Keyword
-
- Criminal law (23)
- Evidence (11)
- Criminal procedure (10)
- Maine criminal code (10)
- Fourth amendment (9)
-
- Sentencing (8)
- Constitutional law (7)
- Post-conviction review (7)
- Mens rea (6)
- Right to counsel (6)
- Constitution (5)
- Due process (5)
- Insanity (5)
- Seizure (5)
- Jurisdiction (4)
- Law enforcement (4)
- Maine (4)
- Prison (4)
- Privilege (4)
- Search (4)
- Sentence (4)
- Book review (3)
- Constitutional right (3)
- Counsel (3)
- Criminal (3)
- Criminal trial (3)
- Culpability (3)
- De novo (3)
- Habeas corpus (3)
- Indigent (3)
Articles 31 - 60 of 125
Full-Text Articles in Criminal Procedure
Mens Rea And Insanity, Maine Law Review
Mens Rea And Insanity, Maine Law Review
Maine Law Review
Two developments in the administration of criminal law call for a closer examination of the relationship between mens rea and insanity. The first is the practice of bifurcating trials into a guilt phase and an insanity phase. The new Maine Criminal Code, for example, allows the defendant to elect such a procedure. The second development is the increasing willingness of courts to admit evidence of the accused's mental disease or defect as probative of whether he possessed the culpable state of mind, or mens rea, which must be proven as one of the elements of the crime charged. When the …
The Burden Of Proof And The Insanity Defense After Mullaney V. Wilbur, Maine Law Review
The Burden Of Proof And The Insanity Defense After Mullaney V. Wilbur, Maine Law Review
Maine Law Review
In 1970, the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of In re Winship specified an evidentiary standard of proof for criminal prosecutions as a requirement of the due process clause of the 14th amendment: "Lest there remain any doubt about the constitutional stature of the reasonable doubt-standard, we explicitly hold that the Due Process Clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged." Five years later, in Mullaney v. Wilbur, the Court extended Winship to invalidate Maine's statutory scheme of …
Constitutional And Legislative Issues Raised By The Entrapment Defense In Maine, Maine Law Review
Constitutional And Legislative Issues Raised By The Entrapment Defense In Maine, Maine Law Review
Maine Law Review
In recent years the increase in undercover investigative activity by police agents has generated considerable interest in the defense of entrapment. The entrapment defense to a criminal prosecution has been recognized either judicially or legislatively in most jurisdictions in the United States. The proper formulation of the defense, however, has given rise to conflicting opinions involving various evidentiary and constitutional considerations. In raising the defense of entrapment, a defendant does not deny that he committed the acts constituting the crime, but rather asserts that, on grounds of public policy, he should not be convicted. In Maine, the defense of entrapment …
"Jurisdictional" Indictments, Informations And Complaints: An Unnecessary Doctrine, Peter G. Ballou
"Jurisdictional" Indictments, Informations And Complaints: An Unnecessary Doctrine, Peter G. Ballou
Maine Law Review
In the majority of jurisdictions in the United States, including the federal courts and Maine, a sufficient indictment, information or complaint is deemed an absolute prerequisite to a valid conviction. This right to a sufficient charging instrument is not subject to waiver and may be asserted at any time, even though not raised before or during trial or on direct appeal from a conviction. This characteristic of nonwaivability, probably unique among the rights belonging to a criminal defendant, has led some courts, including the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, to characterize the requirement of a sufficient indictment as "jurisdictional." When an …
State V. Hayes: Privacy Of The Mind And The Incompetent Defendant, Maine Law Review
State V. Hayes: Privacy Of The Mind And The Incompetent Defendant, Maine Law Review
Maine Law Review
Although numerous jurisdictions have faced the question of whether a criminal defendant can be considered competent to stand trial when his competency is medically induced, the question of whether the state may force the accused to take competency-inducing medication during trial over the pretrial objections of the defense is relatively novel. Confronted with that issue recently, the Supreme Court of New Hampshire in State v. Hayes held that the state could compel a criminal defendant to take psychotropic drugs' necessary to maintain competency if the jury was informed about the use of medication. It is clear from the New Hampshire …
Mental Abnormality In The Maine Criminal Code: Section 58 (1-A), Susan E. Peck
Mental Abnormality In The Maine Criminal Code: Section 58 (1-A), Susan E. Peck
Maine Law Review
The law surrounding the insanity defense has always been complex and problematic. Since the promulgation of the M'Naghten test in 1843, courts and legislators have attempted to articulate a clear and easily understood definition of insanity. Legal scholars have created an overwhelming volume of literature on such important aspects of the defense as the role of psychiatrists in a jury trial, the appropriateness of the diminished capacity defense, and the constitutionality of imposing the burden of proving insanity on the defendant. Even the necessity of retaining the defense has been questioned. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has recently confronted a …
"Fighting Words" And The First Amendment In Maine: State V. John W., Deborah J. Ross
"Fighting Words" And The First Amendment In Maine: State V. John W., Deborah J. Ross
Maine Law Review
On April 1, 1979, John W. was driving his car, accompanied by his sister Maria. The car was stopped by a police officer who requested John's license and registration. Maria asked the officer why they had been stopped. When the officer remained silent, Maria became abusive and was arrested for disorderly conduct. John demanded to know what was going on. Ordered to get back into his car, John began shouting at the police: "Hey, turn around and come back here;" "Hey, you fucking pig, you fuckin' kangaroo;" "Fuck you." John was arrested and convicted in a juvenile proceeding of disorderly …
The Development And Consequences Of The "Good Faith" Exception To The Exclusionary Rule And The Qualified "Good Faith" Immunity From Liability Under Section 1983, Philip M. Coffin Iii, Paul F. Driscoll
The Development And Consequences Of The "Good Faith" Exception To The Exclusionary Rule And The Qualified "Good Faith" Immunity From Liability Under Section 1983, Philip M. Coffin Iii, Paul F. Driscoll
Maine Law Review
The remedies fashioned to redress violations of the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution continue to be the subject of much judicial, legislative, and scholarly inquiry. In striking the balance between the need to protect individual freedom and the need to protect society from criminal activity, the Supreme Court and Congress have developed two principal remedies for fourth amendment violations: the exclusionary rule and civil actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or under theories of constitutional tort. on the development of both of these remedies it is assumed that their effectiveness is the true measure of fourth amendment liberties. …
State V. Grant: Is Intent An Essential Element Of Criminal Attempt In Maine?, Bethanne Lyons Poliquin
State V. Grant: Is Intent An Essential Element Of Criminal Attempt In Maine?, Bethanne Lyons Poliquin
Maine Law Review
Criminal attempt is a conceptually difficult area of the criminal law. Efforts to develop a judicial and statutory framework for the imposition of criminal attempt liability have resulted in analytical difficulties from which sound policy has not emerged. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court has recently encountered this problem in State v. Grant. Liability for criminal attempt has traditionally been limited to those situations in which the actor is shown to have had the specific intent to engage in conduct that constituted a substantial step toward the commission of the substantive crime. Because of this requirement, courts have reasoned that criminal …
Criminal Contempt In Maine: Constitutionally Protected Or Neglected?, Christopher D. Hardy
Criminal Contempt In Maine: Constitutionally Protected Or Neglected?, Christopher D. Hardy
Maine Law Review
The power to punish contempt of court is an ancient power justified as inherent and necessary for the effective administration of justice. Because criminal contempts are willful challenges to the power of a court to maintain control over its proceedings, contempts are acts which serve to lessen the dignity and authority of the court. Certainly, the maintenance of decorum in the courtrooms is of paramount importance. Absent the ability to sanction willful disobedience, a court is powerless to enforce its decrees or control its proceedings. Yet it is a power readily open to abuse; application of this power must be …
Presumptions Against Criminal Defendants, Affirmative Defenses, And A Substantive Due Process Interpretation Of County Court Of Ulster V. Allen, John C. Sheldon
Presumptions Against Criminal Defendants, Affirmative Defenses, And A Substantive Due Process Interpretation Of County Court Of Ulster V. Allen, John C. Sheldon
Maine Law Review
In County Court of Ulster County v. Allen, the Supreme Court stated: "inferences and presumptions are a staple of our adversary system of factfinding." Because Allen concerned the constitutionality of the use against criminal defendants of such deductive devices as statutory inferences and presumptions, it appeared that the decision would ultimately favor their unrestricted use in criminal cases by the prosecution. Further, that expectation was buttressed by the ruling in Patterson v. New York, in which the Court awarded constitutional sanction to state use of affirmative defenses against criminal defendants. These facts suggested that the Court would refrain from imposing …
Cars Don’T Stop For Yellow Lights: Turning Maine’S Yellow Flag Law Red, Jamison Rhoads-Doyle
Cars Don’T Stop For Yellow Lights: Turning Maine’S Yellow Flag Law Red, Jamison Rhoads-Doyle
Maine Law Review
This Case Note is about Maine’s Extreme Risk Protection Order law, Title 34-B, Section 3862-A, of the Maine Revised Statutes. The purpose of Maine’s law and others like it is to proactively take firearms away from individuals who present a substantial risk of violently harming themselves or others. In the aftermath of the mass shooting which occurred in Lewiston, Maine on October 25, 2023, there was debate over whether law enforcement could have used Section 3862-A to proactively prevent the shooting, as well as over whether Section 3862-A was an effective tool for preventing violence in the first place. This …
Slow, Expensive, And Out Of Control: A Statutory Solution To The Competency Crisis, Robert Barnhart
Slow, Expensive, And Out Of Control: A Statutory Solution To The Competency Crisis, Robert Barnhart
Maine Law Review
The United States Constitution guarantees both the right to a speedy trial and the right to be competent to stand trial. United States Supreme Court decisions have recognized both of these rights but left the hard work of implementing them to legislatures and rulemakers. After turning the technicalities over to the states, the Supreme Court has generally stayed out of the business of setting bright-line rules to follow, both for setting speedy trial limits and ensuring defendants are evaluated and restored to competency. This delegation has led to a dual crisis. Cases are not resolved on time, and a substantial …
Constitutional Issues Raised By The Civil-Criminal Dichotomy Of The Maine Oui Law, Bruce W. Smith
Constitutional Issues Raised By The Civil-Criminal Dichotomy Of The Maine Oui Law, Bruce W. Smith
Maine Law Review
Moving to the forefront of a national trend, the Maine Legislature undertook a thorough reform of its operating under the influence (OUI) law in 1981. The new statute was billed "the toughest in the nation," largely because of a provision for mandatory prison sentences. The statute's most radical provision is not the mandatory prison term, however, but a section which gives prosecutors the option to treat less egregious first offenses as civil infractions rather than crimes. The section generates the broad issue addressed by this Comment: may trial by jury and other constitutional protections formerly afforded OUI defendants be denied …
The Obsolescence Of Voluntary Confessions In Maine, John C. Sheldon
The Obsolescence Of Voluntary Confessions In Maine, John C. Sheldon
Maine Law Review
The would-be assassin lurks in the crowd that gathers outside the campaign headquarters building. In anticipation of the candidate's appearance, the television technicians hoist their videotape cameras and illuminate the scene with floodlights, as the gunman nervously fingers the automatic concealed in the pocket of his field jacket. Moments later, the candidate emerges from the doorway; the assassin rushes into the floodlit view of the cameras, takes aim at the startled politician, and hollers: "I've been planning this for years, and now I'm going to give you what's coming to you." His shots ring out as Secret Service agents converge …
Cyr V. Michaud: Correction Of Clerical Errors With Juror Affidavits, William S. Kany
Cyr V. Michaud: Correction Of Clerical Errors With Juror Affidavits, William S. Kany
Maine Law Review
Cyr v. Michaud, a civil suit to recover for personal injuries, was tried before a jury and resulted in a verdict which included specific answers to five interrogatories. After a unanimous verdict for the plaintiff was entered and the jury was discharged, the defendant obtained affidavits from all of the jurors which indicated that the jury had made a mistake. The trial court rejected a motion to correct the error and the defendant appealed. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, ruled that juror affidavits are not admissible to correct errors in the recording of verdicts. The …
The Parent-Child Privilege And The Parent-Child Crime: Observations On State V. Delong And In Re Agosto, Ellen Kandoian
The Parent-Child Privilege And The Parent-Child Crime: Observations On State V. Delong And In Re Agosto, Ellen Kandoian
Maine Law Review
Should a child be compelled to testify against his parent under threat of criminal punishment? Ignoring for a moment the applicable legal doctrines, there are several reasons why one might answer no. First, if we value the idea of family loyalty, and believe that loyalty of a child to his parent is particularly important for traditional, moral, and practical reasons, then measures taken by a state to undermine such loyalty must be viewed critically. Second, children tend to accumulate tremendous amounts of information about their parents' activities and are party or witness to many communications made by their parents with …
State V. Curlew: Assessing The Sufficiency Of Evidence Under The Corpus Delicti Rule, Brett D. Baber
State V. Curlew: Assessing The Sufficiency Of Evidence Under The Corpus Delicti Rule, Brett D. Baber
Maine Law Review
In State v. Curlew, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, reversed a conviction for unlawful sexual contact. The court predicated reversal upon a reaffirmation of both the substantive aspect and the evidentiary aspect of the corpus delicti rule. The substantive aspect of the corpus delicti rule requires the state "to produce, exclusive of any confession or admission by the defendant, such credible evidence as will create a substantial belief that the crime charged has been committed by some person." The evidentiary aspect of the corpus delicti rule requires proof of the corpus delicti prior to the …
A Quarter Of A Century Of Rulemaking With Particular Attention To The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Frank J. Remington
A Quarter Of A Century Of Rulemaking With Particular Attention To The Federal Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Frank J. Remington
Maine Law Review
It is a happy coincidence that Edward Thaxter Gignoux completes twenty-five years on the bench at about the same time that the present rulemaking procedures in the federal system reach their twenty-fifth anniversary. In the quarter of a century of the present system for rulemaking there have been three distinguished chairmen of the Standing Committee—the committee to which there is delegated overall responsibility for rulemaking by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The three chairmen are Senior Circuit Judge Albert Maris, generally thought of as the modern "Father" of federal rulemaking, Senior District Judge Rozell Thomson and the present …
State Courts' Interest In Federal Rulemaking: A Proposal For Recognition, Vincent L. Mckusick
State Courts' Interest In Federal Rulemaking: A Proposal For Recognition, Vincent L. Mckusick
Maine Law Review
As we approach the half-century anniversary of the adoption of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, we should take stock of the extent that they have served as a model for state rulemaking. At least thirty states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, now have civil rules substantially identical to the federal rules. Of the remaining states, only three have statutes or rules of civil procedure that bear little or no resemblance to the federal model Even those states such as Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania that have not modeled their civil procedure generally on the federal …
Deadlocked Juries And The Allen Charge, Karen Pelletier O'Sullivan
Deadlocked Juries And The Allen Charge, Karen Pelletier O'Sullivan
Maine Law Review
Juries in cases requiring a unanimous verdict have three alternatives: a guilty verdict, a not guilty verdict, or no verdict for lack of unanimity. Deadlocked juries have long created a problem for efficient judicial administration. Early common law judges carried hung jurors around in oxcarts until a verdict "bounced out." More recent methods of forcing jurors to reach verdicts have included requiring them to deliberate all night and threatening to deprive them of water and heat. A more subtle method of encouraging jurors to reach verdicts is a trial judge's supplemental instruction to deadlocked jurors. A verdict-urging instruction is commonly …
Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends, James A. Trowbridge
Restraining The Prosecutor: Restrictions On Threatening Prosecution For Civil Ends, James A. Trowbridge
Maine Law Review
Prosecutors in some cases agree to dismiss criminal charges, admit a defendant to a diversion program, or enter a nolle prosequi in exchange for the defendant signing a waiver of any civil claims against law enforcement agents, governments, or private persons. The practice of a prosecutor bargaining for the release of law enforcement personnel or others from civil liability raises serious questions concerning the independence of the prosecutorial function, the relationship of prosecutors to other legal institutions, and the application of rules of professional responsibility. Generally, courts have been critical of these arrangements. The Model Code of Professional Responsibility (Code) …
State V. Durepo: Toward A Principled Maine Version Of The Impeachment Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Andre D. Bouffard
State V. Durepo: Toward A Principled Maine Version Of The Impeachment Exception To The Exclusionary Rule, Andre D. Bouffard
Maine Law Review
As one might have anticipated, the broad substantive mandates of the major Warren Court exclusionary rule decisions have not been left completely intact by later Supreme Court decisions. Instead, the scope of the evidentiary exclusionary doctrine established by the Warren Court has been significantly narrowed by later Supreme Court decisions that have created numerous exceptions to the general command of the exclusionary rule that evidence obtained through unconstitutional means is inadmissible in a criminal trial. Although some members of the present Court argue that the exceptions to the exclusionary rule are consistent with the purposes of the rule, and therefore …
State V. Farnham: The Defendant's Exercise Of The Right To Stand Trial As Negative Character Evidence, Richard F. Buckley
State V. Farnham: The Defendant's Exercise Of The Right To Stand Trial As Negative Character Evidence, Richard F. Buckley
Maine Law Review
A defendant in a criminal case may not receive a more severe sentence because he exercised his sixth amendment right to stand trial. However, determining when a court has more severely sentenced a defendant for exercising his constitutional right to a jury trial is a difficult task. Some argue that a defendant's choice to stand trial is relevant to the sentencing process as character evidence. The decision to stand trial, the argument goes, indicates a defendant's lack of remorse and an unwillingness to take the first step toward redemption by admitting his guilt. Others take the position that consideration in …
State V. Boilard: Are Jury Instructions On Statutory Defenses Essential To A Fair Trial?, Kristin A. Gustafson
State V. Boilard: Are Jury Instructions On Statutory Defenses Essential To A Fair Trial?, Kristin A. Gustafson
Maine Law Review
In State v. Boilard, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, recently addressed the question of when the failure to instruct the jury regarding a defense available under the Maine Criminal Code constitutes error. The court held that the trial court's failure to give an instruction on the defense of justification did not rise to the level of obvious error. The court reasoned that because the instruction conflicted with the defendant's theory of defense, and because counsel for the defendant did not claim error at trial or on appeal, any argument that the defendant had been prejudiced …
State V. Harding: Municipal Police Authority And The Fresh Pursuit Statute, David S. Schuman
State V. Harding: Municipal Police Authority And The Fresh Pursuit Statute, David S. Schuman
Maine Law Review
As early as 1551, during the reign of King Edward VI, courts held at common law that, except in cases of fresh pursuit, the power of a sheriff or justice of the peace does not extend beyond his jurisdiction. Recognizing the importance of jurisdictional boundaries as limits on a sheriff's authority, the Barons of the Exchequer denounced the possibility of "two several sheriffs in one same county," observing that "in this realm there are divers authorities, and none may exceed his limits or bounds." Modern state statutes setting forth the powers of local police continue to limit the extra-jurisdictional authority …
The Denial Of Bail Under Maine's "Proof Evident Or Presumption Great" Standard, Maureen Dea
The Denial Of Bail Under Maine's "Proof Evident Or Presumption Great" Standard, Maureen Dea
Maine Law Review
When the framers of the Maine Constitution gathered in Portland in the fall of 1819, they decided that the document, unlike the Massachusetts Constitution on which it was based, should guarantee a right to bail pending trial. The convention adopted, apparently without debate or dissent, the following provision as part of the Declaration of Rights in article I . . .
A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine, Barbara A. Appleby
A Defendant's Right To Counsel In Commitment Hearings For Nonpayment Of A Criminal Fine, Barbara A. Appleby
Maine Law Review
The federal constitutional right of an indigent defendant to appointed counsel in state court proceedings derives from two constitutional provisions. First, the sixth amendment, as incorporated by the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, provides the basis for an absolute right to counsel in criminal prosecutions leading to actual imprisonment. Second, the due process clause, as an independent source of individual rights, provides the basis for the right to counsel in civil proceedings. Both the sixth amendment and the due process rights may be implicated in a hearing for non-payment of a criminal fine. Title 17-A, section 1304 of …
Disparity And The Need For Sentencing Guidelines In Maine: A Proposal For Enhanced Appellate Review, Daniel E. Wathen
Disparity And The Need For Sentencing Guidelines In Maine: A Proposal For Enhanced Appellate Review, Daniel E. Wathen
Maine Law Review
Perhaps in no other field of judicial endeavor is diversity and variety more apparent than when a sentencing judge considers the circumstances presented by a defendant convicted of a criminal offense. In each case, the sentencing judge confronts an individual who has no exact counterpart in any defendant previously appearing before the court for sentencing. The sentence imposed is primarily a matter of judicial discretion and is based upon consideration of the nature of the offense, the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offense, and the circumstances of the defendant. The sentencing judge formulates a specific sentence within broad statutory …
State V. Cloutier: Implied Invitees, Pretext And Plain View Under The Fourth Amendment, Dennis M. Doiron
State V. Cloutier: Implied Invitees, Pretext And Plain View Under The Fourth Amendment, Dennis M. Doiron
Maine Law Review
Law enforcement officers often have occasion to follow the path to the front door of a residence in order to speak to its occupant. Upon answering the door, the occupant may hear a complaint about his barking dog, a query as to whether he witnessed the burglary next door, or a plea seeking support for the police department's Christmas charity drive. Occasionally, a police officer follows the path to a person's door and unexpectedly observes incriminating evidence or activities. In such cases, the police officer's conduct generates the issue of whether his observation implicates the fourth amendment's prohibition against unreasonable …