Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court

355 A.2d 341, 1976 Me. LEXIS 425
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedMarch 19, 1976
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 355 A.2d 341 (Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, 355 A.2d 341, 1976 Me. LEXIS 425 (Me. 1976).

Opinion

[343]*343SENATE ORDER PROPOUNDING QUESTIONS

g>tatr of Hato

Jo tl|e $ear of (@ur Horb ©ne (JjljmtBattii Nine ijuniireii and 9mtttg-&ix

In Senate, March 5,1976

üHílPrBtlí!, it appears to the Senate of the 107th Legislature that the following are important questions of law and that the occasion is a solemn one; and

®íjíEfP80, it is the desire of the 107th Legislature to enact legislation making traffic infractions civil violations and providing for the enforcement of civil violations; and

there is pending before the 107 th Legislature in its» Committee on the Judiciary, bills entitled “AN ACT to Revise the Laws Relating to the Maine Traffic Court,” House Paper 2023, Legislative Document 2202 (Exhibit A) and “AN ACT to Revise the Maine Criminal Code as Recommended by the Criminal Law Revision Commission,” Senate Paper 697, Legislative Document 2217 (Exhibit B); and

Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Maine provides that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall have a right to a trial by jury; and

íüHfyplTCttS, Article 1, Section 20 of the Constitution of the State of Maine provides that in all civil suits the parties shall have a right to a trial by jury, except in cases where it has been otherwise practiced; and

i, Article 1, Section 6-A of the Constitution of the State of Maine provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law; and

the constitutionality of the provisions of Legislative Document 2202 (Exhibit A) has been questioned as they relate to Article 1, Section 6 and Article 1, Section 20 of the Constitution; and

HUjEfEítS, the constitutionality of the provisions of Legislative Document 2217 (Exhibit- B), to wit, Section 19, enacting Title 17-A, section fifteen, subsection 2, and section 16, subsection 2, authorizing a law enforcement officer to require a person to remain in the officer’s presence for up to 2 hours so that the officer may verify the person’s identity have been questioned as they relate to Article 1, Section 6-A of the Constitution; and

[344]*344the constitutionality of the provisions of Legislative Document 2217 (Exhibit B), to wit, section 19, enacting Title 17-A, section fifteen, subsection 2, and section 16, subsection 2, punishing the knowing failure or refusal to provide a law enforcement officer with reasonably credible evidence of one’s name and address, has been questioned as they relate to Article 1, Section 6-A of the Constitution; and

UlIjTfPclfi, it is important that the Legislature be informed as to the answers to these important and serious legal questions hereinafter raised; now, therefore, be it

that the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court are hereby respectfully requested to give to the Senate, according to the provisions of the Constitution on its behalf, their opinion upon the following questions, to wit:

QUESTION #1:

Would section 23 of Legislative Document 2202 (Exhibit A), if enacted into law, unconstitutionally deprive a defendant of his right to trial by jury as provided by Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of Maine?

QUESTION #2:

Would section 23 of Legislative Document 2202 (Exhibit A), if enacted into law, unconstitutionally deprive a defendant of his right to trial- by jury as provided by Article 1, Section 20 of the Constitution of the State of Maine?

QUESTION #3:

Would the provisions of section 19 of Legislative Document 2217 (Exhibit B), enacting Title 17-A, section fifteen, subsection 2, and section sixteen, subsection 2, authorizing a law enforcement officer to require a person to remain in the officer’s presence for a period of up to 2 hours, if enacted into law, unconstitutionally deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law in violation of Article 1, Section 6-A of the Constitution of the State of Maine?

QUESTION #4:

Would the provisions of section 19 of Legislative Document 2217 (Exhibit B), enacting Title 17-A, section fifteen, subsection 2, and section sixteen, subsection 2, punishing the knowing failure or refusal to provide a law enforcement officer with reasonably credible evidence of one’s name and address, if enacted into law, unconstitutionally deprive a person of life, liberty or property without due process of law in violation of Article 1, Section 6-A of the Constitution of the State of Maine?

[345]*345(EXHIBIT A)

(EMERGENCY) FIRST SPECIAL SESSION

ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTH LEGISLATURE

Legislative Document No. 2202

H. P. 2023 blouse of Representatives, February io, 1976

Referred to the Committee on Judiciary. Sent up for concurrence and ordered printed.

EDWIN H. PERT, Clerk

Presented by Mr. Hughes of Auburn.

Cosponsor: Mrs. Miskavage of Augusta.

STATE OF MAINE

IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-SIX

AN ACT to Revise the Laws Relating to the Maine Traffic Court.

Emergency preamble. Whereas, Acts of the Legislature do not become effective until 90 days after adjournment unless enacted as emergencies; and

Whereas, numerous situations have arisen in the enactment of chapter 430 of the public laws of 1975 which have greatly hindered the ability of the various law enforcement agencies of the State, the Secretary of State and the courts of this State to properly administer and enforce the provisions of Title 29 and other provisions of the Revised Statutes which relate to the operation of motor vehicles of all types on the highways of the State; and

Whereas, because of the aforesaid situation, it is deemed immediately necessary to make various amendments to Title 29 and other related provisions of the Revised Statutes in order to clarify, correct and modify those statutes in a manner that will forthwith permit those laws to be properly and expeditiously administered and enforced ; and

Whereas, in the judgment of the Legislature, these facts create an emergency within the meaning of the Constitution of Maine and require the following legislation as immediately necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health and safety; now, therefore,

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine, as follows:

Sec. 1. 1 MRSA § 72, sub-§ 2-B, as enacted by PL 1969, c. 433, § 3 and as amended by PL 1971, c. 598, § 2, is repealed and the following enacted in place thereof:

[346]*3462 LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENT No. 2202

2-B. Civil violation. “Civil violation” shall have the same meaning given that term by Title 17-A, section 4.

Sec. 2. 1 MRSA § 72, sub-§ 2-C is enacted to read:

2-C. Full age. “Full age” means the age of 18 and over.

Sec. 3. 4 MRSA § 164, sub-§ 12, ¶ B, 1st sentence, as enacted by PL 1969, c. 299 and as last amended by PL 1975, c. 430, § 4, is further amended to read:

The Chief Judge shall by order, which may from time to time be amended, suspended or repealed, designate the traffic mfrac-tionD offenses within the authority of the violations clerk. Such mfraetiono offenses shall not include:

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Opinion of the Justices
2017 ME 100 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2017)
In re Interrogatories of the Governor
578 P.2d 200 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1978)
Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court
371 A.2d 616 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1977)
Chester v. ASSINIBOIA CORPORATION
355 A.2d 880 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
355 A.2d 341, 1976 Me. LEXIS 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opinion-of-the-justices-of-the-supreme-judicial-court-me-1976.