State of Maine v. Cianchette

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 31, 2015
DocketCUMcr-15-1373
StatusUnpublished

This text of State of Maine v. Cianchette (State of Maine v. Cianchette) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State of Maine v. Cianchette, (Me. Super. Ct. 2015).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE UNIFIED CRIMINAL DOCKET CUMBERLAND, ss. No. CR-15-1373

STATE OF MAINE

V. ORDER

JON CIANCHETTE,

Defendant

Defendant has moved under Rule 17(d) 1 for the production from Spring Harbor and from

David Hodgkins, LCSW of certain records that may be privileged. The proposed subpoenas

attached to defendant's motion states that there are attachments listing the specific records that

are sought but the attachments have not been included with the proposed subpoenas filed with

the court.

The proposed subpoenas also call for production at the offices of defendants' attorney

instead of at the court for in camera inspection. Since there is no dispute that some or all of the

records sought may be privileged, any records that are sought must be submitted for in camera

inspection by the court before any disclosure to counsel. Moreover, the Law Court has held that

subpoenas for cmmseling records that are sought solely because of the possibility that those

records may contain impeachment material may be quashed without in camera review. State v.

Watson, 1999 ME 41 ~ 7, 726 A.2d 214. See State v. Dube, 2014 ME 43 ~ 8, 87 A.3d 1219 (party

seeking subpoena must show that subpoena is not a fishing expedition); State v. Marroquin-

Aldana, 2014 ME 47 ~ 34, 89 A. 3d 519 (purpose of subpoena is not to expand the discovery

rights ofthe parties).

1 Where only records are sought rather than testimony, M.R.Crim.P. 18(f) may be applicable rather than Rule 17(d), but there is no material difference in the procedure involved. Accordingly, the motion is denied without prejudice to resubmission with proposed

subpoenas that (1) include the relevant attachments and (2) call for production at the court for

possible in camera inspection. The court understands that there are other hearings scheduled for

August 4 in this case. Another hearing date will have to be set for the motion in limine to allow a

new proposed court order to be submitted and for proper subpoenas to be issued and for

argument as to whether in camera review is called for or whether the subpoenas should be

quashed under Watson. 2

As the court understands it, the party requesting a subpoena must also provide notice to

the person whose records are at issue. Unless that person expressly waives privilege, waiver will

not be presumed but that person has a right to be heard if he or she wishes.

Dated: July ~ I , 20 15

Thomas D. Warren Justice, Superior Court

2 If in camera review is ordered, the court will request the positions of the parties with respect to the determination of what material is privileged and what is non-privileged and whether and under what circumstances privileged material can be disclosed. M.R.Evid. 503 does not appear to contain any exception applicable to this situation.

2 STATE OF MAINE CRIMINAL DOCKET vs CUMBERLAND, ss. JON KENT CIANCHETI'E Docket No CUMCD-CR-2015-01373 8 ORLANDO ST SOUTH PORTLAND ME 04106 DOCKET RECORD DOB: 03/13/1958 Attorney: THOMAS HALLETT State's Attorney: MEGAN ELAM HALLETT WHIPPLE PA 75 MARKET ST SUITE 502 PO BOX7508 PORTLAND ME 04112-7508 RETAINED 06/08/2015 Filing Document: CRIMINAL COMPLAINT Major Case Type: FELONY (CLASS A,B,C) Filing Date: 03/11/2015 Charge(s) 1 AGGRAVATED PROMOTION OF PROSTITUTION 09/01/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 782 17-A 852(l)(A) Class B ESTABROOK CUM 2 AGGRAVATEDSEXTRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12764 17-A 852(1)(A) Class B ESTABROOK CUM 3 GROSS SEXUAL ASSAULT 09/01/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 638 17-A 253(2)(B) Class B ESTABROOK· CUM 4 PROMOTION OF PROSTITUTION 09/01/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq783 17-A 853(1) Class D ESTABROOK CUM 5 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(l)(A) Class D ESTABROOK CUM 6 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(l)(A) Class D Charged with SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT on Supplemental Filing. ESTABROOK CUM 7 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(1)(A) Class D Charged with SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT on Supplemental Filing. ESTABROOK CUM 8 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(l)(A) Class D Charged with SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT on Supplemental Filing. ESTABROOK CUM 9 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(l)(A) Class D Charged with SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT on Supplemental Filing. ESTABROOK CUM 10 SEX TRAFFICKING 10/09/2013 SOUTH PORTLAND Seq 12767 17-A 853(1 )(A) Class D Charged with SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT on Supplemental Filing. ESTABROOK CUM Docket Events: 03/11/2015 FILING DOCUMENT- CRIMINAL COMPLAINT FILED ON 03111/2015

03/1112015 BAIL BOND- $10,000.00 CASH BAIL BOND SET BY COURT ON 03111/2015 PAULE EGGERT , JUDGE $10,000 CASH BAIL & MPTS CONTRACT. NO CONTACT DIRECT OR INDIRECT WITH ANY VICTIMS/WITNESSES IN THIS CASE AND SHALL NOT ENTER OR GO UPON THE PREMISES OF ANY RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT OF SAME. NO USE/POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL/MARIJUANA/ILLEGAL DRUGS OR DANGEROUS WEAPONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LI MITED TO FIREARMS AND SUBMIT TO RANDOM SEARCHES AND TESTING FOR SAME. NOTIFY THE COURT OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR EMPLOYMENT. SHALL NOT HAVE ANY UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING WITH HIM 03/11/2015 OTHER FILING- OTHER DOCUMENT FILED ON 03111/2015

CR-200 Page I of6 Printed on: 08/03/2015 JON KENT CIANCHETfE CUMCD-CR-2015-01373 DOCKET RECORD

DA: MEGAN ELAM STATE'S REQUEST FOR BAIL ON WARRANT 0311112015 MOTION- MOTION TO IMPOUND ALED BY STATE ON 03111/2015

DA: MEGAN ELAM MOTION TO IMPOUND COMPLAINT AND AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF ARREST WARRANT AND INTIAL DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE. 03111/2015 MOTION- MOTION TO IMPOUND GRANTED ON 03/11/2015 PAULE EGGERT ,JUDGE IN PART-AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF ARREST WARRANT 03111/2015 ORDER- COURT ORDER ENTERED ON 03111/2015 PAULE EGGERT ,JUDGE IT IS ORDERED THAT THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF ARREST WARRANT IN THIS MA ITER BE IMPOUNDED, TO REMAIN UNDER SEAL UNTIL FURTHER ORDER OF THIS COURT OR ANOTHER COURT HAVING JURIDICTION IN THIS MATTER. 03111/2015 WARRANT- $10,000.00 ON AFFIDAVIT ORDERED ON 03/1112015 PAULE EGGERT , JUDGE $10,000 CASH BAIL & MPTS CONTRACT. NO CONTACT DIRECT OR INDIRECT WITH ANY VICTIMS/WITNESSES IN THIS CASE AND SHALL NOT ENTER OR GO UPON THE PREMISES OF ANY RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT OF SAME. NO USE/POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL/MARIJUANA/ILLEGAL DRUGS OR DANGEROUS WEAPONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO AREARMS AND SUBMIT TO RANDOM SEARCHES AND TESTING FOR SAME. NOTIFY THE COURT OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR EMPLOYMENT. SHALL NOT HAVE ANY UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING WITH HIM 03111/2015 WARRANT- $10,000.00 ON AFFIDAVIT ISSUED ON 03/ll/20I5

$IO,OOO CASH BAIL & MPTS CONTRACT. NO CONTACT DIRECT OR INDIRECT WITH ANY VICTIMS/WITNESSES IN THIS CASE AND SHALL NOT ENTER OR GO UPON THE PREMISES OF ANY RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT OF SAME. NO USE/POSSESSION OF ALCOHOL/MARIJUANA/ILLEGAL DRUGS OR DANGEROUS WEAPONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO AREARMS AND SUBMIT TO RANDOM SEARCHES AND TESTING FOR SAME. NOTIFY THE COURT OF ANY CHANGE OF ADDRESS OR EMPLOYMENT. SHALL NOT HAVE ANY UNRELATED PERSONS RESIDING WITH HIM 0311112015 WARRANT- ON AFFIDAVIT EXECUTED BY AGENCY ON 0311 I/20I5 at 05:38p.m.

03116/20I5 Party(s): JON KENT CIANCHETTE ATTORNEY- RETAINED ENTERED ON 03/13/20I5

Attorney: CLIFFORD STRIKE 03/I6/20I5 Charge(s): I ,2,3,4,5 HEARING - INITIAL APPEARANCE HELD ON 03113/2015 MARY KELLY ,JUDGE Attorney: CLIFFORD STRIKE DA: HANNAH MAY Defendant Not Present in Court 03/16/20I5 Charge(s): 1,2,3,4,5 PLEA - NO ANSWER ENTERED BY DEFENDANT ON 03/ I 3/20 I 5

03/I6/20I5 BAIL BOND- CASH BAIL BOND SET BY COURT ON 03/13/20I5 MARY KELLY , JUDGE $7,500. WIMPS CONTRACT AND CONDS. 03116/2015 HEARING- DISPOSITIONAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 05/26/20I5 at 08:30a.m. in Room No.

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

Related

State v. Watson
1999 ME 41 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1999)
State of Maine v. Reginald Dube
2014 ME 43 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2014)
State of Maine v. Elfido Marroquin-Aldana
2014 ME 47 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State of Maine v. Cianchette, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-maine-v-cianchette-mesuperct-2015.