State of Maine v. Lund

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedJune 12, 2006
DocketKENcr-06-330
StatusUnpublished

This text of State of Maine v. Lund (State of Maine v. Lund) 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. Lund, (Me. Super. Ct. 2006).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT KENNEBEC, ss CRIMINAL ACTION REC'E) & FILED DOCKET NO. CR-06-330 A. ~esjardin ' I

JUN 12 2006 sTATEoFMAINE Clerkofcourts v. Kenneb€3CCounty ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS WILLIAM LUND

Defendant

The findings of fact made on the record at the close of the hearing are

incorporated into tlus order by reference.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The questions asked by the officer that are at issue in this motion were not

administrative questions. See State v. Rossinnol, 627 A.2d 524, 526 (Me. 1993). The issue is whether the defendant was in custody. An "ordinary traffic stop to ask a few

questions and to conduct field sobriety tests on a driver suspected of operating under

the influence does not amount to custodial interrogation" that requires a r a n d a

warnings. See State v. Lewry, 550 A.2d 64/65 (Me. 1988); see Berkemer v. McCartv,

468 U.S. 420,423 (1984) (defendant questioned outside his vehcle on side of road); State

v. Swett, 1998 ME 76, ¶4, 709 A.2d 727, 730 (defendant interviewed either whle seated

in his vehicle or outside h s vehicle on side of road).

Considering the factors outlined in State v. Michaud, viewed in their totality, the

court concludes that the defendant was not in custody. See State v. Michaud, 1998 ME

251, ¶ 4, 724 A.2d 1222, 1226. On this record, a reasonable person in the defendant's

position would not have concluded that he was "in police custody and constrained to a

degree associated with formal arrest." See id. Accordingly, no Wranda warnings were required in order for the defendant's answers to the officer's questions to be admissible.

See State v. Hollowa~2000 ME 172 q[ 13,760 A.2d 223,228. The entry is

The Defendant's Motion to Suppress is DENIED.

Date: June 1 2 2006 STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT vs KENNEBEC, ss . WILLIAM H LUND Docket No AUGSC-CR-2006-00330 28 CRESTWOOD DR. APT H WATERVILLE ME 04901 DOCKET RECORD

DOB: 07/22/1974 Attorney: JASON JABAR State's Attorney: TRACY DEVOLL JABAR BATTEN RINGER & MURPHY ONE CENTER STREET WATERVILLE ME 04901-5495 RETAINED 01/06/2006

Charge (s1 1 OPERATING UNDER THE INFLUENCE 12/16/2005 WATERVILLE Seq 9878 29-A 2411(1-A) (A) Class D GARDINER / WAT

Docket Events: 03/14/2006 Charge (s): 1 TRANSFER - TRANSFER FOR JURY TRIAL ED1 ON 03/14/2006 @ 18:01

TRANSFERRED CASE: SENDING COURT CASEID WATDCCR200503168 FILING DOCUMENT - NON CASH BAIL BOND FILED ON 12/19/2005

Charge(s): 1 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT SCHEDULED FOR 03/08/2006 @ 8:30

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL Charge(s1 : 1 HEARING - ARRAIGNMENT WAIVED ON 02/03/2006

BAIL BOND - $700.00 UNSECURED BAIL BOND FILED ON 12/19/2005

Bail A m t : $700 Date Bailed: 12/17/2005 BAIL BOND - UNSECURED BAIL BOND BAIL RELEASED ON 01/18/2006

Date Bailed: 12/17/2005 03/14/2006 BAIL BOND - UNSECURED BAIL BOND RELEASE ACKNOWLEDGED ON 01/18/2006

Date Bailed: 12/17/2005 Party (s): WILLIAM H LUND ATTORNEY - RETAINED ENTERED ON 01/06/2006

Attorney : JASON JABAR MOTION - MOTION AMEND BAIL CONDITIONS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 01/06/2006

MOTION - MOTION AMEND BAIL CONDITIONS GRANTED ON 01/13/2006 ROBERT E MULLEN , JUDGE COPY TO PARTIES/COUNSEL DEFENDANT MUST APPEAR TO SIGN NEW BOND Charge (s): 1 Page 1 of 3 Printed on: 06/12/2006 WILLIAM H LUND AUGSC-CR-2006-00330 DOCKET RECORD SUPPLEMENTAL FILING - COMPLAINT FILED ON 01/06/2006

BAIL BOND - PR BAIL BOND FILED ON 01/18/2006

Date Bailed: 01/18/2006 Charge (6): 1 PLEA - NOT GUILTY ENTERED BY COUNSEL ON 02/03/2006

Charge (s): 1 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS FILED BY DEFENDANT ON 02/03/2006

Charge (s): 1 TRANSFER - TRANSFER FOR JURY TRIAL GRANTED ON 03/14/2006

Charge (6): 1 TRANSFER - TRANSFER FOR JURY TRIAL REQUESTED ON 03/03/2006

Charge(6): 1 FINDING - TRANSFER FOR JURY TRIAL TRANSFERRED ON 03/14/2006

AUGSC 03/15/2006 Charge(6) : 1 TRANSFER - TRANSFER FOR JURY TRIAL R E C W BY COURT ON 03/15/2006

RECEIVED FROM WATERVILLE DISTRICT COURT DOCKET NO: CR-05-3168 04/14/2006 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL SCHEDULED FOR 05/01/2006 @ 9:00

04/14/2006 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL NOTICE SENT ON 04/14/2006

05/10/2006 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL HELD ON 05/01/2006

05/10/2006 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL SCHEDULED FOR 06/05/2006 @ 10:OO

06/12/2006 TRIAL - DOCKET CALL HELD ON 06/05/2006 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE Reporter: JANETTE COOK Defendant Present in Court 06/12/2006 Charge (s): 1 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SCHEDULED FOR 06/13/2006 @ 10:OO

NOTICE TO PARTIES/COUNSEL 06/12/2006 Charge(s) : 1 TRIAL - JURY TRIAL SELECTED ON 06/08/2006

JURY SELECTION 06/12/2006 HEARING - MOTION TO SUPPRESS HELD ON 06/06/2006 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE Attorney: JASON JABAR DA: BRAD GRANT Reporter: JANETTE COOK Defendant Present in Court 06/12/2006 Charge(s) : 1 MOTION - MOTION TO SUPPRESS DENIED ON 06/12/2006 NANCY MILLS , JUSTICE Page 2 of 3 Printed on: 06/12/2006 WILLIAM H LUND AUGSC-CR-2006-00330 DOCKET RECORD

A TRUE COPY ATTEST : Clerk

Page 3 of 3 Printed on: 06/12/2006

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

Related

Berkemer v. McCarty
468 U.S. 420 (Supreme Court, 1984)
State v. Holloway
2000 ME 172 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2000)
State v. Lewry
550 A.2d 64 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1988)
State v. Michaud
1998 ME 251 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1998)
Salvation Army v. Town of Standish
1998 ME 75 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1998)
State v. Swett
1998 ME 76 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1998)
State v. Rossignol
627 A.2d 524 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
State of Maine v. Lund, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-maine-v-lund-mesuperct-2006.