State v. Buckley
This text of 548 A.2d 505 (State v. Buckley) 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.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
The Defendant appeals his conviction of robbery under 17-A M.R.S.A. § 651 and assault under 17-A M.R.S.A. § 207. We affirm the judgment of the Superior Court (Penobscot County, Silsby J). The presiding justice did not abuse his discretion in reserving his ruling on the Defendant’s Motion in Limine until the Defendant testified at trial. See State v. Chapman, 496 A.2d 297, 302 (Me.1985); State v. Dodge, 397 A.2d 588, 592-93 (Me.1979). We also find no abuse of discretion in the presiding justice’s decision to admit, as relevant evidence, the testimony of James Baker. See State v. Crocker, 435 A.2d 58, 73 (Me.1981). Finally, the State adduced sufficient evidence at trial to enable a jury to rationally conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was guilty of the crimes charged, State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me.1985).
The entry is:
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
All concurring.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
548 A.2d 505, 1988 Me. LEXIS 237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-buckley-me-1988.