State v. Daniels

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Daniels

520 A.2d 1301, 1987 Me. LEXIS 623

DecidedFebruary 6, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 520 A.2d 1301 (State v. Daniels) 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

State v. Daniels, 520 A.2d 1301, 1987 Me. LEXIS 623 (Me. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

The defendant appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict in the Superior Court, Somerset County, finding him guilty of reckless conduct in the use of a dangerous weapon, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 211 (1983), and driving to endanger, 29 M.R. S.A. § 1314 (Supp.1986). He challenges 1) the failure of the court to inquire into his competency to stand trial, 2) the validity of the indictment and 3) the effectiveness of his counsel. Contrary to the defendant’s first contention, the trial court was not required to make further inquiry in the absence of genuine doubt concerning the defendant’s competence to stand trial. See State v. Ledger, 444 A.2d 404, 418-19 (Me.1982). The defendant having chosen to go to trial without raising his objection to the indictment, and the alleged defect not rising to the jurisdictional level, we decline to consider his objection on appeal. State v. Michaud, 473 A.2d 399, 402 (Me.1984). We likewise decline to take cognizance on direct appeal of alleged ineffectiveness of counsel since the record does not clearly establish representational difficulties that are plainly beyond explanation or justification. State v. Bagley, 507 A.2d 560, 563 (Me.1986).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

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

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

The defendant appeals from a judgment entered on a jury verdict in the Superior Court, Somerset County, finding him guilty of reckless conduct in the use of a dangerous weapon, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 211 (1983), and driving to endanger, 29 M.R. S.A. § 1314 (Supp.1986). He challenges 1) the failure of the court to inquire into his competency to stand trial, 2) the validity of the indictment and 3) the effectiveness of his counsel. Contrary to the defendant’s first contention, the trial court was not required to make further inquiry in the absence of genuine doubt concerning the defendant’s competence to stand trial. See State v. Ledger, 444 A.2d 404, 418-19 (Me.1982). The defendant having chosen to go to trial without raising his objection to the indictment, and the alleged defect not rising to the jurisdictional level, we decline to consider his objection on appeal. State v. Michaud, 473 A.2d 399, 402 (Me.1984). We likewise decline to take cognizance on direct appeal of alleged ineffectiveness of counsel since the record does not clearly establish representational difficulties that are plainly beyond explanation or justification. State v. Bagley, 507 A.2d 560, 563 (Me.1986).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

520 A.2d 1301, 1987 Me. LEXIS 623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-daniels-me-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack