State v. Day
This text of 489 A.2d 1099 (State v. Day) 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.
Upon motion by the State and after hearing, the District Court, Millinocket, ordered the revocation of the defendant’s probation. The Superior Court, Penobscot County, affirmed the order of the District Court. The defendant appeals to this Court.
The District Court ordered the revocation because it found that the defendant inexcusably violated a condition of his probation forbidding contact with Laurie Creehan. See 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1206(6) (Supp.1984). The defendant admits having contact with Ms. Creehan, but contends that this failure to comply with a condition of his probation was not inexcusable. Whether a probation violation is inexcusable is a question of fact. See State v. Brydon, 454 A.2d 1385, 1387 (Me.1983). The District Court’s finding that the defendant inexcusably violated a condition of his probation is not clearly erroneous. See State v. Maier, 423 A.2d 235, 240 (Me.1980).
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
489 A.2d 1099, 1985 Me. LEXIS 667, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-day-me-1985.