State v. Farrar
This text of 509 A.2d 113 (State v. Farrar) 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.
On appeal from his conviction of operating after suspension (29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (1978 & Supp.1985)) after jury trial in the Superior Court, Aroostook County, Mark J. Farrar contends that the presiding justice erroneously instructed the jury on the State’s burden of disproving beyond a reasonable doubt the asserted competing harms defense. See State v. Raubeson, 488 A.2d 1379, 1380 (Me.1985); 17-A M.R. S.A. § 103 (1983). Because the evidence at trial was insufficient to generate the competing harms defense, we conclude that any error in the jury instruction was harmless. See 17-A M.R.S.A. § 101(1) (1983).
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
509 A.2d 113, 1986 Me. LEXIS 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-farrar-me-1986.