State v. Farrar

509 A.2d 113, 1986 Me. LEXIS 782
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedApril 30, 1986
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
State v. Farrar, 509 A.2d 113, 1986 Me. LEXIS 782 (Me. 1986).

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

State v. Raubeson
488 A.2d 1379 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
509 A.2d 113, 1986 Me. LEXIS 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-farrar-me-1986.