State v. Filieo

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Filieo

538 A.2d 772, 1988 Me. LEXIS 74

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided March 17, 1988·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

David Filieo appeals the judgment of the Superior Court (Androscoggin County) affirming the District Court (Lewiston) judgment that he had violated 22 M.R.S.A. § 2383 (1980) (civil possession of marijuana). Contrary to Filieo’s only contention on appeal, we conclude that the motion judge’s finding that the police officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory stop was not clearly erroneous. See State v. Cyr, 501 A.2d 1303, 1305-06 (Me.1985); State v. Chapman, 495 A.2d 314, 317-18 (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

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

David Filieo appeals the judgment of the Superior Court (Androscoggin County) affirming the District Court (Lewiston) judgment that he had violated 22 M.R.S.A. § 2383 (1980) (civil possession of marijuana). Contrary to Filieo’s only contention on appeal, we conclude that the motion judge’s finding that the police officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory stop was not clearly erroneous. See State v. Cyr, 501 A.2d 1303, 1305-06 (Me.1985); State v. Chapman, 495 A.2d 314, 317-18 (Me.1985).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

State v. Filieo, 538 A.2d 772, 1988 Me. LEXIS 74 (Me. 1988).

Pincite

538 A.2d 772 (State v. Filieo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related