State v. Howard

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Howard

541 A.2d 1295, 1988 Me. LEXIS 157

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine

DecidedJune 1, 1988

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 541 A.2d 1295 (State v. Howard) 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. Howard, 541 A.2d 1295, 1988 Me. LEXIS 157 (Me. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

Elmer Joe Howard appeals from the judgment entered in the Superior Court, Androscoggin County, on a jury verdict finding him guilty of gross sexual misconduct, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 253(1)(B) (Supp. 1987). Our review of the record discloses that, contrary to Howard’s contention, the verdicts were not irreconcilably inconsistent because the jury did not find him guilty on all counts charged in the indictment, State v. Neron, 519 A.2d 197, 201 (Me.1986); viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the jury rationally could find beyond a reasonable doubt all the elements of the offense charged, State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me.1985); and at sentencing the trial court properly could consider the offense in relation to its effect on the victim of the crime, State v. Samson, 388 A.2d 60, 67-68 (Me. [1296]*12961978); 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1257(2) (Supp.1987).

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.

Elmer Joe Howard appeals from the judgment entered in the Superior Court, Androscoggin County, on a jury verdict finding him guilty of gross sexual misconduct, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 253(1)(B) (Supp. 1987). Our review of the record discloses that, contrary to Howard’s contention, the verdicts were not irreconcilably inconsistent because the jury did not find him guilty on all counts charged in the indictment, State v. Neron, 519 A.2d 197, 201 (Me.1986); viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the jury rationally could find beyond a reasonable doubt all the elements of the offense charged, State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me.1985); and at sentencing the trial court properly could consider the offense in relation to its effect on the victim of the crime, State v. Samson, 388 A.2d 60, 67-68 (Me. [1296]*12961978); 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1257(2) (Supp.1987).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

541 A.2d 1295, 1988 Me. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-howard-me-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack