State v. O'Neill

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. O'Neill

658 A.2d 661, 1995 Me. LEXIS 103

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided May 24, 1995·Published

Opinion

CLIFFORD, Justice.

Donald O’Neill appeals from the judgment of conviction for aggravated assault, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 208 (1988), entered in the Superior Court (Cumberland County, Cole, J.) following a jury trial. Contrary to O’Neill’s contentions, the court did not err in denying his motion to suppress statements made by O’Neill and physical evidence located at the scene of the crime. State v. Powell, 640 A.2d 209, 210 (Me.1994); State v. Gardner, 509 A.2d 1160, 1168 n. 3 (Me.1986). Nor did the court err in its determination that the statements made by the victim were admissible pursuant to M.R.Evid. 803(2) as excited utterances. State v. McLaughlin, 642 A.2d 173, 175 (Me.1994).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CLIFFORD, Justice.

Donald O’Neill appeals from the judgment of conviction for aggravated assault, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 208 (1988), entered in the Superior Court (Cumberland County, Cole, J.) following a jury trial. Contrary to O’Neill’s contentions, the court did not err in denying his motion to suppress statements made by O’Neill and physical evidence located at the scene of the crime. State v. Powell, 640 A.2d 209, 210 (Me.1994); State v. Gardner, 509 A.2d 1160, 1168 n. 3 (Me.1986). Nor did the court err in its determination that the statements made by the victim were admissible pursuant to M.R.Evid. 803(2) as excited utterances. State v. McLaughlin, 642 A.2d 173, 175 (Me.1994).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

State v. O'Neill, 658 A.2d 661, 1995 Me. LEXIS 103 (Me. 1995).

Pincite

658 A.2d 661 (State v. O'Neill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related