State v. Parks

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

State v. Parks

541 A.2d 168, 1988 Me. LEXIS 146

DecidedMay 31, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 541 A.2d 168 (State v. Parks) 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. Parks, 541 A.2d 168, 1988 Me. LEXIS 146 (Me. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

Larry Parks appeals from a judgment entered by the Superior Court, Cumberland County, upon jury verdicts convicting him of one count of aggravated assault, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 208 (1983) (Class B), one count of kidnapping, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 301 (1983) (Class A), two counts of rape, 17-A M.R.S. A. § 252 (1983) (Class A) and four counts of gross sexual misconduct, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 253 (1983 and Supp.1987) (Class A). Contrary to Parks’s contentions on appeal, we conclude that any lapses by the prosecutor in his closing remarks, to which no objection was taken, do not rise to the level of obvious error; that this record does not reveal representational deficiencies requiring us to recognize on direct appeal Parks’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, see State v. Bagley, 507 A.2d 560, 563 (Me.1986); and that other unpreserved claims of error did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights, see M.R.Crim.P. 52(b).

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.

Larry Parks appeals from a judgment entered by the Superior Court, Cumberland County, upon jury verdicts convicting him of one count of aggravated assault, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 208 (1983) (Class B), one count of kidnapping, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 301 (1983) (Class A), two counts of rape, 17-A M.R.S. A. § 252 (1983) (Class A) and four counts of gross sexual misconduct, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 253 (1983 and Supp.1987) (Class A). Contrary to Parks’s contentions on appeal, we conclude that any lapses by the prosecutor in his closing remarks, to which no objection was taken, do not rise to the level of obvious error; that this record does not reveal representational deficiencies requiring us to recognize on direct appeal Parks’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, see State v. Bagley, 507 A.2d 560, 563 (Me.1986); and that other unpreserved claims of error did not affect the defendant’s substantial rights, see M.R.Crim.P. 52(b).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

541 A.2d 168, 1988 Me. LEXIS 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-parks-me-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack