State v. Tuckett

510 A.2d 1070, 1986 Me. LEXIS 798
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine·Decided June 18, 1986·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

James W. Tuckett appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court (York County) entered on a jury verdict convicting him of unlawful sexual contact, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 255(1)(C) (Supp.1985-1986). Without any record, we cannot review his challenge of the voir dire of prospective jurors. See State v. Dionne, 505 A.2d 1321, 1325 (Me.1986). We also reject his contention that one part of the trial court’s instruction on sexual contact constituted obvious error. On the whole instruction the error, if any, was not obviously and highly prejudicial, indeed not prejudicial at all, because the court thereafter clearly and correctly defined the term. See State v. True, 438 A.2d 460, 467-68 (Me.1981). Finally, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the jury rationally could have found beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the offense of unlawful sexual contact. See State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (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

State v. Tuckett, 510 A.2d 1070, 1986 Me. LEXIS 798 (Me. 1986).

510 A.2d 1070 (State v. Tuckett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. True
438 A.2d 460 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1981)
State v. Dionne
505 A.2d 1321 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1986)
State v. Barry
495 A.2d 825 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1985)