Maine Law Court & the Criminal Law

1. Maine Law Court & the Criminal Law DAG Bill Stokes, Chief, Criminal Division AAG Don Macomber, Criminal Division

2. Miranda & Voluntariness • Prescott • Bragg • Jones • Nightingale • Wiley

3. State v. Prescott, 2012 ME 96 • Defendant who left scene of accident not “in custody” when questioned at her home • Defendant “in custody” when questioned at scene after officer told her she had to return with him

4. State v. Bragg, 2012 ME 102 • Defendant questioned at scene of OUI stop not “in custody” • Officer’s telling defendant that her BAC was .13 and that legal limit in Maine was .08 was not “interrogation”

5. State v. Jones, 2012 ME 126 • Juvenile defendant (17 ½) not “in custody” when questioned at hospital where his baby died • Also not “in custody” when questioned later that night in his apartment during scene re-creation • Also not “in custody” when questioned later that week at police station

6. State v. Nightingale, 2012 ME 94 • Defendant not “in custody” during 9 hour polygraph interview at police station; statements voluntary • Invocation of right to counsel at end of interview did not preclude police from going to defendant’s mother’s house to interview defendant

7. Nightingale • Non-deliberate failure to give Miranda warnings at mother’s house did not preclude admission of post-warning confession • Petition for certiorari filed as to whether “deliberate” Miranda violation, announced in Justice Kennedy concurring opinion, is proper standard; Supreme Court ordered response • Cert. denied in June 2013

8. State v. Wiley, 2013 ME 30 • Defendant not “in custody” when questioned at police station about child sex offenses when he voluntarily went there and was told he was not under arrest • Defendant’s confession “involuntary” as primarily motivated by officer’s offer of short jail sentence and probation as alternative to lengthy prison sentence

9. State v. Butsitsi, 2013 ME 2 • Defendant waived his privilege against self-incrimination by testifying on direct examination; State’s cross-examination question about gun was relevant • Trial court did not violate Maine Rule of Evidence 512 by instructing the jury that it could consider defendant’s refusal to answer the question despite court’s order to do so

10. State v. Carr, 2012 ME 136 • New trial not warranted even though State inadvertently failed to turn over audio recording of defense eyewitness until after trial • Summary of interview provided before trial and recording did not materially differ from summary

11. State v. Reese, 2013 ME 10 • Postconviction DNA motion for new trial properly denied despite unknown male DNA not belonging to defendant found on duct tape wrapped around victim’s wrists • Defense did not prove DNA was not product of contamination • Trial evidence of defendant’s guilt was overwhelming

12. State v. Hofland, 2012 ME 129 • State constitution does not provide right to hybrid/duel representation • Defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to counsel

13. State v. Doloff, 2012 ME 130 • Prosecutor’s comment that she did not think bat used to attack victim was too heavy not obvious error • Prosecutor comment regarding her personal opinion of defendant’s credibility, while improper, was not obvious error • Prosecutor’s urging jury to “do justice” was improper, but not obvious error

14. Pop Quiz: Who is this woman?

15. The Zumba Queen

16. State v. Strong, 2013 ME 21 • State had right to bring interlocutory appeal from trial court’s dismissal of 46 invasion of privacy counts • Trial court had right to consider facts alleged in State’s offer of proof, not just the indictment • Johns do not have reasonable expectation to be free from video surveillance when having sex with prostitute

17. So remember: