Case ID: a2d_539/html/0216-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Maine v. Richard PAUL and Charles Smith.
    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
    Submitted on Briefs March 22, 1988.
    Decided April 5, 1988.
    R. Christopher Almy, Dist. Atty., Ann Murray, Asst. Dist. Atty., Bangor, for plaintiff.
    Richard D. Violette, Jr., Ferris, Dearborn & Willey, Brewer, for Richard Paul.
    Marvin H. Glazier, Vafiades, Brountas & Kominsky, Bangor, for Charles Smith.
    Before McKUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN, SCOLNIK and CLIFFORD, JJ.
   MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

The defendants, Richard Paul and Charles Smith, appeal from their convictions of burglary (17-A M.R.S.A. § 401 (1983 & Supp.1987)) and theft (17-A M.R.S. A. § 353 (1983)) following a jury trial in Superior Court (Penobscot County). Contrary to their contentions on appeal, we conclude that the trial court acted within the limits of its discretion in its ruling as to the prior convictions that were admissible under M.R.Evid. 609(a), State v. Gervais, 394 A.2d 1183, 1187 (Me.1978); that the trial court did not err in excluding defendants’ proffer of the details of their prior convictions, see State v. Chase, 490 A.2d 208, 210 (Me.1985); State v. Carmichael, 395 A.2d 826, 828 (Me.1978); and that, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the jury could rationally have found beyond a reasonable doubt the essential elements of the offenses charged. State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me.1985).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.