Case ID: a2d_555/html/1054-01.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 GOODFIELD.
    Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
    Argued March 8, 1989.
    Decided March 10, 1989.
    Mary Tousignant, Dist. Atty., Anne Jordan (orally), Deputy Dist. Atty., Alfred, for the State.
    Craig F. Evans (orally), Durham, N.H., for defendant.
    Before McKUSICK, C.J., and ROBERTS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN, CLIFFORD and HORNBY, JJ.
   MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.

Richard Goodfield appeals his conviction of gross sexual misconduct, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 253 (Supp.1988), after a jury trial in the Superior Court (York County; Cole, J.). Contrary to defendant’s contention, we find no obvious error affecting substantial rights in the State’s closing argument. M.R.Crim.P. 52(b). See State v. Niemszyk, 551 A.2d 842, 844 (Me.1988). Furthermore, on the record evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the State, the jury could rationally find beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the crime charged. See State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me. 1985).

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring.