Case Name: STATE of Maine v. Jeffrey R. COTE
Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Maine
Decision Date: 2006-11-09
Citations: 909 A.2d 626
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE of Maine v. Jeffrey R. COTE.
Judges: Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, DANA, ALEXANDER, CALKINS, LEVY, and SILVER, JJ.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 909
Pages: 626–629

Head Matter:
2006 ME 128
STATE of Maine v. Jeffrey R. COTE.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
Submitted on Briefs: June 28, 2006.
Decided: Nov. 9, 2006.
Mark W. Lawrence, Dist. Atty., John M. Pluto, Asst. Dist. Atty., Alfred, ME, for State.
Paul Aranson, Scaccia, Lenkowski & Ar-anson, Sanford, ME, for defendant.
Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, DANA, ALEXANDER, CALKINS, LEVY, and SILVER, JJ.
Majority: SAUFLEY, C.J., and CLIFFORD, DANA, CALKINS, LEVY, and SILVER, JJ.
Concurrence: ALEXANDER, J.

Opinion:
CALKINS, J.
[¶ 1] Jeffrey R. Cote appeals from a judgment of conviction for operating under the influence (Class D), 29-A M.R.S.A. 2411(1) (1996), entered in the District Court (Biddeford, Foster, J.). Cote contends that the court (Janette, J.) erroneously denied his motion for leave to file a late jury trial request. The State has joined Cote's request to have the case remanded to the District Court for the withdrawal of his conditional guilty plea and to transfer the case to the Superior Court for a jury trial. Because the two parties before us have agreed that the trial court erred and have both requested a remand, and because our independent review of the record satisfies us that their request is reasonable, we vacate the conviction.
The entry is:
Judgment vacated. Case remanded to allow Cote to withdraw the conditional plea and for a transfer to the Superior Court for a jury trial.
. Tide 29-A M.R.S.A. § 2411(1) (1996) has been repealed by P.L. 2003, ch. 452, § Q-77 (effective July 1, 2004), and replaced by 29-A M.R.S. § 241K1-A) (2005).
. Cote entered a plea of not guilty at his arraignment and filed his request for court-appointed counsel eight days later. However, the financial investigator for the court did not make a recommendation as to Cote's eligibility for court-appointed counsel for almost four weeks. Although the court promptly appointed counsel upon receiving the eligibility recommendation, the twenty-one-day period for demanding a jury trial in M.R.Crim. P. 22(a) had passed.