Case Name: STATE of Maine v. Kevin DAY
Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Maine
Decision Date: 1985-03-29
Citations: 489 A.2d 1099
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE of Maine v. Kevin DAY.
Judges: Before McCUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, VIOLETTE, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 489
Pages: 1099–1100

Head Matter:
STATE of Maine v. Kevin DAY.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
Argued March 12, 1985.
Decided March 29, 1985.
Margaret Kravchuk, Dist. Atty., Gary F. Thome, Michael Roberts (orally), Asst. Dist. Attys., Bangor,'for plaintiff.
Norman S. Heitmann, III (orally), East Millinocket, for defendant.
Before McCUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, VIOLETTE, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
Upon motion by the State and after hearing, the District Court, Millinocket, ordered the revocation of the defendant's probation. The Superior Court, Penobscot County, affirmed the order of the District Court. The defendant appeals to this Court.
The District Court ordered the revocation because it found that the defendant inexcusably violated a condition of his probation forbidding contact with Laurie Creehan. See 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1206(6) (Supp.1984). The defendant admits having contact with Ms. Creehan, but contends that this failure to comply with a condition of his probation was not inexcusable. Whether a probation violation is inexcusable is a question of fact. See State v. Brydon, 454 A.2d 1385, 1387 (Me.1983). The District Court's finding that the defendant inexcusably violated a condition of his probation is not clearly erroneous. See State v. Maier, 423 A.2d 235, 240 (Me.1980).
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
All concurring.