Case Name: STATE of Maine v. Jack RANDALL
Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court
Jurisdiction: Maine
Decision Date: 1986-06-11
Citations: 511 A.2d 438
Docket Number: 
Parties: STATE of Maine v. Jack RANDALL.
Judges: Before McKUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 511
Pages: 438–438

Head Matter:
STATE of Maine v. Jack RANDALL.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
Argued June 9, 1986.
Decided June 11, 1986.
R. Christopher Almy, Dist. Atty. Philip Worden, Asst. Dist. Atty., (orally), Bangor, for plaintiff.
Archer & Perry, Mark A. Perry (orally), Brewer, for defendant.
Before McKUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
Jack Randall appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court (Penobscot County) entered on a jury verdict convicting him of two counts of rape, 17-A M.R. S.A. § 252 (1983 & Supp.1985-1986). Contrary to the first two contentions on appeal, the trial justice committed no abuse of discretion in granting the jury's request to have certain trial testimony read back, see State v. Engstrom, 453 A.2d 1170, 1173 (Me.1982), or in returning the jury for further deliberation after an initial indication of deadlock. See State v. DeLong, 505 A.2d 803, 806 (Me.1986). A review of the prosecutor's closing argument reveals no impropriety that constitutes a basis for vacating the judgment on the ground of obvious error. See State v. Hinds, 485 A.2d 231, 237 (Me.1984). Finally, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, the jury rationally could find beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the offense of rape. See State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me.1985).
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
All concurring.