Opinion ID: 3172723
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Aggravated Assault under Maine Law

Text: Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), a court may revoke a term of supervised release if the court finds by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant violated a condition of supervised release. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). Wright challenges the court's finding that he violated the term of his release that prohibits commission of a state crime. He argues that he did not commit aggravated assault under Maine law. We agree with the district court that Wright's conduct during the July 20, 2014, incident constituted aggravated assault under § 208(1)(B), the use of a dangerous weapon prong of the Maine statute. See Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, § 208(1) (2014). As a result, we need not reach whether his conduct also qualifies under the extreme indifference prong, id. § 208(1)(C). - 6 - Under applicable Maine law, criminal liability for aggravated assault attaches when a person recklessly causes bodily injury with a dangerous weapon. Id. § 208(1)(B). Maine courts have recognized that a vehicle can qualify as a dangerous weapon if the vehicle is used . . . in a manner capable of producing death or serious bodily injury. State v. Pierre, 649 A.2d 333, 334 (Me. 1994); see State v. York, 899 A.2d 780, 783 (Me. 2006); Pierre, 649 A.2d at 334–35 & 334 n.3 (discussing Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, § 2(9)(A), defining use of a dangerous weapon). Wright asserts that the circumstances in this case do not allow finding that the truck was used as a dangerous weapon, as [n]ot every instance of driving away causes the motor vehicle to be defined as a weapon under Maine law. Even were that so in other situations, it is not true here. Here, Wright grabbed a man through the passenger-side window of a vehicle and instructed the driver to go, go, go, leaving the man dangling as the vehicle sped forward, before the man was released and run over by the vehicle. While the victim, Trayes, survived without lifethreatening injuries, Wright's use of the vehicle was certainly in a manner capable of producing death or serious bodily injury. Pierre, 649 A.2d at 334. Wright has not even attempted to explain - 7 - how the facts could otherwise be viewed.2 There was no error in the district court's determination that Wright violated the term of his release proscribing a violation of state law.