Opinion ID: 2057780
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Violation of a Protection from Abuse Order

Text: [¶ 8] Violation of a protection from abuse order is committed when the defendant violates [a] temporary, emergency, interim or final protective order if the defendant has prior actual notice of the existence of the order. 19-A M.R.S. § 4011(1)(A). In this case, the State presented evidence that Smen's wife obtained a protection from abuse order against Smen that prohibited Smen from contacting her, that Smen was present at the protection from abuse hearing, and therefore had prior notice of the provisions of the order, and that after the protection order was issued, Smen called his wife at the residence where she resided with her boyfriend and spoke to her. [¶ 9] Smen argues that this evidence is not sufficient to support his conviction on this count because he did not know his wife was residing at that location, and that he was not attempting to contact his wife when he called the residence. The evidence, however, disclosed that when his wife answered the phone, Smen spoke to her, saying, this is your husband. In addition, on the same evening that he made the phone call, Smen referred to the boyfriend's residence as the old lady's house, thereby supporting a finding that Smen was aware that his wife was residing there. Accordingly, the evidence is sufficient to support the court's finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Smen committed each element of violating a protection from abuse order.