Opinion ID: 2109272
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: [¶ 2] On July 25, 2000, Kalex was driving a red pickup truck with a passenger inside. Kalex pulled up beside Holland, who was walking down the street, and said, according to Holland's trial testimony, that Holland was lucky that [Kalex and the passenger] didn't have a gun right then or they would shoot [Holland], while Kalex gestured like he was pointing a gun at Holland. According to Holland's testimony, Kalex's passenger told Holland he could take that to the bank because that's a promise, not a threat. Holland reported the incident to the police, identified Kalex and described the truck and passenger, after which the police went to Kalex's home. When Kalex arrived, the police questioned him. During a heated conversation, Kalex referred to Holland as a nigger, and stated he would not do anything to Holland, but his family would take care of Holland. [¶ 3] The State charged Kalex with interference with Holland's constitutional and civil rights, 17 M.R.S.A. § 2931 (Supp.2000), and terrorizing, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 210 (Supp.2000). [1] At the trial on the count of terrorizing, [2] the court admitted testimony that Kalex and others had approached Holland's house on October 31, 1999, wearing KKK outfits and carrying a sign from Holland's mayoral campaign; the sign was altered to display a drawing of a raccoon circled in red with a line through it. The court admitted a photograph of Kalex in a KKK outfit for the limited purpose of the jury understanding the  the attire that the officer said was similar to what appears in that picture. [3] [¶ 4] The court refused to admit evidence presented through voir dire regarding Holland's reputation for truthfulness. Theresa Ordway testified that a few people had warned [her] that he wasn't a very nice guy, and that he takes things that don't belong to him, that he lies about  he tells stories, he fabricates stories in order to get things that he wants. She testified that she based her testimony on what she heard from about fifteen people. Brian McLaughlin, a local business owner, stated that Holland had caused problems or stolen merchandise from local businesses and that other business owners told him Holland tr[ied] to con things out of ... store[s], merchandise or anything. McLaughlin stated, however, that apart from hearing about Holland being manipulative and trying to strong-arm or con five to ten business people, McLaughlin couldn't tell you about his reputation for truthfulness .... [¶ 5] Denise Everest, Kalex's girlfriend, stated that she had spoken with at least fifty people in the greater Biddeford area who regarded Holland as untruthful. She also testified that, apart from those approximately fifty people, the Biddeford business community had dishonest problems with him as far as products, services, and lack of payment. Thomas Kent testified that Holland was manipulative of local businesses according to the five to ten people with whom he had conversed about Holland. Kalex himself testified that Holland was an extortionist, that he lies and cheats and thieves, and that the newspapers had questioned Holland's honesty about obtaining signatures for his electoral ballots. Kalex did not say how many people had communicated to him about Holland's reputation for untruthfulness. [¶ 6] The court concluded that the above testimony, based on the witnesses' own observations or the observations of a number of business people regarding Holland's reputation for being a con man who strong-arms people or fails to pay them did not constitute evidence of his reputation in the community for truthfulness. The court stated: And to the extent that if five or 10 business people on Main Street have issues in regard to truthfulness, which I didn't even hear, but to the extent that wouldn't be a big enough community, clearly the defense has failed to meet its required standing to proceed with the  on the issue of character, and I am not going to permit the proposed inquiry about the defendant's reputation for truthfulness or veracity in the community on the basis of what has been presented by way of the voir dire here and these six witnesses. [¶ 7] The jury convicted Kalex of terrorizing before the Superior Court (York County, Fritzsche, J. ). Kalex filed his notice of appeal from the conviction, after which the court (York County, Cole, J. ) entered its judgment and commitment, sentencing Kalex to 364 days in jail with all but 120 days suspended, plus a year of probation.