Legal Opinion
State v. Allen
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided December 12, 1984PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McKUSICK, Chief Justice.
Defendant Robert Allen appeals his conviction in the District Court (Augusta) for operating under the influence of intoxicating liquor. 29 M.R.S.A. § 1312-B (Supp. 1984-1985). On appeal Allen makes two novel legal arguments. First, he asserts that since no Miranda warnings were given him and he asked to speak with a lawyer, evidence of his responses to inquiries about his comprehension of the implied consent form was not admissible at trial. Second, Allen contends that 29 M.R.S.A. § 2501 (Supp.1984-1985) requires that a police officer have probable cause, not just…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. GouveiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mogard v. City of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. PinkhamSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
- State v. BavousetSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- State v. ChaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- State v. LemieuxSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995