Legal Opinion

State v. Millett

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided January 3, 1996PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WATHEN, Chief Justice.

Defendants Richard Millett and Dejanine Stirling appeal from a judgment entered in the Superior Court (Androscoggin County, Alexander, J.) denying their motions to dismiss the State’s indictments against them for theft. Defendants argue that because sanctions had previously been imposed in an administrative proceeding, the criminal indictments violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. Because the Superior Court correctly concluded that the prior administrative sanction for defendants’ fraudulent receipt of unemployment benefits was remedial and not punitive, we…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. State v. SavardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
  5. United States v. John C. Hudson, Larry Baresel, and Jack Butler RackleyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1994

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. O'CONNORSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
  2. State v. HiderSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998
  3. E. Perry Iron & Metal Co., Inc. v. City of PortlandSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2006
  4. State v. GeorgeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1997
  5. State v. ChristenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API