State v. Quint
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1Opinion of the Court
CARTER, Justice.
After a jury trial in the Superior Court, Aroostook County, the defendant was convicted of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 1312 (1980). As the sole ground of appeal here, the defendant claims that the court’s particular instructions requiring the jury to continue its deliberations after it had reported a deadlock were coercive in nature and constitute reversible error. We sustain the appeal.
The jury commenced its deliberations at 10:23 in the morning of the second day of trial. It returned an hour later after…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Allen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Jenkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- People v. GainerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
- United States v. John FlanneryCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1971
- People v. BarrazaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. DeLongSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1986
- State v. HerbestSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1988
- State v. GooginsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- State v. McArthurConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- State v. WeidulSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.