Legal Opinion

State v. Moore

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 18, 1990PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLIFFORD, Justice.

Cynthia Moore appeals from her conviction of operating a motor vehicle after having been declared an habitual offender, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2298 (Supp.1989), entered upon a conditional plea of guilty. Moore contends that the Superior Court (Androscoggin County, Delahanty, J.) erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the competing harms defense, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 103 (1983). Although Moore’s conditional plea of guilty did not meet the requirements of M.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2), we reach the merits of Moore’s appeal in the interest of judicial economy. Because the competing harms defense…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. KeeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
  2. State v. GliddenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985
  3. People v. HandySupreme Court of Colorado · 1979

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. CaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
  2. State v. DyerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
  3. State v. Seamen's ClubSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1997
  4. State v. RaineySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1990
  5. State v. ChristenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1997

8 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