Legal Opinion

State v. Tuplin

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 6, 2006PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSaufley, C.J.

[¶ 1] We are called upon here to address the procedure constitutionally required of the trial court when a defendant must make the election to exercise his right to testify on his own behalf or his competing right to remain silent. Luke Tuplin appeals from a judgment of conviction entered by the Superior Court (Cumberland County, Cole, J.) upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of one count of assault (Class D), 17-A M.R.S. § 207(1)(A) (2005). Tuplin contends, among other things, that he was denied his constitutional right to testify at trial. We conclude that he waived that right, and we…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Boyd v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  5. Malloy v. HoganSupreme Court of the United States · 1964

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Kansas · 2012
  2. State v. NadeauSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2010
  3. State of Maine v. Bartolo P. FordSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2013
  4. State v. EricsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2011
  5. State of Maine v. William TrueSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2017

7 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