Legal Opinion

State v. LeClair

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided May 10, 1973PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

POMEROY, Justice.

Rule 37A(b), Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure, is the vehicle by which this “case” is before us for decision.

The ruling we are asked to review is clearly interlocutory and constitutes an exception to the “final judgment rule.” Rule 37, Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure.

The reason for requiring a final judgment as a condition of appellate review was described by Mr. Justice Frankfurter in DiBella v. United States, 369 U.S. 121, 82 S. Ct. 654, 7 L.Ed.2d 614 (1962).

“This insistence on finality and prohibition of piecemeal review discourage undue litigiousness and leaden-footed…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Carroll v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1925
  2. Draper v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  3. DiBella v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  4. State v. DoyleSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1964
  5. State v. McDanielOregon Supreme Court · 1924

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. LeBlancSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1975
  2. State v. BassfordSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
  3. Italiano v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1973
  4. State v. DesrosiersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
  5. State v. ThomasSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API