Legal Opinion
State v. Pinkham
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided March 28, 1978PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
POMEROY, Justice.
We criticized 16 M.R.S.A. § 56, 1 in State v. Toppi, Me., 275 A.2d 805 (1971), and we said in State v. Peaslee, Me., 287 A.2d 588, 591, n. 2, (1972)
“we suggest the time has come for a re-evaluation of this statute by the Legislature, particularly insofar as it permits evidence of conviction for felonies which by their nature have no tendency whatsoever to demonstrate lack of veracity.”
In 1973, the Legislature by enacting 4 M.R. S.A. § 9-A provided
“The Supreme Judicial Court shall have the power and authority 2 to prescribe, repeal, add to, amend or modify rules of evidence…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Morris W. Gordon v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1967
- Charles M. Luck v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1965
- State v. ToppiSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1971
- Parker v. HohmanSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1969
- Taylor v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Stanley Christmas v. Lolita SandersCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- State v. RoySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
- State v. CommeauSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
- State v. HanscomeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
- State v. HathorneSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.