State v. Quinnam
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1Opinion of the Court
WERNICK, Judge.
After defendant James B. Quinnam had waived trial by jury, on October 9, 1975 the Justice presiding in the Superior Court (Sagadahoc County) found him guilty, as charged, of having operated a motorcycle without protective headgear in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 1373. 1
Defendant’s appeal from the judgment of conviction attacks the constitutionality of that statute.
We deny the appeal.
We hold without merit the first facet of defendant’s attack:—that 29 M.R.S.A. § 1373 violates the constitutional guarantee of due process of law.
It would be reasonable for the Legislature to believe:…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. O'BrienSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- California v. LaRueSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Bibb v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Bisenius v. KarnsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1969
- Love v. BellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1970
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Robotham Ex Rel. Robotham v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1992
- Benning v. StateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1994
- City of Bremerton v. SpearsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- City of Bremerton v. SpearsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- People v. KohrigIllinois Supreme Court · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.