Legal Opinion

State of Maine v. Eric Bard

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided March 15, 2018No. Docket: Ken–15–400PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Per curiam

[¶ 1] During the pendency of criminal proceedings against Eric Bard, and while Bard's competency to stand trial was under consideration and his motion to dismiss all charges on the basis of alleged prosecutorial misconduct was pending before the court, the trial court (Kennebec County, Marden, J. ) held an ex parte conference with the prosecutor to address the alleged prosecutorial misconduct. Defense counsel was not notified of that conference and did not consent to the ex parte communication. After further proceedings, the same jurist found Bard competent to stand trial, denied the motion…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Liteky v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  3. Tumey v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
  4. Withrow v. LarkinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. In Re Murchison.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. United States v. Randy WilliamsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
  2. State of Maine v. Philip FlemingSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2020
  3. LaQuinn D. Evans v. State of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2020
  4. In re Child of Brooke B.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2020
  5. Todd E. Mathiesen v. Karie Ann (Mathiesen) MichaudSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2020

6 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