State v. Ketchum
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1DissentLipez, Justice
[¶ 15] I respectfully dissent because the evidence is sufficient to support Ketchum’s conviction. Moreover, the Court’s opinion reveals the need for clarifying the requirements the State must meet to gain the benefit of the statutory presumption set forth in 17-A M.R.S.A. § 361(2) (1983).5
I
[¶ 16] On July 29, 1994, eight Emmett Kelly figurines were stolen from the Country Store operated by William Haefele. Late that afternoon, the stolen figurines were recovered from Michael Curtis’s car in which Ketehum and Wayne Paschal were passengers. The jury could find that all three occupants of the car…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. DurganSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1983
- State v. MosherSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1970
- State v. SabaSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1942
- State v. RussoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1928
- State v. DePhilippoSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.