State of Maine v. Andrew J. Freeman
2014 ME 35
| Me. | 2014Background
- Freeman, 21, dated Kristen McLeod, 17; December 6, 2011 visit to McLeod residence ended with him being dropped off near his aunt/uncle’s home.
- Two basement fires occurred; first involved igniting a cloth, second involved a spray-painted box spring frame; “bye” and “Die Kristen” spray-painted.
- Several items missing or disturbed in basement (phones, light bulbs, milk with Freeman’s DNA, thermostat set high, sliding door ajar).
- Freeman’s DNA found on a milk bottle in basement and on a butane lighter found outside Freeman’s aunt’s house on December 8; Freeman DNA linked to lighter.
- Freeman indicted on four counts (two aggravated attempted murder counts, arson, burglary); trial in September 2012; jury convicted on all four counts.
- Sentencing: court set basic sentence 30–40 years, then elevated to 50 years based on aggravating factors, suspended 10 years, and imposed 4 years probation; other counts run concurrently.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the basic sentence complied with principled sentencing under law | Freeman argues the basic sentence swerve in principle | State contends the basic sentence was proper given the crimes | No abuse; basic sentence within principled range |
| Whether aggravating factors justified the maximum term | Freeman asserts mitigating factors were ignored | Court properly weighed aggravators over mitigating factors | Aggravating factors supported fifty-year maximum |
| Whether the final sentence suspension and probation were proper | Freeman challenges length of suspension/probation | Court acted within discretion to suspend ten years and impose four years probation | No abuse; sentence suspension and probation affirmed |
| Whether proportionality raised by the sentence was improper | Freeman argues disproportionate to offense | Court found no gross disproportionality, relied on Fortune comparison only | Not grossly disproportionate; no need to compare with others |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Stanislaw, 65 A.3d 1242 (Me. 2013) (guides proportionality and sentencing review factors)
- Fortune v. State, 34 A.3d 1115 (Me. 2011) (relevant to comparing seriousness to maximize sentence)
- State v. Hewey, 622 A.2d 1151 (Me. 1993) (three-step sentencing analysis requirements)
- State v. Reese, 991 A.2d 806 (Me. 2010) (abuse-of-discretion standard in maximum sentence considerations)
- State v. Nichols, 72 A.3d 503 (Me. 2013) (non-mandatory use of comparable offenses in basic sentence)