State of Maine v. Bethmarie Retamozzo, 135 A.3d 98

Defendant Bethmarie Retamozzo was charged with two counts of criminal restraint by a parent after taking her two young children, who were under her mother’s guardianship and subject to supervised contact, and traveling out of state with them.
On August 15, 2013, Retamozzo obtained permission from her mother to take the children; a court-appointed supervisor agreed to supervise a park visit but the children never met the supervisor there and were later reported missing.
Two days after the children were reported missing, law enforcement located Retamozzo and the children at a South Carolina rest stop; Retamozzo was arrested and later tried by jury in Kennebec County Superior Court.
During direct examination of Retamozzo’s mother at trial, the mother stated, in response to whether she saw Retamozzo in South Carolina, “I visited her in jail.” Defense counsel did not object at trial.
Retamozzo was convicted on both counts and appealed, arguing the court should have declared a mistrial sua sponte because the mother’s comment revealed Retamozzo’s incarceration and risked juror prejudice.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by failing to declare a mistrial sua sponte after a witness stated she had visited the defendant in jail	The mother’s comment suggested incarceration and undermined a fair trial; the court should have declared a mistrial on its own	The comment was fleeting, inadvertent, not elicited by the State, and caused no prejudice; no sua sponte mistrial required	No obvious error; conviction affirmed — the brief comment did not prejudice the defendant and did not require a mistrial

Estelle v. Williams, 425 U.S. 501 (U.S. 1976) (compelling a defendant to stand trial in identifiable prison clothes can deny a fair trial; objection must be raised)
State v. Cote, 118 A.3d 805 (Me. 2015) (standard for viewing facts in light most favorable to the State)
State v. Chasse, 750 A.2d 586 (Me. 2000) (review for obvious error where no objection made regarding prejudicial courtroom conditions)
State v. Pabon, 28 A.3d 1147 (Me. 2011) (definition and review standard for obvious error under Rule 52(b))
State v. White, 456 A.2d 13 (Me. 1983) (brief, inadvertent exposure of a defendant in handcuffs is not automatically prejudicial)
United States v. Trinidad-Acosta, 773 F.3d 298 (1st Cir. 2014) (fleeting comments about pretrial incarceration are less prejudicial than visible prison attire during trial)
State v. Cheney, 55 A.3d 473 (Me. 2012) (trial counsel’s tactical choice to avoid calling attention to a fleeting prejudicial remark can be reasonable)