State of Maine v. Buddy Robinson, 134 A.3d 828

Background

Victim Christiana Fesmire disappeared July 1, 2011; evidence linked her blood to the first-floor apartment and the trunk of a Lexus Robinson drove. Robinson had threatened to kill Fesmire and made incriminating statements to several people after her disappearance.
Robinson was indicted for murder; a 10-day jury trial in Nov. 2012 resulted in a guilty verdict and a 55-year sentence; restitution ordered to the Victims’ Compensation Fund.
During trial the prosecutor referenced his Attorney General’s Office homicide experience in opening and mockingly claimed in closing that he is “always wrong…never get[s] the right person,” implying past defenses had failed; Robinson did not object at trial to those comments.
After closing, Robinson alleged prosecutorial misconduct during his counsel’s summation: that the prosecutor mouthed a response to the defense’s rhetorical questions and feigned sleep; these claims were raised in a post-trial motion for a new trial and developed at an evidentiary hearing.
The trial court found some testimony (e.g., about mouthing) equivocal, implied the prosecutor may have feigned sleep, but concluded any misconduct did not probably affect the verdict; the court also declined to supply a transcript requested by the jury and instead offered an in-court read-back if narrowed; the jury returned a verdict without requesting a read-back.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor’s references to his AG homicide experience and statements that he’s "always wrong" in opening/closing were prosecutorial misconduct requiring a new trial	Robinson: statements improperly appealed to extraneous experience and disparaged the defense, undermining fairness	State: remarks were rhetorical, within advocacy bounds; no contemporaneous objection; any error was harmless given evidence and instructions	Court: remarks were improper but unpreserved; under obvious-error standard Robinson failed to show a reasonable probability of prejudice; no relief
Whether prosecutor’s alleged mouthing of answers to jurors during defense summation and feigned sleep deprived Robinson of a fair trial	Robinson: gestures and mouthing communicated with jury and prejudiced deliberations; feigned sleep was unprofessional and distracting	State: prosecutor denied mouthing; some witnesses contradicted Dionne; conduct (if occurred) was limited and unlikely to affect outcome	Court: credited trial judge’s assessment; treated feigned sleep as admitted but harmless; even if mouthing occurred, unlikely to have affected verdict; motion denied
Whether cumulative prosecutorial misconduct warranted a new trial	Robinson: multiple instances combined to prejudice trial fairness	State: overall trial was long, evidence strong, and jury instructions mitigated any improprieties	Court: cumulative review found no denial of a fair trial
Whether court erred in responding to jury’s read‑back request for a 90+ page transcript	Robinson: court’s written responses were insufficient and prejudicial	State: court properly asked jury to narrow request and offered in‑court read‑back rather than providing transcript	Court: no error; court did not refuse read‑back and acted within discretion; no obvious error shown

Key Cases Cited

State v. Dolloff, 58 A.3d 1032 (Me. 2012) (standards for prosecutorial misconduct and harmless‑error review)
State v. McDonald, 472 A.2d 424 (Me. 1984) (prosecutor must not invite verdict on basis other than evidence)
State v. Fahnley, 119 A.3d 727 (Me. 2015) (plain‑error review for unpreserved prosecutorial misconduct)
State v. Reilly, 446 A.2d 1125 (Me. 1982) (prosecutor’s argument must be confined to evidence)
State v. Hoffstadt, 652 A.2d 93 (Me. 1995) (limits on prosecutorial argument)
State v. Clark, 954 A.2d 1066 (Me. 2008) (curative jury instructions can mitigate improper argument)
State v. Poblete, 993 A.2d 1104 (Me. 2010) (deference to trial court on mistrial/misconduct rulings)
State v. Doyon, 745 A.2d 365 (Me. 1999) (defer to trial court’s credibility findings on post‑trial motions)
State v. Reynolds, 604 A.2d 911 (Me. 1992) (trial court discretion on jury read‑backs)
State v. Engstrom, 453 A.2d 1170 (Me. 1982) (application of read‑back discretion)
State v. Giglio, 441 A.2d 303 (Me. 1982) (trial court may require narrowing of broad read‑back requests)