114 A.3d 664
Me.2015Background
- In January 2014 the State charged Sanford R. King III with multiple drug offenses and sought criminal forfeiture of a firearm; a bench trial ultimately occurred on July 8, 2014.
- The trial court dismissed two charges, convicted King of unlawful possession of a Class E scheduled drug, ordered forfeiture of the firearm, imposed 96 hours in county jail and a $30 fine.
- King appealed pro se but did not file a transcript order with his notice of appeal, did not provide a trial transcript or acceptable transcript substitute, nor did he request indigent transcript funding.
- King’s appellate appendix omitted mandatory contents: it lacked the docket entries and the court orders reflecting continuances of the originally scheduled trial date.
- The issues King raised on appeal required review of trial evidence and the court’s discretionary continuance decisions—both of which cannot be reviewed without the missing transcript and docket materials.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence supporting conviction | King contends the evidence did not support his conviction | State argues conviction should stand (trial record supports findings) | Appeal dismissed for lack of transcript; court could not review sufficiency |
| Trial court’s decision(s) to continue the trial date | King asserts continuances were improper or an abuse of discretion | State asserts continuances were proper and within court discretion | Appeal dismissed because appendix lacked docket/continuance orders, preventing review |
Key Cases Cited
- Clark v. Heald, 983 A.2d 406 (Me. 2009) (appellant bears burden to provide adequate record on appeal)
- State v. Barnard, 828 A.2d 216 (Me. 2003) (appellant responsible for providing record sufficient for review)
- State v. Ahmed, 909 A.2d 1011 (Me. 2006) (issues unsupported by record may be treated as unpreserved)
- State v. Dill, 783 A.2d 646 (Me. 2001) (absence of necessary record materials may preclude review)
- Springer v. Springer, 984 A.2d 828 (Me. 2009) (transcript or substitute required to review factual findings or discretionary decisions)
- State v. Hughes, 863 A.2d 266 (Me. 2004) (without complete trial testimony transcript, appellate court cannot assess sufficiency of evidence)
- State v. Ross, 841 A.2d 814 (Me. 2004) (appeal may be dismissed for failure to comply with appellate rules)