State v. Carr
2012 ME 136
| Me. | 2012Background
- Carr was convicted of intentional or knowing murder after a jury trial in Bangor, Maine.
- During trial, the State failed to disclose an eyewitness interview recording discovered at the end of testimony.
- Carr moved for a new trial; the court conducted a hearing and denied the motion after finding the omission was inadvertent and not prejudicial.
- Juror #75 was designated as an alternate due to unavailability past a certain time for religious reasons; the juror was released to deliberate after 12:50 p.m. and the verdict was reached around 4:57 p.m.
- Carr was sentenced on December 2, 2011 to 35 years; the court applied mitigating factors (age ~18, immaturity, dysfunctional family, remorse) and an aggravating factor (amount of suffering to victim’s family) in the 35-year calculation.
- On appeal, the court affirmed the conviction and addressed the challenged issues including discovery, equal protection as to Juror #75, sufficiency of the evidence, and sentencing methodology.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery violation and new trial | Carr | Carr | No reversible error; trial fair and no basis for new trial |
| Equal protection for Juror #75 | Carr | Carr | No equal protection violation; alternate designation based on time availability, not race/religion |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | Carr | Carr | Evidence supported each element of intentional or knowing murder beyond a reasonable doubt |
| Sentencing methodology | Carr | Carr | Sentence properly calculated with appropriate mitigating and aggravating factors |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Gould, 2012 ME 60 (Me. 2012) (review standard for discovery violations; whether trial was fair)
- State v. Cookson, 2003 ME 136 (Me. 2003) (discretion in ruling on disclosure matters)
- State v. Graham, 2010 ME 60 (Me. 2010) (sanctions and discovery standards in Maine criminal procedure)
- State v. Rankin, 666 A.2d 123 (Me. 1995) (discovery violations and due process considerations)
- State v. Robbins, 689 A.2d 603 (Me. 1997) (duty of police to disclose discoverable information)
- State v. Silva, 56 A.3d 1230 (Me. 2012) (disclosure timing and impact on trial)
- State v. Poole, 46 A.3d 1129 (Me. 2012) (equal protection framework for jury deliberation issues)
- State v. Larrivee, 563 A.2d 1104 (Me. 1989) (judicial management of juror availability and alternates)
- State v. Rollins, 2008 ME 189 (Me. 2008) (alternative juror decisions and abuse of discretion review)
- State v. Landry, 485 A.2d 218 (Me. 1984) (juror management and due process considerations)
- State v. Koehler, 2012 ME 93 (Me. 2012) (sentencing factors and firearm enhancement guidance)
- State v. Waterman, 2010 ME 45 (Me. 2010) (sentencing procedure and balancing aggravators/mitigators)
- State v. Schofield, 2006 ME 101 (Me. 2006) (sentencing considerations and appellate review)
- Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (U.S. 1991) (standing to raise equal protection rights of jurors in nonracial discrimination context)
