State v. Thomas
2010 ME 116
| Me. | 2010Background
- John C. Thomas Sr. captained the Maine-flagged fishing vessel F/V Blue Water III, which operated in federal waters and held a Maine commercial license.
- Maine marine patrol boarded the vessel about 35 miles from Matinicus Island; Thomas initially refused, then allowed boarding after federal authorities asserted concurrent authority.
- Officers found 78 lobsters aboard, 24 of which were oversize, some banded in totes, triggering charges under Maine law for oversize lobsters and unconventional fishing methods.
- Thomas moved to suppress the seized evidence, arguing lack of lawful boarding/search and lack of independent basis beyond federal authority.
- The Blue Water was in the federal EEZ at the time; Maine claimed jurisdiction under the Magnuson-Stevens Act via the vessel's Maine registration, enabling search under Maine law.
- The trial court denied suppression, found Maine Section 6306 independent authority to search a Maine-registered vessel, and sentenced Thomas on both Maine lobster offenses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the suppression denial proper under Maine law? | Thomas argues lack of jurisdiction and improper boarding/search absent independent basis. | Thomas contends no authority under Maine law to search outside territorial waters without registration basis. | Yes; search upheld under Maine registration-based jurisdiction in EEZ. |
| Should Thomas be prosecuted under §6432 or §6952-A for the same conduct? | Thomas favors §6952-A (trawling) with different penalties and defenses. | State may pursue §6432 (unconventional method) consistent with conduct and penalties; both statutes apply. | Prosecution properly could be under either; choice within prosecutorial discretion. |
| Is the immediate liberation defense available to Thomas? | Immediate liberation defense would excuse possession if lobsters were released immediately alive. | Defense is narrow and requires immediate release; banded lobsters in totes did not qualify. | Immediate liberation defense not applicable; failure to immediately liberate banded lobsters bars defense. |
| Does Maine's definition of 'registered vessel' authorize EEZ jurisdiction over the Blue Water? | Registration broad enough to justify Maine authority in EEZ under Magnuson-Stevens Act. | Registration definition is too broad and could create constitutional issues; overreach not supported. | Yes; Blue Water was a Maine-registered vessel under multiple criteria, enabling EEZ jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Hayes, 603 A.2d 869 (Me. 1992) (enforcement of stricter state laws in the EEZ for Maine-registered vessels)
- State v. Richardson, 285 A.2d 842 (Me. 1972) (conservation aims of lobster statutes; core prohibitions)
- Daley v. Comm'r, Dep't of Marine Res., 698 A.2d 1053 (Me. 1997) (Magnuson-Stevens Act allows states to enforce stricter laws in EEZ)
- State v. Nadeau, 2010 ME 71 (Me. 2010) (standards for reviewing suppression rulings)
- United States v. Batchelder, 442 U.S. 114 (U.S. 1979) (prosecutorial discretion in charging decisions)