State v. Coston, 082919 MESC, Pen-18-481
|Opinion Judge:||SAUFLEY, C.J.|
|Party Name:||STATE OF MAINE v. LARRY F. COSTON II|
|Attorney:||Zachary J. Smith, Esq. (orally), Lawsmith Legal Services, L.L.C., Bangor, for appellant Larry F. Coston II Marianne Lynch, District Attorney, and Mark A. Rucci, Asst. Dist. Atty. (orally), Prosecutorial District V, Bangor, for appellee State of Maine|
|Judge Panel:||Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ.|
|Case Date:||August 29, 2019|
|Court:||Supreme Judicial Court of Maine|
Argued: June 25, 2019
Zachary J. Smith, Esq. (orally), Lawsmith Legal Services, L.L.C., Bangor, for appellant Larry F. Coston II
Marianne Lynch, District Attorney, and Mark A. Rucci, Asst. Dist. Atty. (orally), Prosecutorial District V, Bangor, for appellee State of Maine
Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and HUMPHREY, JJ.
[¶1] Larry F. Coston II appeals from a judgment of conviction of burglary (Class C), 17-A M.R.S. § 401(1)(A) (2018), 1 entered by the court (Anderson, J.) after a jury trial. He argues that the court erred in admitting recordings of incriminating telephone conversations that he had with his girlfriend while he was in jail. We affirm the judgment.
[¶2] Coston was tried by a jury in October 2018 on a charge of burglary arising from events that had occurred in May 2018.2 The State presented evidence that Coston borrowed a car; drove his friend to a location near a convenience store where the friend intended to break in to steal cash or goods; and, after the friend broke into the store and stole cigarettes, drove the friend home.
[¶3] As part of its case-in-chief, the State sought to admit recordings of Costons telephone conversations that were recorded by the jail in which Coston was held after his arrest. The State offered the testimony of a Penobscot County jail administrator and a Dexter police officer to establish the means by which the jails phone calls are recorded, preserved, and retrieved. The jail has a contract with an out-of-state company to provide telecommunications services for inmates. Inmates are assigned identification numbers that they must use to place calls. All calls in the jail are recorded except for inmates calls to and from their attorneys and calls placed on the separate, internal phone system of the jail. The recordings are collected and preserved on the companys servers outside of Maine.
[¶4] The recordings may be accessed and searched by jail administrators and law enforcement via a website that requires entry of a username and password. The recordings here were downloaded from the systems website by the Dexter police officer, who kept his username secure in his desk at work, had his password memorized, and accessed the website in his office on a desktop computer that cannot be used without a password. The officer testified that he did not alter the recorded calls or delete anything from them.
[¶5] Although Coston objected to the admission of the recordings...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP