State v. Lemar
| Decision Date | 10 April 1952 |
| Citation | 87 A.2d 886,147 Me. 405 |
| Parties | STATE v. LEMAR. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Harold J. Rubin, Bath, for the State.
Nunzi Napolitano, Portland, for defendant.
Before MURCHIE, C. J., and THAXTER, FELLOWS, MERRILL, NULTY and WILLIAMSON, JJ.
The respondent was charged in the Bath Municipal Court with a violation of Sec. 77 of Ch. 34 of Rev.Stat.1944, Sec. 85, Ch. 332, Pub.Laws 1947, which reads as follows:
The particular offense with which the respondent is charged is that, being a resident of Dresden in the County of Lincoln, he did at Woolwich, in the County of Sagadahoc, on June 9, 1951, unlawfully and without right 'dig bloodworms without first having obtained a license from the Municipal Officers of said Town of Woolwich'. The complaint was brought in the Municipal Court at Bath in said County of Sagadahoc; the respondent, after a plea of not guilty, was found guilty and fined $15 and costs; and appealed to the Superior Court to be held on the first Tuesday of June, 1951. All parties agreeing, the case was reported by the Superior Court sitting at Bath to this court on an agreed statement of facts and a stipulation that the only issue was 'the question of the constitutionality of Chapter 34, Section 77, Revised Statutes of Maine, as revised by Chapter 332, Section 85, of the Public Laws of 1947, and incorporated in the Second Biennial Revision of the Sea and Shore Fisheries Laws of the Public Laws of 1949, which the respondent contends deprives him of his property without due process of law; abridges his privileges and immunities; denies him the equal protection of the laws in contravention of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and precludes him from acquiring and possessing property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness in violation of Article I, Section 1, of the Constitution of the State of Maine'.
The facts are not in dispute. The agreed statement reads in part as follows:
'On the ninth day of June, A. D. 1951, Robert Lemar, of Dresden, Maine, was arrested by a Warden of the Maine Sea and Shore Fisheries Department for unlawfully digging blood-worms from the flats within the limits of the Town of Woolwich, he, the said Robert Lemar, not then having a written permit of the Municipal Officers of said Town of Woolwich and paying the fee therefor, and he not being a riparian owner of shore or flats in said Town.
'It is admitted that said Robert Lemar dug said worms as above set forth; that he was a resident of Dresden at that time; that he had no license from said Town, but that he did have a valid commercial fishing license issued by the Commissioner of Sea and Shore Fisheries of the State of Maine permitting him to dig and sell worms taken from the flats and coastal waters of the State; that said respondent was not a riparian owner of the shore or flats within said Town of Woolwich; also that said respondent is a legal resident of the State of Maine within the terms and provisions of the Sea and Shore Fisheries Laws of said State, to wit: Chapter 34, Revised Statutes of 1944, as revised.'
The only issue is the constitutionality under the state and federal constitutions of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bell v. Town of Wells
...of Long Wharf, 25 Me. 51, 65 (1845). Similarly, we have broadly construed "fishing" to include digging for worms, State v. Lemar, 147 Me. 405, 87 A.2d 886 (1952), clams, State v. Leavitt, 105 Me. 76, 72 A. 875 (1909), and shellfish, Moulton v. Libbey, 37 Me. 472 (1854). We have never, howev......
-
William A. Mcgarvey Jr. v. Whittredge
...on the intertidal land). We construed the term “fishing” in the Colonial Ordinance to include digging for worms, State v. Lemar, 147 Me. 405, 409, 87 A.2d 886, 888 (1952), clams, Leavitt, 105 Me. at 78–80, 72 A. at 876–77, and shellfish, Moulton v. Libbey, 37 Me. 472, 489–90 (1854). We inte......
-
Almeder v. Town of Kennebunkport
... ... ALMEDER, et al., Plaintiffs v. TOWN OF KENNEBUNKPORT and ALL PERSONS WHO ARE UNASCERTAINED, not in being, unknown or out of the State, heirs or legal representatives of such unascertained persons, or such persons as shall become heirs, devisees or appointees of such unascertained ... 51, 65 (1845) ... Similarly, we have broadly construed "fishing" to ... include digging for worms, State v. Lemar, 147 Me ... 405, 87 A.2d 886 (1952), clams, State v. Leavitt, ... 105 Me. 76, 72 A. 875 (1909), and shellfish, Moulton v ... ...
-
Almeder v. Town of Kennebunkport
... ... Frame, Esq., Andre Duchette, Esq., TAYLOR MCCORMACK & ... FRAME LLC ... For ... the State of Maine: Paul Stern, A.A.G. Office of the Attorney ... General ... Prose ... Litigants: Alexander Lachiatto Judith ... 51, 65 (1845) ... Similarly, we have broadly construed "fishing" to ... include digging for worms, State v. Lemar, 147 Me ... 405, 87 A.2d 886 (1952), clams, State v. Leavitt, ... 105 Me. 76, 72 A. 875 (1909), and shellfish, Moulton v ... ...