State v. Tait
| Decision Date | 09 November 1984 |
| Citation | 483 A.2d 745 |
| Parties | STATE of Maine v. Timothy TAIT. |
| Court | Maine Supreme Court |
John R. Atwood, Dist. Atty., David M. Spencer (orally), Asst. Dist. Atty., Wiscasset, for plaintiff.
Fitzgerald, Donovan & Conley, Daniel R. Donovan (orally), Bath, for defendant.
Before McKUSICK, C.J., and NICHOLS, VIOLETTE, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and SCOLNIK, JJ.
Pursuant to 15 M.R.S.A. § 2115-A(2) (1983-1984) and M.R.Crim.P. 37B, the State appeals from a judgment of acquittal entered by the Superior Court, Lincoln County, notwithstanding a jury verdict finding the defendant, Timothy Tait, guilty of a Class A robbery, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 651 (1983). We reverse the judgment of acquittal and remand to the Superior Court for reinstatement of the jury verdict.
The defendant was tried with co-defendant Anthony Zaccadelli, and many of the facts are set forth in State v. Zaccadelli, 472 A.2d 928 (Me.1984). The State established that about 10:00 a.m. on January 22, 1983, George McLain, the assistant manager of Sampson's Supermarket in Damariscotta, was robbed in the Sampson's parking lot. The jury also heard testimony that: Zaccadelli's car occupied by Zaccadelli and a male passenger was in the parking lot at 9:45 a.m.; at about 10:00 a.m. two people in dark ski masks were "sneaking" through the cars in the lot, threw something at McLain, ran to a car similar to Zaccadelli's and drove out of the lot; the defendant was in Damariscotta at 9:15 a.m.; his car was parked at Zaccadelli's residence at 10:45 a.m.; the defendant was seen with Zaccadelli in the defendant's car at 11:45 a.m. in Damariscotta; the defendant and Zaccadelli were at Eddie's Drive-In in Waldoboro at 12:15 p.m. and left the diner in the defendant's car; at 2:15 p.m., while the police were en route to Zaccadelli's residence, they passed the defendant in his car going in the opposite direction.
McLain was unable to identify his assailants. However, he described the one assailant he saw as wearing a blue-black ski mask, jeans, a faded corduroy jacket, and lace-up military boots or shoes. The defendant, when later seen with Zaccadelli, was wearing jeans, boots, and either a plaid shirt without a jacket, or a brown leather jacket.
The defendant was not present in the Zaccadelli residence when police gained access to a locked safe and found two blue-black ski masks, a gun similar to the one used in the robbery, and a bank deposit bag containing cash, with one bill bearing the thumbprint of Sampson's bookkeeper.
Michael P. Malone, Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and expert witness on behalf of the State, examined hairs taken from the ski masks found at the Zaccadelli residence. He testified that each of the masks yielded three Caucasian head hairs matching sample hairs taken from Tait and that one of the masks carried three hairs matching samples from Zaccadelli. No other hairs appeared on the masks.
The defendant offered no evidence. His previous motions for acquittal, on the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, made at the conclusion of the State's evidence and the close of the evidence were denied. Within ten days after the return of the jury verdict of guilty, the defendant filed a motion for acquittal or new trial. M.R.Crim.P. 29(b). After taking the matter under advisement, the court entered a judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence. The State appeals from that judgment.
On an appeal by the State from a judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict, we "examine the jury verdict to determine whether, viewing the evidence as a whole from the standpoint most favorable to the State, a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Montgomery v. State, 56743
...State v. Wilkins, 215 Kan. 145, 523 P.2d 728 (1974). Kentucky: Holland v. Commonwealth, 323 S.W.2d 411 (Ky.1959). Maine: State v. Tait, 483 A.2d 745 (Me.1984); State v. Cowperthwaite, 354 A.2d 173 (Me.1976). Nevada: Bailey v. State, 94 Nev. 323, 579 P.2d 1247 (1978). New Jersey: State v. Ra......
-
State v. Skarbinski
...to support the convictions.1 See State v. Tayman, 2008 ME 177, ¶ 4, 960 A.2d 1151, 1153 (stating the standard of review); State v. Tait, 483 A.2d 745, 746 (Me.1984) (stating that issues of witness credibility are the jury's exclusive province and that we give great deference to the findings......
-
State v. Spooner
...Moreover, we will not substitute our judgment as to the weight and credibility of the evidence for that of the jury. State v. Tait, 483 A.2d 745, 746 (Me.1984) (citing State v. Smith, 456 A.2d 1 We recently affirmed a conviction for gross sexual misconduct based on the testimony of a five-y......
-
State v. Chapman
...on the legal issue, namely, the sufficiency of the evidence to support the jury's verdict as a matter of law. See, e.g., State v. Tait, 483 A.2d 745, 746 (Me.1984). We do not substitute our judgment on the weight and the credibility of the evidence for that of the jury as fact-finder. See S......