Skip Maine state header navigation

Agencies | Online Services | Help
State v. Pierce, attorneys and footnotes

Attorneys for State:

David W. Crook, District Attorney
Alan Kelley, Deputy District Attorney
95 State Street
Augusta, ME 04330

Attorney for defendant:

Walter F. McKee, Esq.
Lipman & Katz, P.A.
P O Box 1031
Augusta, ME 04332-1031
FOOTNOTES******************************** {1} . Pierce was indicted on the following 19 counts: Count 1 - gross sexual assault of Victim A; Count 2 - unlawful sexual contact of Victim A; Count 3 - aggravated trafficking or furnishing of scheduled drugs to Victim A; Count 4 - unlawful sexual contact of Victim B; Count 5 - aggravated trafficking or furnishing of scheduled drugs to Victim C; Count 6 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim C; Count 7 - aggravated trafficking or furnishing of scheduled drugs to Victim D; Count 8 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim D; Count 9 - aggravated trafficking or furnishing of scheduled drugs to Victim E; Count 10 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim E; Count 11 - gross sexual assault of Victim E; Count 12 - unlawful sexual contact of Victim E; Count 13 - aggravated trafficking or furnishing of scheduled drugs to Victim F; Count 14 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim F; Count 15 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim G; Count 16 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim H; Count 17 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim I; Count 18 - procuring or furnishing liquor for a minor, Victim J; and Count 19 - possession of firearms by a felon (Class C), 15 M.R.S.A. § 393 (1980 & Supp. 2000). {2} . Pierce requested separate trials on Counts 1 through 3, Count 4, Counts 5 and 6, Counts 7 and 8, Counts 9 through 12, Counts 13 and 14, Counts 15 through 18, and Count 19. {3} . Pierce was sentenced to the following terms of imprisonment: Count 1 - 17 years served concurrently with Counts 2 and 3 but consecutive to Count 4; Count 2 - 4 years served concurrently with Counts 1 and 3 but consecutive to Count 4; Count 3 - 2 1/2 years served concurrently with Counts 1 and 2 but consecutive to Count 4; Count 4 - 4 years served consecutive to Counts 9, 11 and 12; Counts 6 and 8 - 364 days served concurrently with each other but consecutive to Counts 15, 16, 17 and 18; Count 9 - 2 1/2 years served concurrently with Counts 11 and 12 but consecutive to Counts 13 and 14; Count 11 - 20 years served concurrently with Counts 9 and 12 but consecutive to Counts 13 and 14; Count 12 - 4 years served concurrently with Counts 9 and 11 but consecutive to Counts 13 and 14; Count 13 - 2 years served concurrently with Count 14 but consecutive to Counts 6 and 8; Count 14 - 364 days served concurrently with Count 13 but consecutive to Counts 6 and 8; Count 15 - 364 days served concurrently with Counts 16, 17 and 18; Count 16 - 364 days served concurrently with Counts 15, 17 and 18; Count 17 - 364 days served concurrently with Counts 15, 16 and 18; Count 18 - 364 days served concurrently with Counts 15, 16 and 17. {4} . "(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that the person acted in conformity therewith." M.R. Evid. 404(b). This rule of exclusion aims to avoid the danger that the jury will convict the defendant on the basis of evidence of uncharged acts rather than on the evidence of the crime for which he is charged. Evidence, however, that is otherwise competent and relevant to prove a defendant's guilt of a particular crime charged is not inadmissible solely because it also shows defendant guilty of another distinct crime. In this context the foundational test for admissibility is relevance. Evidence revealing other crimes is relevant if it casts light upon the nature of the act for which the defendant is being prosecuted, by showing motive, intent, knowledge, absence of mistake, common scheme, identity or a system or general pattern. State v. Wallace, 431 A.2d 613, 615-16 (Me. 1981) (citations omitted). {5} . 28-A M.R.S.A. § 2081 states in pertinent part: 1. Offense. Except as provided in subsection 2, no person may knowingly: A. Procure, or in any way aid or assist in procuring, furnish, give, sell or deliver liquor for or to a minor; . . . . {6} . M.R. Evid. 403 states: Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury, or by considerations of undue delay, waste of time, or needless presentation of cumulative evidence. {7} . After she made the statements about Pierce's mob connection, the State asked her: "And, so, he could do this for you?" and she responded: "That's what he claimed."

Back to the text of this opinion.

Back to the Opinions page.