Summary
upholding defendant's OUI conviction on circumstantial evidence because such evidence "is no less conclusive than direct evidence in supporting a conviction"
Summary of this case from U.S. v. MaherOpinion
Submitted on Briefs January 13, 1989.
Decided January 17, 1989.
Appeal from the District Court, Pease, J.
William R. Anderson, Dist. Atty., Leanne Zainea, Asst. Dist. Atty., Rockland, for State.
Wayne R. Crandall, Collins, Crandall, Hanscom Pease, Rockland, for defendant.
Before McKUSICK, C.J., and ROBERTS, WATHEN, GLASSMAN and HORNBY, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
Carmen Merrill appeals the affirmance by the Superior Court (Knox County; Silsby, J.) of her District Court (Rockland; Pease, J.) conviction for the Class D crime of operating under the influence of intoxicating liquor, 29 M.R.S.A. § 1312-B (Pamph. 1988). On appeal Merrill argues only that the circumstantial evidence that she was the operator of her automobile at the time of a single car accident is insufficient to support a conviction. Circumstantial evidence is no less conclusive than direct evidence in supporting a conviction. State v. Kenney, 534 A.2d 681, 682 (Me. 1987). Viewing the record evidence in the light most favorable to the State, we conclude that the trier of fact could rationally find every element of the crime of operating under the influence beyond a reasonable doubt. See State v. Barry, 495 A.2d 825, 826 (Me. 1985).
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
All concurring.