State v. Cason, 46 A.3d 1141 (Me. 2012). · Go Syfert
State v. Cason, 46 A.3d 1141 (Me. 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
18 citation events (18 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Donald J. Trump v. Secretary of State (me, 2024-01-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Donald J. Trump v. Secretary of State
Me. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See id. ¶¶ 12-24. 14 disposition of the entire litigation, see, e.g., Liberty v. Bennett, 2012 ME 81, ¶ 19 , 46 A.3d 1141 ; Cutting v. Down E.
discussed Cited "see" Kathleen Flanders v. Fern R. Gordon (2×)
Me. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
See Liberty v. Bennett, 2012 ME 81, ¶¶ 20-21 , 46 A.3d 1141 .
cited Cited "see" Bernard Quirion v. Bryan Veilleux
Me. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Liberty, 2012 ME 81, ¶¶ 19, 22 , 46 A.3d 1141 .
discussed Cited "see" In re Maine Today Media, Inc. State of Maine v. Mark W. Strong Sr. (2×)
Me. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
See Liberty v. Bennett, 2012 ME 81, ¶ 18 , 46 A.3d 1141 .
cited Cited "see, e.g." State of Maine v. Jason J. Follette
Me. · 2026 · signal: see also · confidence low
Orthopedic Assocs., P.A., 2021 ME 1, ¶ 16 , 244 A.3d 226 (quotation marks omitted); see also Liberty v. Bennett, 2012 ME 81, ¶ 19 , 46 A.3d 1141 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Carol Cutting v. Down East Orthopedic Associates, P.A.
Me. · 2021 · signal: see also · confidence low
Servs. v. Hart, 639 A.2d 107, 107-08 (Me. 1994) (dismissing an interlocutory appeal “because we ha[d] not yet resolved the question whether res judicata would apply in the circumstances of th[e] case”). [¶18] “Generally, we invoke the judicial economy exception when there are particularly unique circumstances in the history of a case such as exceedingly long litigation, multiple pending proceedings involving the same party, or litigation subject to inordinate delay.” Quirion v. Veilleux, 2013 ME 50, ¶ 9 , 65 A.3d 1287 (alteration and quotation marks omitted); see also Liberty v. Benn…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE of Maine
v.
Timothy M. CASON
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.
Jul 12, 2012.
46 A.3d 1141
Timothy M. Cason, pro se appellant., The State of Maine did not file a brief.
Alexander, Gorman, Levy, Mead, Saufley, Silver.
Published
PER CURIAM.

[¶ 1] Timothy M. Cason appeals from the judgment of the District Court (Augusta, French, J.) convicting him, following a hearing, of operating an unregistered vehicle (Class E), 29-A M.R.S. § 351(1)(B) (2011). Cason does not appear to dispute that he was operating a vehicle with an expired registration in Gardiner on or about July 81, 2011.[1]

[¶ 2] Cason contends that the operating an unregistered vehicle charge should have been dismissed because it was brought in violation of “the Peoples common law right to travel” and that an “American citizen does indeed have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of another.”

[¶ 8] Contrary to Cason’s contentions, persons operating motor vehicles on the roadways are properly required by law to have the motor vehicles registered as a condition of operation. There exists no inherent constitutional right to drive on public ways. See State v. Demerritt, 149 Me. 380, 383-84, 103 A.2d 106 (1953); Hendrick v. Maryland, 235 U.S. 610, 622, 35 S.Ct. 140, 59 L.Ed. 385 (1915). The Legislature does not restrict the right to travel when it sets conditions and restrictions on the operation of motor vehicles. See Hendrick, 235 U.S at 624, 35 S.Ct. 140.

The entry is:

Judgment affirmed.

1

The vehicle that Cason was operating, a 1966 Triumph TR4, had a registration that expired on October 31, 2009.