Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 12, § 7464 (2026)

Prohibited acts relating to moose

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1979, c. 420, §1 (NEW). PL 1979, c. 543, §50 (RPR). PL 1979, c. 723, §§20,21 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 118, §§3-9 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 369, §21 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 317, §22 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 696, §§12-14 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 493, §39 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 705, §3 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 88, §1 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 438, §34 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 455, §35 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 9, §1 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 322, §13 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 403, §§24-27 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 790, §A16 (AMD). PL 2001, c. 269, §13 (AMD). PL 2003, c. 331, §§23-28 (AMD). PL 2003, c. 333, §21 (AMD). PL 2003, c. 414, §A1 (RP). PL 2003, c. 414, §D7 (AFF). PL 2003, c. 614, §9 (AFF).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1986–1988 · leading case: State v. Wright, 549 A.2d 1128 (Me. 1988).
State v. Wright, 549 A.2d 1128 (Me. 1988). · cites it 3× “12 M.R.S.A. § 7464(2) (1981). The Superior Court sentenced both defendants to the statutory minimum of three days in jail and a fine of $500.”
State v. Cobb, 515 A.2d 1156 (Me. 1986). “Cobb, appeals his convictions of illegal possession of moose meat, 12 M.R.S.A. § 7464(2) (1981) (Class D), and trafficking in marijuana, 17-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 12, § 7464(2) — 2 cases
State v. Wright, 549 A.2d 1128 (Me. 1988). “12 M.R.S.A. § 7464(2) (1981). The Superior Court sentenced both defendants to the statutory minimum of three days in jail and a fine of $500.”
State v. Cobb, 515 A.2d 1156 (Me. 1986). “Cobb, appeals his convictions of illegal possession of moose meat, 12 M.R.S.A. § 7464(2) (1981) (Class D), and trafficking in marijuana, 17-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 12, § 7464(7) — 1 case
State v. Wright, 549 A.2d 1128 (Me. 1988). “12 M.R.S.A. § 7464(2) (1981). The Superior Court sentenced both defendants to the statutory minimum of three days in jail and a fine of $500.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.