Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 15
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, § 1258 (2026)

Juries for criminal offenses; challenges

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
When a person charged with a criminal offense who has not waived the person's right to trial by jury is put upon the person's trial, the clerk, under the direction of the court, shall place the names of all the traverse jurors summoned and in attendance in a box upon separate tickets, and the names, after being mixed, must be drawn from the box by the clerk, one at a time. The Supreme Judicial Court shall by rule provide the manner of exercising all challenges and the number and order of peremptory challenges.   [RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. D, §54 (COR).]
Whenever by reason of the prospective length of a criminal trial the court in its discretion considers it advisable, the court may direct that jurors in addition to the regular panel be called and impanelled to sit as alternate jurors. Those alternate jurors in the order in which they are called must replace jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties. The alternate jurors must be drawn in the same manner, must have the same qualifications, must be subject to the same examination and challenges, must take the same oath and must have the same functions, powers, facilities and privileges and be subject to the same obligations and penalties as jurors on the regular panel. An alternate juror who does not replace a juror on the regular panel must be discharged when the jury retires to consider its verdict. The Supreme Judicial Court shall by rule provide the number of alternate jurors, the manner of exercising all challenges to alternate jurors and the order and number of peremptory challenges to alternate jurors.   [RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. D, §54 (COR).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1965, c. 356, §47 (RPR). PL 1965, c. 482, §1 (AMD). RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. D, §54 (COR).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1969–2012 · leading case: State v. Crocker, 435 A.2d 58 (Me. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Crocker, 435 A.2d 58 (Me. 1981). · cites it 2× “The existence and exercise of peremptory challenges in Maine are controlled by 15 M.R.S.A. § 1258 (1980). In that section the legislature delegated to the Supreme Judicial Court the authority to prescribe by rule "the manner of exercising all challenges, and the number and order…”
State v. McLean, 2002 ME 171 (Me. 2002). · cites it 3× “The court may direct that not more than four jurors in addition to the regular panel be called and impaneled to sit as alternate jurors as provided by law. The manner and order of exercising peremptory challenges to alternate jurors shall be the same as provided for peremptory…”
State v. Lowry, 2003 ME 38 (Me. 2003). “4 15 M.R.S.A. §§ 1258, 1259 *335 (2003); M.”
State v. Lizotte, 249 A.2d 874 (Me. 1969). · cites it 2× “§ 1258, read in pertinent part as follows: “When a person charged with a criminal offense, * * * is put upon his trial, the clerk, under the direction of the court, shall place the names of all the traverse jurors summoned and in attendance in a box upon separate tickets, and…”
State v. Carr, 58 A.3d 1102 (Me. 2012). “1989); see 15 M.R.S. § 1258 (2011) (“Whenever by reason of the prospective length of a criminal trial the court in its discretion shall deem it advisable,” the trial court can impanel alternate jurors who can be called upon to replace jurors who, “prior to the time the jury…”
State v. Houston, 534 A.2d 1293 (Me. 1987). “See 15 M.R.S.A. § 1258 (1980). Defendant, however, failed to make a timely objection to the jury selection procedure used in the case at bar.”
State v. Larrivee, 563 A.2d 1104 (Me. 1989). “15 M.R.S.A. § 1258 (1980) (court may replace with alternates “jurors who, prior to the time the jury retires to consider its verdict, become unable or disqualified to perform their duties”).”
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.