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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, § 1702 (2026)

No punishment until conviction; costs

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  No punishment before conviction.  A person may not be punished for an offense until convicted of that offense in a court having jurisdiction over the person and case.  
[PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (NEW).]
2.  Costs included in sentence.  If a person is convicted and the court imposes a fine, the court:  
A. May sentence the defendant to pay the costs of prosecution;   [PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (NEW).]
B. May sentence the defendant to pay, as restitution, the costs of drug tests, other than tests under Title 29‑A, administered to the defendant by a law enforcement officer or medical personnel at the request of a law enforcement officer. The court shall transfer all amounts paid by a defendant under this paragraph to the municipal, county or state agency that incurred the costs; and   [PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (NEW).]
C. Shall, if the case is prosecuted in District Court, sentence the defendant to pay a fine sufficient to cover the costs as provided in Title 4, section 173. This paragraph does not apply to defendants prosecuted for violations of Title 26, chapter 7, subchapter 1‑B or for violations of Title 28‑A, sections 2078 and 2223.   [PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (NEW).]
[PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (NEW).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1965, c. 356, §55 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 499, §3 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 45, §B2 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 737, §§C29,C106 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 6 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 9, §2 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 104, §§C8,C10 (AMD). PL 2003, c. 182, §1 (RPR).
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 6 cases, 1965–1988 · leading case: State v. Williams, 395 A.2d 1158 (Me. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Williams, 395 A.2d 1158 (Me. 1978). “2d 524, 526 (1971), constrained only by the provisions of 15 M.R.S.A. § 1702, Having expressly stated that the sentences would be served consecutively, the presiding justice fulfilled his obligation under that statute.”
State v. Jacques, 537 A.2d 587 (Me. 1988). · cites it 2× “Title 15 M.R.S.A. § 1702 (1980 & Supp.1987) provides that “No person shall be punished for an offense until convicted thereof in a court having jurisdiction of the person and case.”
Collins v. State, 213 A.2d 835 (Me. 1965). · cites it 2× “A sentence imposed without qualifying statement and executed while on parole is served concurrently with the subsisting sentence (15 M.R.S.A. § 1702) except in cases specifically covered by statute such as those involving parolees from the Men’s Reformatory and from the State…”
Higgins v. Robbins, 265 A.2d 90 (Me. 1970). “This single Justice holds that where the parole violation warrant is not executed, even though it could not be executed by reason of primary custody being in non-parole authority, and sentence is imposed on the new offense without compliance with 15 M.R.S.A. Section 1702 or Rule…”
Lizotte v. State, 279 A.2d 524 (Me. 1971). · cites it 2× “He now contends that because of the order in which the sentences are being served, the condition in the sentence of July 31, 1968, that it was to be “non-concurrent with any other sentence,” was ineffective and the two sentences must be considered to run concurrently.”
Kuhn v. State, 254 A.2d 591 (Me. 1969). “15 M.R.S.A. § 1702; M.R.Crim. P.Rule 32(a).”
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.