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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, § 701 (2026)

Criminal prosecutions by indictment; excepted cases

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No person shall be held to answer in any court for an alleged offense, unless on an indictment found by a grand jury, except for contempt of court and in the following cases:  
1.  Use of charging instrument other than an indictment.  When a prosecution utilizing a charging instrument other than an indictment is expressly authorized by rule of court; or  
[PL 1997, c. 4, §1 (RPR).]
2.  District Courts and courts martial.  In proceedings before the District Court, the District Court acting as a juvenile court and courts martial.  
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1971, c. 544, §49 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 663, §94 (AMD). PL 1997, c. 4, §1 (AMD).
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 (1 in the last 5 years), 1968–2021 · leading case: State v. Hathorne, 387 A.2d 9 (Me. 1978).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Hathorne, 387 A.2d 9 (Me. 1978). · cites it 2× “1977, Chapter 510, § 45. Although as to such Class D crime the Maine Constitution does not require that prosecution be upon the indictment of a grand jury, the Legislature has nevertheless prescribed in 15 M.”
Eaton v. State, 302 A.2d 588 (Me. 1973). · cites it 4× “On the date of the information here in issue, 15 M.R.S.A. § 701 provided: “No person shall be held to answer in any court for an alleged offense, unless on an indictment found by a grand jury, except for contempt of court and in the following cases: 1.”
Plourde v. Dirigo Counseling Clinic, LLC (Me. Super. Ct 2021). · cites it 2× “May 26, 2020); 15 M.R.S. §§ 701, 702, 708. Accordingly, the court concludes that counts 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 17, 23, 24 all fail to state a claim 4 upon which relief may be granted and therefore dismisses all those counts to the extent they are raised against the State of…”
Lemieux v. Robbins, 294 F. Supp. 1171 (D. Me. 1968). · cites it 2× “15 M.R.S.A. § 701 (1964); M.R.Crim.P. 7(a).”
State v. Lilja, 570 A.2d 315 (Me. 1990). · cites it 3× “Instead he relies on the statutory limitation contained in 15 M.R.S.A. § 701 (1980 & Supp.1989). 1 Lilja cites our discussion in State v.”
Barth v. Town of Waterboro (Me. Super. Ct 2020). “See 15 M.R.S. §§ 701, 708. Barth has not identified any authority conferring a private right of action for the alleged violations of the sections of Title 30-A to which he cites.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 15, § 701(1) — 2 cases
Eaton v. State, 302 A.2d 588 (Me. 1973). “On the date of the information here in issue, 15 M.R.S.A. § 701 provided: “No person shall be held to answer in any court for an alleged offense, unless on an indictment found by a grand jury, except for contempt of court and in the following cases: 1.”
State v. Lilja, 570 A.2d 315 (Me. 1990). “Instead he relies on the statutory limitation contained in 15 M.R.S.A. § 701 (1980 & Supp.1989). 1 Lilja cites our discussion in State v.”
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.