Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 105 (2026)

Use of force in property offenses

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person is justified in using a reasonable degree of nondeadly force upon another person when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes it necessary to prevent what is or reasonably appears to be an unlawful taking of the person's property, or criminal mischief, or to retake the person's property immediately following its taking; but the person may use deadly force only under such circumstances as are prescribed in sections 104, 107 and 108. [PL 2007, c. 173, §21 (AMD).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). PL 1975, c. 740, §27 (AMD). PL 2007, c. 173, §21 (AMD).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases, 1981–2020 · leading case: State v. Williams, 433 A.2d 765 (Me. 1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Williams, 433 A.2d 765 (Me. 1981). · cites it 6× “His appeal from the judgment entered pursuant thereto presents, for the first time since Maine’s adoption of the Criminal Code, an issue concerning the threatened use of deadly force in the context of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 105 justification. We conclude, on the record before us, that…”

State v. Thurston, 2009 ME 41 (Me. 2009). · cites it 6× “[¶ 16] The dissent also asserts that Thurston's taking and smashing of Harmon's cellular phone constituted both criminal mischief and theft and that, therefore, Harmon's threatened use of force was lawful pursuant to 17-A M.R.S. § 105 (2008). Section 105 states, "A person is…”

State v. Patterson, 2004 ME 79 (Me. 2004). · cites it 5× “Patterson contends that the District Court erred when it rejected his 17-A M.R.S.A. § 105 (1983) defense of property defense, which he asserts was applicable in the circumstances of this case.”

State v. Patterson, 2005 ME 55 (Me. 2005). · cites it 4× “In a prior appeal we vacated Patterson’s conviction and remanded the case for the trial court to clarify its findings of fact and conclusions of law regarding Patterson’s defense of property defense pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 105 (1983). See State v. Patterson, 2004 ME 79 , 851…”

State v. Villacci, 187 A.3d 576 (Me. 2018). “§ 104 (2017) ; (3) defense of property, see 17-A M.R.S. § 105 (2017) ; and (4) consent, see 17-A M.”

State of Maine v. Wesley M. Villacci, 2018 ME 80 (Me. 2018). “§ 104 (2017); (3) defense of property, see 17-A M.R.S. § 105 (2017); and (4) consent, see 17-A M.”

State v. Glassman, 2001 ME 91 (Me. 2001). “The issue was whether the defendant’s conduct was deadly force under section 2(8), or whether the defense of justified use of nondeadly force in preventing an unlawful taking of property was generated pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 105 (Supp.1979). Williams, 433 A.”

State v. Knox, 2003 ME 39 (Me. 2003). “2002), and defense of property, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 105 (1983). [¶ 4] While giving the jury its instructions, the judge came off the bench and used an easel to assist in the explanation of the charges of assault and aggravated assault.”

State v. Winchenbach, 658 A.2d 1083 (Me. 1995). “Defendant attempts to portray the victim as twice provoking him into arguments, first, when she pulled a telephone cord out of the wall inside the trailer, and second, when she walked up to him when he was allegedly breaking her car window.”

State v. Foster, 566 A.2d 1084 (Me. 1989). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 105. Foster presents three arguments based upon the section 105 defense.”

State v. Forbes, 2003 ME 106 (Me. 2003). “See 17-A M.R.S.A. §§ 105, 106, 107, 108 (1983 & Supp.”

State v. Laferriere, 945 A.2d 1235 (Me. 2008). “See 17-A M.R.S. §§ 105, 108(1) (2007). We agree, vacate the conviction, and remand for a new trial.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

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.