Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 12 (2026)

De minimis infractions

✓ current as of May 2026

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

1. The court may dismiss a prosecution if, upon notice to or motion of the prosecutor and opportunity to be heard, having regard to the nature of the conduct alleged and the nature of the attendant circumstances, it finds the defendant's conduct:

A. Was within a customary license or tolerance, which was not expressly refused by the person whose interest was infringed and which is not inconsistent with the purpose of the law defining the crime; or [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

B. Did not actually cause or threaten the harm sought to be prevented by the law defining the crime or did so only to an extent too trivial to warrant the condemnation of conviction; or [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

C. Presents such other extenuations that it cannot reasonably be regarded as envisaged by the Legislature in defining the crime. [PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

[PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

2. The court shall not dismiss a prosecution under this section without filing a written statement of its reasons.

[PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 16 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: State of Maine v. Jacob R. Labbe Sr., 2024 ME 15 (Me. 2024).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State of Maine v. Jacob R. Labbe Sr., 2024 ME 15 (Me. 2024). · cites it 2× “Title 17-A M.R.S. § 12(1) (2023) does not prescribe either the time or the procedure for requesting a de minimis dismissal.”

State v. Kargar, 679 A.2d 81 (Me. 1996). · cites it 3× “1 Kargar contends on appeal that the court erred in denying his motion to dismiss pursuant to the de minimis statute, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12 (1983). We agree and vacate the judgments.”

City of Rockland v. Doud, 721 A.2d 981 (Me. 1998). · cites it 5× “The City of Rockland contends that the District Court erred as a matter of law when it invoked 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12 (1983) to dismiss the civil violation.”

Leigh v. Superintendent, Augusta Mental Health Inst., 2003 ME 22 (Me. 2003). “The motion also requested that the complaint be dismissed because the conduct alleged was a “de minimis infraction within the meaning of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1)(B) or (C).” In the alternative, the motion requested that Leigh’s plea be amended to "not guilty and not criminally…”

State v. Patterson, 2004 ME 79 (Me. 2004). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 12 (1983). The court’s disposition, while finding the offense "minimal in nature,” suggests it viewed the offense as more serious than de minimis, and therefore, not appropriate for dismissal.”

State v. Pleasant Hill Health Facility, Inc., 496 A.2d 306 (Me. 1985). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1) (1983). On the facts of this case, we find no merit in this contention.”

State v. Curtis, 828 A.2d 795 (Me. 2003). “[¶ 4] Further, because Curtis’s OUI was not a de minimis infraction under the statute, see 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1) (1983), the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to dismiss on de minimis grounds when Curtis intentionally consumed the drugs despite having been warned…”

State of Maine v. Moody (Me. Super. Ct 2018). · cites it 2× “In addition, were the court to find that Defendant committed a technical violation, "de minimis infractions" pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. §12 would likely apply. 17-A M.”

State v. Fasulo (Me. Super. Ct 2009). · cites it 3× “She has no criminal record. She is mature, responsible, and trustworthy.”

David Wayne Gober v. The State of Wyoming, 2025 WY 96 (Wyo. 2025). · cites it 2× “§ 702-236 ; Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 17-A, § 12; N.J.”

State of Maine v. Boyd (Me. Super. Ct 2016). “FACTS Hearing was held on November 30, 2016. Sworn testimony was received from Josh Caldwell, MDEA Agent Seeley and Fran Capell.”

State of Maine v. Peacock (Me. Super. Ct 2018). “17-A M.R.S.A § 12. The parties have agreed that the court may refer to the police reports.”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 12(1) — 3 cases

State of Maine v. Jacob R. Labbe Sr., 2024 ME 15 (Me. 2024). “Title 17-A M.R.S. § 12(1) (2023) does not prescribe either the time or the procedure for requesting a de minimis dismissal.”

State v. Pleasant Hill Health Facility, Inc., 496 A.2d 306 (Me. 1985). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1) (1983). On the facts of this case, we find no merit in this contention.”

State v. Curtis, 828 A.2d 795 (Me. 2003). “[¶ 4] Further, because Curtis’s OUI was not a de minimis infraction under the statute, see 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1) (1983), the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to dismiss on de minimis grounds when Curtis intentionally consumed the drugs despite having been warned…”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 12(1)(B) — 1 case

Leigh v. Superintendent, Augusta Mental Health Inst., 2003 ME 22 (Me. 2003). “The motion also requested that the complaint be dismissed because the conduct alleged was a “de minimis infraction within the meaning of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12(1)(B) or (C).” In the alternative, the motion requested that Leigh’s plea be amended to "not guilty and not criminally…”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 12(1)(C) — 1 case

State v. Kargar, 679 A.2d 81 (Me. 1996). “1 Kargar contends on appeal that the court erred in denying his motion to dismiss pursuant to the de minimis statute, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 12 (1983). We agree and vacate the judgments.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 12(l)(B) — 1 case

State v. Fasulo (Me. Super. Ct 2009). “She has no criminal record. She is mature, responsible, and trustworthy.”

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.