Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 17-A
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 1205 (2026)

Commencement of probation revocation proceedings by arrest

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). PL 1975, c. 740, §§111,112 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 510, §71 (RPR). PL 1979, c. 701, §28 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 315, §1 (AMD). PL 1995, c. 502, §F13 (AMD). PL 1997, c. 273, §1 (AMD). PL 1999, c. 246, §1 (AMD). PL 2005, c. 661, §§1,2 (AMD). PL 2005, c. 661, §9 (AFF). PL 2019, c. 113, Pt. A, §1 (RP).
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 9 cases, 1976–2011 · leading case: Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976). · cites it 2× “17-A MRSA § 1205, sub-§ 1, as enacted by PL 1975, c.”
McInnis v. Maine, 638 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2011). “McInnis also claims that he was kept in jail for two days after the error was known, but there is no dispute about the magistrate judge's notation that the complaint makes no such claim.”
State v. Brydon, 454 A.2d 1385 (Me. 1983). “On December 18,1981, the probation officer who had Brydon under supervision initiated probation revocation proceedings against him pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205, alleging the defendant’s failure to report to his probation officer as required under the terms of his probation…”
State v. Sommer, 388 A.2d 110 (Me. 1978). “Probable cause that the violations had occurred was found following the preliminary hearing required by 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205. The hearing was had before a supervisor in the Department of Probation and Parole.”
McInnis v. Maine, 638 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2011). “Mclnnis also claims that he was kept in jail for two days after the error was known, but there is no dispute about the magistrate judge’s notation that the complaint makes no such claim.”
State v. Kniffin, 604 A.2d 900 (Me. 1992). “See 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205 (1983 & Supp.1991). A revocation hearing was held and Kniffin was found to be in violation of the terms of his probationary sentence for criminal threatening by virtue of his subsequent criminal conduct.”
State v. Chamberland, 499 A.2d 143 (Me. 1985). · cites it 2× “At that time Chamberland was denied bail on the probation proceeding pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(5). 1 On January 9, 1985 Chamberland appeared in District Court on the possession of a firearm charge.”
State v. Morrison, 473 A.2d 869 (Me. 1984). “He argues that the probation officer who reported his probation violation failed to exercise due diligence in attempting to locate him before filing a written notice with the court pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(1). The “due diligence” requirement found in the statute relates…”
State v. Edwards, 493 A.2d 1051 (Me. 1985). “1984) and 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(1) (1983) he was never properly under the supervision of the probation officer arresting him, (2) that under 34-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 1205(1) — 4 cases
McInnis v. Maine, 638 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2011). “McInnis also claims that he was kept in jail for two days after the error was known, but there is no dispute about the magistrate judge's notation that the complaint makes no such claim.”
McInnis v. Maine, 638 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2011). “Mclnnis also claims that he was kept in jail for two days after the error was known, but there is no dispute about the magistrate judge’s notation that the complaint makes no such claim.”
State v. Morrison, 473 A.2d 869 (Me. 1984). “He argues that the probation officer who reported his probation violation failed to exercise due diligence in attempting to locate him before filing a written notice with the court pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(1). The “due diligence” requirement found in the statute relates…”
State v. Edwards, 493 A.2d 1051 (Me. 1985). “1984) and 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(1) (1983) he was never properly under the supervision of the probation officer arresting him, (2) that under 34-A M.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 1205(5) — 1 case
State v. Chamberland, 499 A.2d 143 (Me. 1985). “At that time Chamberland was denied bail on the probation proceeding pursuant to 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1205(5). 1 On January 9, 1985 Chamberland appeared in District Court on the possession of a firearm charge.”
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.