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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 13 (2026)

Other offenses

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  The existence of a crime other than the one charged, but based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal episode, for which a person may be prosecuted, whether that crime is a lesser or greater crime as to elements or sentencing classification, shall not preclude prosecution for the offense charged unless a contrary legislative intent plainly appears.  
[PL 1975, c. 740, §20 (NEW).]
2. 
[PL 1979, c. 512, §20 (RP).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1975, c. 499, §1 (NEW). PL 1975, c. 740, §20 (RPR). PL 1979, c. 512, §20 (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 20 cases, 1976–2010 · leading case: State v. Lagasse, 410 A.2d 537 (Me. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Lagasse, 410 A.2d 537 (Me. 1980). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2) (Supp.1978), which was applicable to this case, 6 defined the duty of the presiding Justice to instruct the jury upon so-called lesser offenses: The court is not required to instruct the jury concerning a lesser offense, unless on the basis of the evidence…”
State v. Jones, 405 A.2d 149 (Me. 1979). · cites it 2× “” 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(1). 6 Appellant asserts that the legislature plainly intended to confine section 211 “to that conduct which does not fall within the ambit of Sections 1311 and 1314 .”
State v. Anderson, 409 A.2d 1290 (Me. 1979). “§ 13, which reads: “The existence of a crime other than the one charged, but based on the same conduct or arising from the same criminal episode, for which a person may be prosecuted, whether that crime is a lesser or greater crime as to elements or sentencing classification,…”
State v. Goodall, 407 A.2d 268 (Me. 1979). “A person acts recklessly with respect to a result of his conduct when he consciously disregards a risk that his conduct will cause such a result. B. A person acts recklessly with respect to attendant circumstances when he consciously disregards a risk that such circumstances…”
State v. Howard, 405 A.2d 206 (Me. 1979). “” 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2). 6 The evidence introduced at trial tended to show that the defendant fired *213 two shots at Mary Ann, the first from close range and the other from almost pointblank range.”
State v. Pickering, 462 A.2d 1151 (Me. 1983). “at 152 (citing 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(1)). In State v. Anderson, 409 A.”
State v. Raymond, 1999 ME 126 (Me. 1999). · cites it 2× “See 17-A M.R.S.A. §§ 13, 405. The decision to prosecute an accused for one or both crimes lies within the discretion of the prosecutor.”
State v. Bennett, 416 A.2d 720 (Me. 1980). · cites it 2× “Under the provisions of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2) (Supp.1978), 6 the court was not required to give that instruction unless the evidence provided a rational basis for a finding of guilt on the lesser included offense.”
State v. Viger, 392 A.2d 1080 (Me. 1978). “The code did not attempt to designate what is an included offense, see 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13, comment, but Section 351 recognizes the substantial overlap of theft offenses.”
State v. Allard, 557 A.2d 960 (Me. 1989). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 13 — A(2) (B)(1983). See also State v.”
State v. DiPietro, 420 A.2d 1233 (Me. 1980). “See 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13 (Supp.1980). In section 454(1)(B) there appears no plain legislative intent to the contrary.”
State v. Snow, 383 A.2d 1385 (Me. 1978). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2); cf. State v. Rice, Me.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 13(1) — 4 cases
State v. Jones, 405 A.2d 149 (Me. 1979). “” 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(1). 6 Appellant asserts that the legislature plainly intended to confine section 211 “to that conduct which does not fall within the ambit of Sections 1311 and 1314 .”
State v. Pickering, 462 A.2d 1151 (Me. 1983). “at 152 (citing 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(1)). In State v. Anderson, 409 A.”
State v. Moores, 396 A.2d 1010 (Me. 1979).
State v. Raymond, 1999 ME 126 (Me. 1999). “See 17-A M.R.S.A. §§ 13, 405. The decision to prosecute an accused for one or both crimes lies within the discretion of the prosecutor.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 17-A, § 13(2) — 8 cases
State v. Lagasse, 410 A.2d 537 (Me. 1980). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2) (Supp.1978), which was applicable to this case, 6 defined the duty of the presiding Justice to instruct the jury upon so-called lesser offenses: The court is not required to instruct the jury concerning a lesser offense, unless on the basis of the evidence…”
State v. Goodall, 407 A.2d 268 (Me. 1979). “A person acts recklessly with respect to a result of his conduct when he consciously disregards a risk that his conduct will cause such a result. B. A person acts recklessly with respect to attendant circumstances when he consciously disregards a risk that such circumstances…”
State v. Howard, 405 A.2d 206 (Me. 1979). “” 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2). 6 The evidence introduced at trial tended to show that the defendant fired *213 two shots at Mary Ann, the first from close range and the other from almost pointblank range.”
State v. Bennett, 416 A.2d 720 (Me. 1980). “Under the provisions of 17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2) (Supp.1978), 6 the court was not required to give that instruction unless the evidence provided a rational basis for a finding of guilt on the lesser included offense.”
State v. Snow, 383 A.2d 1385 (Me. 1978). “17-A M.R.S.A. § 13(2); cf. State v. Rice, Me.”
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.