Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 29
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 1314 (2026)

Driving to endanger

✓ 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(REPEALED)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 1971, c. 449, §3 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 731, §52 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 468, §13 (RPR). PL 1981, c. 679, §§41,42 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 683, §A1 (RP). PL 1993, c. 683, §B5 (AFF).
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 10 cases, 1972–1995 · leading case: State v. Davis, 398 A.2d 1218 (Me. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Davis, 398 A.2d 1218 (Me. 1979). · cites it 6× “Davis guilty of having committed, on January 27, 1978, the offense of “driving to endanger”, in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314. In his appeal from the judgment of conviction defendant makes two contentions: (1) the conviction is a nullity because the statute establishing the…”
State v. Pickering, 462 A.2d 1151 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 1311) or driving to endanger (29 M.R.S.A. § 1314). The Court, citing Batchelder , noted that in the absence of allegations that the decision to prosecute was based upon an arbitrary classification, "[w]here the same criminal conduct or episode gives rise to more than one…”
State v. Tempesta, 617 A.2d 566 (Me. 1992). · cites it 3× “) convicting him of driving to endanger in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314 (Pamph.1991) for splashing snow slush onto a police cruiser and two other vehicles.”
Opinion of the Justices of the Supreme Jud. Court, 355 A.2d 341 (Me. 1976). “29 MRSA § 1314, as amended by PL 1971, c.”
State v. Leeman, 291 A.2d 709 (Me. 1972). “One of these statutes, 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314, reads: “No person shall drive any vehicle upon a way in such a manner as to endanger any person or property.”
State v. House, 481 A.2d 1129 (Me. 1984). “1983-1984); and, one count of driving to endanger, 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314 (Supp. 1983-1984). On appeal defendant argues that the court erred in the following respects: by failing to dismiss all charges because of the state’s failure to preserve evidence; by denying pretrial motions…”
State v. Bourque, 415 A.2d 1095 (Me. 1980). “29 M.R.S.A. § 1314. The sole issue raised by the defendant on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence.”
State v. Thompson, 514 A.2d 1208 (Me. 1986). “From a conviction of driving to endanger, 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314 (Supp.1985), in a jury trial in Superior Court (Lincoln County) the Defendant, Paul Thompson, brings his appeal here, challenging only the sufficiency of the evidence of the incident that occurred September 1, 1984, on…”
State v. Hezik, 539 A.2d 207 (Me. 1988). “§§ 209, 1252(4) (1983), and driving to endanger (Class E), 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314 (Supp.1987). On his appeal he fails to persuade us that any error occurred in the trial leading to his convictions.”
State v. Currier, 662 A.2d 204 (Me. 1995). “1979) (incorporating into 29 M.R.S.A. § 1314 the culpable mental state required by the criminal code).”
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.