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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2184 (2026)

Driving while license or registration suspended or revoked

✓ 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(REPEALED)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. 770, §159 (RPR). PL 1981, c. 468, §14 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 679, §§43,44 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 197, §1 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 791, §25 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 822, §2 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 866, §§B16,26 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 891, §§A10,11 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 293, §2 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 224, §11 (AMD). PL 1993, c. 658, §21 (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 49 cases, 1975–2018 · leading case: State v. Janisczak, 579 A.2d 736 (Me. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Janisczak, 579 A.2d 736 (Me. 1990). · cites it 4× “1989), and operating a vehicle after suspension, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (1978 & Supp.1989) after a separate trial unrelated to the present appeal.”
Roberts v. State of Maine, 48 F.3d 1287 (1st Cir. 1995). · cites it 2× “Officer Main smelled alcohol on Roberts’ breath and suspected Roberts was driving while intoxicated but initially arrested Roberts only for operating a vehicle with a suspended license in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184. Officer Main handcuffed Roberts and then transported him…”
Piacitelli v. Quinn, 449 A.2d 1126 (Me. 1982). · cites it 4× “While the suspensions were still in effect, Piacitelli committed the offense of operating a motor vehicle after suspension (29 M.R.S.A. § 2184) on three separate occasions.”
State v. Kovtuschenko, 521 A.2d 718 (Me. 1987). · cites it 3× “Undoubtedly the Legislature had this history in mind along with the administrative convenience of this system, and above all with its concern that presumptively dangerous operators must be removed from Maine’s highways, when it enacted 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184. We observe that the…”
State v. Brewer, 505 A.2d 774 (Me. 1985). “1984-1985), and operating a motor vehicle while his license to operate had been suspended, in violation of 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp. 1984-1985). We agree with the defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in drawing inferences adverse to the defendant from the…”
State of Maine v. Dmitri L. Cannady, 2018 ME 106 (Me. 2018). · cites it 2× “On appeal following his convictions, Lamarre asserted that the operating after suspension or revocation statute, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp. 1987), which was materially the same as the statute at issue in Kovtuschenko , 8 created an unconstitutional presumption that the licensee…”
State v. St. Hilaire, 543 A.2d 824 (Me. 1988). · cites it 2× “Hilaire was convicted on an uncounseled guilty plea for operating after suspension, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp.1987) (OAS). St.”
State v. DePhilippo, 628 A.2d 1057 (Me. 1993). “1992), and operating a motor vehicle after suspension of his license, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (1978 & Pamph.1992) (Penobscot County, Silsby, J).”
State v. Lamare, 463 A.2d 279 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “§ 393 (Class C) and one count of operating after suspension, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184. He appeals. We affirm both convictions.”
State v. Gilman, 489 A.2d 1100 (Me. 1985). “After a jury waived trial in the Superior Court, Somerset County, the defendant was convicted of operating after suspension, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp.1984). The primary issue presented to this Court on appeal is whether the trial court committed reversible error by denying the…”
State v. Rowell, 468 A.2d 1005 (Me. 1983). “29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp.1982-1983). Following an unsuccessful appeal to the Superior Court, he appeals to the Law Court, contending that he was improperly denied his right to a jury trial.”
Colson v. State, 498 A.2d 585 (Me. 1985). · cites it 2× “On or about December 28, 1981 Colson was convicted in District Court of operating a motor vehicle after suspension of his license, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (1978 & Supp. 1984). He was fined $350 and ordered to pay that amount in monthly installments on dates that Colson requested.”
Show all 49 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2184(1) — 4 cases
State v. Kovtuschenko, 521 A.2d 718 (Me. 1987). “Undoubtedly the Legislature had this history in mind along with the administrative convenience of this system, and above all with its concern that presumptively dangerous operators must be removed from Maine’s highways, when it enacted 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184. We observe that the…”
State v. Harris, 1999 ME 80 (Me. 1999).
State v. Comeau, 531 A.2d 290 (Me. 1987).
State v. Michaud, 515 A.2d 1155 (Me. 1986).
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 29, § 2184(1)(D) — 3 cases
State of Maine v. Dmitri L. Cannady, 2018 ME 106 (Me. 2018). “On appeal following his convictions, Lamarre asserted that the operating after suspension or revocation statute, 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184 (Supp. 1987), which was materially the same as the statute at issue in Kovtuschenko , 8 created an unconstitutional presumption that the licensee…”
State v. Kovtuschenko, 521 A.2d 718 (Me. 1987). “Undoubtedly the Legislature had this history in mind along with the administrative convenience of this system, and above all with its concern that presumptively dangerous operators must be removed from Maine’s highways, when it enacted 29 M.R.S.A. § 2184. We observe that the…”
State v. Maloney, 785 A.2d 699 (Me. 2001).
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.