Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 34
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 34, § 1552 (2026)

Powers and duties of the State Parole Board

✓ laws through the 2025 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1969, c. 319, §2 (RPR). PL 1971, c. 172, §4 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 756, §22 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 771, §387 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 455, §7 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 459, §5 (RP).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1967–1974 · leading case: Mottram v. State, 232 A.2d 809 (Me. 1967).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mottram v. State, 232 A.2d 809 (Me. 1967). · cites it 2× “We need not decide whether the Board in its adoption of operational procedures under 34 M.R.S.A. § 1552 (1) may provide for the sealing of its warrant of arrest.”
Gordon v. Mullaney, 317 A.2d 804 (Me. 1974). “” 34 M.R.S.A. § 1552(1) (B). In executing this mandate the legislature determined that a parolee alleged to have violated the conditions of his parole, or to have violated the law, was entitled to appear and be heard by the board.”
Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 34, § 1552(1): 2 cases
Mottram v. State, 232 A.2d 809 (Me. 1967). “We need not decide whether the Board in its adoption of operational procedures under 34 M.R.S.A. § 1552 (1) may provide for the sealing of its warrant of arrest.”
Gordon v. Mullaney, 317 A.2d 804 (Me. 1974). “” 34 M.R.S.A. § 1552(1) (B). In executing this mandate the legislature determined that a parolee alleged to have violated the conditions of his parole, or to have violated the law, was entitled to appear and be heard by the board.”
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.