State of Maine v. Neil D. Salisbury

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed Neil D. Salisbury’s convictions for operating after suspension, operating without a license, and operating an unregistered vehicle. The court rejected his challenges to personal and subject matter jurisdiction and found no merit in his additional claims concerning a subpoena, judicial appointment, opening argument, jury instructions, a trespass claim, and the right to travel.

Holdings

1. The trial court had both personal jurisdiction over Salisbury and subject matter jurisdiction over the criminal prosecution.
2. Issues raised without legal argument supported by proper authority are forfeited on appeal.
3. The trial court did not err or abuse its discretion in quashing Salisbury's subpoena because the assistant district attorney had no relevant evidence to provide.
4. The trial judge was properly appointed.
5. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by reasonably limiting the duration of Salisbury's opening argument.
6. The trial court properly denied Salisbury's requested jury instructions and fully instructed the jury on the applicable law.
7. The trial court had no basis to hear a trespass claim in the criminal trial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court had personal and subject matter jurisdiction over Salisbury's criminal prosecution.
2. Whether the trial court erred or abused its discretion by quashing Salisbury's subpoena of the assistant district attorney.
3. Whether the trial judge was properly appointed.
4. Whether the trial court improperly limited the duration of Salisbury's opening argument.
5. Whether the trial court improperly denied Salisbury's requested jury instructions.
6. Whether the trial court was required to hear a trespass claim in the criminal proceeding.
7. Whether Salisbury's asserted right to interstate travel deprived the State of authority to enforce the motor-vehicle laws.

Disposition

affirmed