State v. Ayotte

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed Cade H. Ayotte’s conviction for operating under the influence. The court held that Ayotte knowingly and voluntarily consented to the blood draw and that the prosecutor’s characterization of certain blood-alcohol testing methodologies as outdated did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct requiring a curative instruction.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not err in finding that Ayotte knowingly and voluntarily consented to the blood draw.
2. The prosecutor did not commit prosecutorial misconduct, and the trial court's general jury instructions were sufficient; the court did not abuse its discretion by declining to issue the requested additional curative instruction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Ayotte's consent to the hospital blood draw was knowing and voluntary under the Fourth Amendment.
2. Whether the prosecutor committed misconduct by characterizing sweat-pad and saliva-sampling techniques described in a scientific article as outdated, and whether the trial court erred by declining to give an additional curative instruction.

Disposition

affirmed