State v. Crossman
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
790 A.2d 603 (2002)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
David Carpenter saw a black pickup truck parked in the driveway of a vacated, foreclosed home. Merle Crossman (defendant) and a woman told Carpenter that they were considering purchasing the house. When Carpenter walked over to the house a short time later, he noticed that some of the home’s doors were missing, including the front door and some sliding glass doors. The doors were underneath a blanket on the driveway. Carpenter later returned to the house a third time and saw the pickup truck drive away from the vacant house. Carpenter got into his own vehicle and pursued the black pickup truck. Carpenter saw the doors from the driveway inside the bed of the pickup truck. Carpenter recognized the driver of the truck as Crossman. The police entered the vacant home and found it to be ransacked. Several doors were missing. The State of Maine (plaintiff) charged Crossman with burglary of a dwelling and theft. At trial, Carpenter testified that he saw Crossman in possession of the missing doors. Crossman testified that he was experienced in removing doors and that doing so requires effort from both sides of the door. A jury convicted Crossman, and he appealed, arguing there was insufficient evidence that he entered the vacant house because no one saw him do so.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Alexander, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
