State v. Woodard
Annotate this CaseDefendant operated a returnable bottle redemption center. Defendant was convicted of theft by deception for turning over empty beverage containers that were not from beverages purchased in Maine and accepting deposit refunds and handling fees from Maine beverage distributors for those containers. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; (2) the trial court did not err in admitting evidence regarding bad acts committed outside the time alleged in the charging instrument; (3) a certain tactic employed by the prosecutor in the case amounted to prosecutorial error, but the error did not prejudice Defendant; and (5) the trial court did not err in failing to give requested jury instructions.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.