State of Maine v. Brandon J. Gibb

Summary

The court affirmed Gibb’s convictions, holding that the victim’s voice-identification testimony satisfied the foundational requirements for lay opinion and authentication because she had heard Gibb speak during the termination incident and at a protection-from-harassment hearing. The court also concluded that Gibb’s unpreserved challenges to the criminal-threatening conviction and jury instructions did not constitute obvious error. The case was remanded only to correct docket entries concerning the concurrent and consecutive nature of the sentences.