Rule 27. Electronic Sound Recording and Transcription of Proceedings

(a) Proceedings Recorded. The procedure for recording in criminal cases is governed by Rule 76H of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure and Me. Admin. Order JB-12-1, Recording of Trial Court Proceedings.

(b) Expenses. Upon appropriate motion, the court shall direct that the State bear any expense for listening to recordings by, or preparation of a transcript for, indigent defendants who qualify for the assignment of counsel pursuant to Rule 44.

Committee Notes

Committee Advisory Note [December 2014] The Rule parallels the content of Rule 27 of the Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure but differs in the following respects. First, in subdivision (a), the words "in the District Court or the Superior Court" are omitted from the first sentence and the words "Unified Criminal Docket" replace the words "District Court or the Superior Court" in the second sentence. Second, in subdivision (b), a reference to "Recording of Trial Court Proceedings, Me. Admin. Order JB-12-1, as amended" is added. Third, in subdivision (c) the letter "s" in the word "state" is capitalized because the word is referring to the "State" as a party.

Advisory Note – April 2015 Rule 27 has been largely abrogated, except to serve as a signpost to direct the reader to apply the procedures contained in amended Rule 76H of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure, and Me. Admin. Order JB-12-1, Recording of Trial Court Proceedings. Further, the directive in the final sentence of former subdivision (a) regarding the filing of condensed transcripts is now found in new subdivision (f) of M.R.U. Crim. P. 49. See also Advisory Note – April 2015 t o M.R.U. Crim. P. 49(f).

[Advisory Notes to former Maine Rules of Criminal Procedure]

Advisory Committee Note—1976 [M.R. Crim. P. 27.] These amendments are to be effective February 2, 1976 to coincide with the effective date of the Maine Rules of Evidence. Their purpose is to bring the Rules of Criminal Procedure into conformity with the Rules of Evidence.

Advisory Committee Note—1983 [M.R. Crim. P. 27.] This rule is intended to standardize practice and facilitate appellate review. For example, if a court reporter does not take down a closing argument, it may disable a reviewing court from fully assessing a challenge to jury instructions. The rule builds upon the recording requirements of 4 M.R.S. § 651, which are taken—for criminal cases—as minimum, but not maximum, requirements.

Advisory Committee Note—1988 [M.R. Crim. P. 27.] The amendment conforms the rule to a recently enacted statute permitting electronic recording of certain Superior Court proceedings. P.L. 1987, ch. 152.

Advisory Committee Note—1989 [M.R. Crim. P. 27.] Rule 27(a) incorporates the language of former Rule 27. Rule 27(b) incorporates the language of former District Court Rule 39A.

Advisory Committee Note—1993 [M.R. Crim. P. 27.] Chapter 591 of the 1991 Public Laws enacted 4 M.R.S. § 651-A, which provides: § 651-A. Production of reviewable record The Supreme Judicial Court shall prescribe rules that ensure the production of a reviewable record of proceedings before all state courts within the Judicial Department. The Chief Justice of the Superior Court has recommended to the Committee that Rule 27 be amended to capitalize on the flexibility provided by Chapter 591 and has drafted the amendment submitted to the Court. The Committee is satisfied that the Chief Justice will use the flexibility supplied by the amendment to ensure that any recording system employed is reliable and accurate.

Advisory Note – 2009 M.R.Crim.P. 27(a). The amendment deletes the first sentence of the subdivision both to eliminate the current requirement that all jury proceedings in the Superior Court must be taken down by a court reporter and to eliminate, as unnecessary, the current references to specific portions of a jury proceeding that must be taken down. Jury proceedings, like all other proceedings in the Superior Court, may now either be electronically recorded or taken down by a court reporter. See also Advisory Note – 2009 to M.R.Crim.P. 6(d).

Advisory Note—July 2010 The amendment modifies Rule 27 in two respects. First, it collapses subdivisions (a) and (b) into a single subdivision to reflect the current practice that all proceedings in criminal cases in both the Superior Court and the District Court are recorded. Second, it clarifies in subdivision (c) [formerly subdivision (d)] that only those defendants entitled to assignment of counsel, pursuant to Rule 44, may have the state bear the expense for listening to a recording or preparing a transcript of a proceeding.

Advisory Committee Note – July 2012 This amendment to Rule 27 changes the name of the rule to indicate that it also governs transcripts and requires parties to file condensed transcripts in accordance with M.R. Civ. P. 5(i)(2).