The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the conviction of Chuck D. Schooley for gross sexual assault of a child and violating conditions of release, rejecting his appeal that challenged jury instructions and prosecutorial conduct during the trial.
Schooley was convicted of Class A gross sexual assault under 17-A M.R.S. § 253(1)(C) and Class E violation of conditions of release under 15 M.R.S. § 1092(1)(A). The convictions followed a jury trial on the sexual assault charge and a bench trial on the violation charge in Lincoln County Superior Court before Judge Billings.
On appeal, Schooley argued that the trial court committed two errors that warranted reversal. First, he claimed the court failed to provide a jury instruction on specific unanimity sua sponte. Second, he argued the court should have intervened during closing arguments when the prosecutor allegedly invoked the jury's sympathy and vouched for the credibility of the child victim.
Because Schooley did not preserve these issues at trial by objecting, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court reviewed them under the obvious error standard. Under this standard, the court examines whether there was an obvious error that seriously affected the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings. The seven-justice panel, led by Justice Horton and including Chief Justice Stanfill, unanimously affirmed the conviction.
According to court records, the case involved allegations spanning from 2019 to 2022. During this period, the victim lived in Wiscasset with her mother, twin younger brothers, and Schooley, who was her mother's spouse. The evidence presented at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the state, showed that starting when the victim was eight years old and continuing until she was nearly twelve, Schooley repeatedly forced her to undress in his bedroom and touched her vagina with his penis.
The court noted that Schooley would use threats and punishment to ensure the victim's compliance. He would hit her or her brothers or take away her phone if she did not cooperate with his demands. This pattern of abuse created an environment of fear and control that enabled the ongoing sexual assault.
The specific unanimity instruction that Schooley claimed should have been given relates to situations where multiple criminal acts are alleged and the jury must agree on which specific act constitutes the charged offense. This instruction ensures that all jurors agree on the same underlying conduct when rendering a verdict. However, the appeals court found no obvious error in the trial court's failure to provide this instruction without being asked.
Regarding the prosecutorial conduct during closing arguments, Schooley argued the prosecutor improperly vouched for the victim's credibility and appealed to the jury's emotions. Vouching occurs when a prosecutor expresses personal opinions about witness credibility or uses the prestige of the government to bolster witness testimony. Appeals to sympathy can prejudice a jury by encouraging decisions based on emotion rather than evidence.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court's decision follows established precedent for reviewing unpreserved claims of error. The obvious error standard is deliberately high, requiring not just error but error so clear and prejudicial that it undermines confidence in the judicial process. By applying this standard, the court balanced the need to ensure fair trials against the procedural requirement that parties preserve issues for appeal by timely objection.
The case reflects ongoing challenges in prosecuting child sexual abuse cases, where the testimony of young victims is often the primary evidence. Courts must balance protecting child witnesses from traumatic cross-examination while ensuring defendants receive fair trials with proper jury instructions and appropriate prosecutorial conduct.
Schooley's convictions carry significant penalties. Gross sexual assault as a Class A crime can result in up to 30 years in prison under Maine law. The Class E violation of conditions of release can add up to six months in jail. The exact sentence imposed was not detailed in the appellate opinion.
The case was argued before the Maine Supreme Judicial Court on June 4, 2025, and decided on Aug. 26, 2025. The decision was designated as 2025 ME 84 and assigned docket number Lin-24-234, reflecting its origin in Lincoln County.
The affirmance means Schooley's convictions stand and he has exhausted his direct appeal rights in state court. The decision also provides guidance for future cases involving similar claims about jury instructions and prosecutorial conduct in child sexual abuse prosecutions.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court's unanimous decision demonstrates the high bar for overturning criminal convictions on unpreserved claims of error, particularly in cases involving serious crimes against children where the evidence supports the verdict.