The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the conviction of Aaron Aldrich on two counts of intentional or knowing murder and one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person, rejecting multiple claims that trial errors deprived him of a fair trial.
The court issued its decision on February 5, 2026, in *State of Maine v. Aaron Aldrich* (2026 ME 8), following oral arguments held on September 10, 2025. Justice Lipez authored the opinion for a six-member panel that included Chief Justice Stanfill and Justices Mead, Connors, Lawrence, and Douglas.
Aldrich was convicted by a jury in Androscoggin County Superior Court on charges stemming from a double homicide. He was found guilty of two counts of intentional or knowing murder under 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(A) and one count of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person under 15 M.R.S. § 393(1)(A-1)(1). Judge Archer presided over the trial proceedings.
The defendant raised several arguments on appeal, challenging multiple aspects of his trial proceedings. Aldrich first contested the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress post-arrest statements he made to law enforcement. The defense argued that these statements should have been excluded from evidence, but the trial court rejected this motion and allowed the statements to be presented to the jury.
Aldrich's most comprehensive challenge centered on what he characterized as "a multitude of erroneous evidentiary rulings" that he claimed "infected his trial from start to finish." The defendant argued that even if individual evidentiary errors were not sufficient to warrant reversal, the cumulative effect of these alleged mistakes deprived him of a fair trial. This cumulative error doctrine allows appellate courts to reverse convictions when multiple trial errors, while individually harmless, collectively undermine confidence in the verdict.
Additionally, Aldrich challenged the trial court's jury instructions, contending that the court improperly instructed the jurors on the applicable law. Jury instruction errors can provide grounds for appeal when they mislead jurors about the legal standards they must apply in reaching their verdict.
The Maine Supreme Judicial Court conducted a thorough review of each of Aldrich's claims. The court examined the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, as is required in criminal appeals, to determine whether a rational jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
After analyzing all of Aldrich's arguments, the high court concluded that his claims "either lack merit or, in instances where we do find error, that the errors—even when viewed together—do not warrant reversal." This language suggests that while the court may have identified some trial errors, it determined that none were sufficiently prejudicial to require overturning the conviction.
The court's application of the cumulative error analysis indicates that even errors that did occur did not, in combination, rise to the level of denying Aldrich a fair trial. Courts typically apply this standard by weighing the severity of individual errors, their potential impact on the jury's decision-making, and the strength of the evidence supporting the conviction.
In addition to the criminal conviction appeal, Aldrich also challenged his sentencing in a separate proceeding before the Maine Sentence Review Panel. The trial court had imposed concurrent life sentences for the murder convictions, which Aldrich contested. The Supreme Judicial Court noted that this sentencing appeal was decided by the Sentence Review Panel on February 20, 2025, in case number SRP-24-540.
Regarding the sentencing challenge, the Supreme Judicial Court concluded that "the court did not misapply legal principles or otherwise err in imposing the sentences." This finding indicates that the trial court followed proper legal standards when determining that life sentences were appropriate for the double murder convictions.
The firearm possession charge Aldrich faced has since been reclassified under Maine law. The court noted that due to recent amendments to the statute, the version of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person that was charged in this case is now classified as a Class B crime rather than the Class C classification that applied at the time of Aldrich's offense. This reclassification became effective on August 9, 2024, through Public Law 2023, chapter 491.
The court's decision represents a comprehensive rejection of Aldrich's post-conviction challenges. By affirming both the conviction and the life sentences, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court concluded that the defendant received a fair trial and that his punishment was legally appropriate.
The case demonstrates the high standard defendants face when challenging criminal convictions on appeal, particularly when raising claims of cumulative trial error. Courts require appellants to demonstrate not only that errors occurred, but that those errors substantially affected the outcome of their trial.
With the appellate process complete, Aldrich's conviction on two counts of intentional murder and illegal firearm possession stands affirmed, along with his concurrent life sentences.