Over more than four decades in law, politics, and public life, Jim Howaniec has been featured in local, national, and international news coverage.
This page brings together selected newspaper articles, television interviews, legal commentary, and media appearances documenting his work as a criminal defense attorney, former mayor of Lewiston, Maine, and advocate for constitutional rights and the criminal justice system.
The collection includes coverage of major criminal trials, public defense issues, political campaigns, civic affairs, and other subjects reflecting his professional and personal interests.
Additional articles, interviews, and archival materials will be added regularly.
The Gage Dalphonse Murder Trial — A Landmark Acquittal
Sun Journal | September 22, 2021
Jury Acquits Gage Dalphonse of Murder in Fatal Shooting at Auburn Walmart
Of the many criminal trials I have handled over more than four decades of practicing law, the defense of Gage Dalphonse stands as perhaps the most significant victory of my career.
Dalphonse, a young Auburn man, was charged with murder following the July 2019 fatal shooting of Jean Fournier in the parking lot of the Auburn Walmart. The prosecution maintained that Dalphonse had deliberately shot Fournier as he fled. Our defense was that Dalphonse, who had been physically assaulted while sitting in his vehicle, acted in self-defense during a sudden, violent confrontation.
The case presented difficult questions involving Maine’s law of self-defense, the use of deadly force, witness testimony, and the interpretation of physical and ballistic evidence. At trial, we challenged the prosecution’s reconstruction of the shooting and argued that the evidence supported our client’s account of a rapidly unfolding confrontation.
On September 22, 2021, following a weeklong trial, the jury deliberated for just over three hours before finding Dalphonse not guilty of both murder and manslaughter. After spending more than two years in custody awaiting trial, he was released and reunited with his family.
The death of Jean Fournier was a tragedy, and the verdict could not diminish the loss suffered by his family. But the case illustrated why the presumption of innocence, the right to present a defense, and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt remain indispensable safeguards in our criminal justice system.
For me, the Dalphonse verdict remains one of the defining moments of my professional life.
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage of the acquittal
The Eric Griffey Trial — Acquittal on Attempted Murder
Sun Journal | March 2, 2017
Griffey Acquitted of Attempted Murder; Guilty on Other Counts in Stabbing Attack
The 2017 trial of Eric Griffey in Androscoggin County Superior Court presented one of the most difficult challenges in criminal defense: defending a client accused of an exceptionally violent assault while requiring the prosecution to prove every element of its most serious charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
Griffey was charged with attempted murder following a brutal attack on his then-fiancée, Kellie Cardona. The evidence included serious injuries, eyewitness testimony, and allegations of repeated threats. The prosecution sought a conviction for attempted murder, a charge carrying a potential sentence of 30 years in prison.
Our defense did not attempt to minimize the seriousness of the assault. Instead, we focused on the critical legal distinction between committing a violent assault and possessing the specific intent to kill.
The trial featured competing forensic psychological testimony concerning Griffey’s mental state, including questions about abnormal conditions of mind, alcohol, medication, and his capacity to form the required criminal intent.
In closing argument, I acknowledged the evidence supporting the lesser charges while challenging the prosecution’s contention that Griffey had intended to commit murder.
On March 2, 2017, following less than two hours of deliberation, the jury acquitted Griffey of attempted murder, although it convicted him of aggravated assault and two domestic violence offenses.
The verdict demonstrated an essential principle of criminal law: even when the underlying conduct is deeply disturbing, a jury must separately determine whether the prosecution has proven the specific elements of each charged offense.
The Griffey case remains an important example of the role of careful legal analysis, forensic psychology, and focused jury advocacy in the defense of serious criminal charges.
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage of the Eric Griffey verdict
The Willie Minor Trial — Acquittal on All Six Charges
Sun Journal | February 20, 2019
Auburn Man Acquitted on Rape, Sex Trafficking and Assault Charges
The 2019 trial of Willie Minor in Androscoggin County Superior Court was another significant victory in my criminal defense career, illustrating the importance of challenging serious criminal allegations through careful examination of witness testimony, physical evidence, and competing accounts of events.
Minor, a 58-year-old Auburn man, faced six criminal charges, including gross sexual assault, aggravated sex trafficking, aggravated assault, and domestic violence assault. The most serious charge carried a potential sentence of 30 years in prison.
The prosecution’s case centered on allegations by a woman who claimed that Minor had sexually assaulted her, forced her into prostitution, and subjected her to repeated physical abuse. Prosecutors introduced photographs of injuries and other physical evidence in support of those allegations.
Our defense presented a substantially different account of the relationship. Minor testified on his own behalf, disputing the accusations and describing a troubled relationship marked by drug addiction, financial conflict, and mutual accusations of violence.
At trial, I challenged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s account and argued that the testimony and physical evidence supported the defense’s version of events.
Following a four-day trial and more than three hours of deliberation, the jury returned not guilty verdicts on all six counts, including all four felony charges.
The verdict brought to an end a nearly three-year ordeal for Minor and demonstrated the importance of requiring the government to prove criminal accusations beyond a reasonable doubt, regardless of how serious or disturbing those accusations may be.
For me, the Minor case remains a memorable example of the essential role of cross-examination, credibility assessment, and independent jury judgment in our criminal justice system.
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage of the Willie Minor acquittal
The Abdi Hassan Welfare Fraud Case — 14 of 15 Charges Dismissed
Maine Public | May 16, 2017
Judge Tosses All But One Charge Against Defendant in Welfare Fraud Case
The 2017 prosecution of Abdi Hassan in Androscoggin County Superior Court was a significant example of the importance of prosecutorial disclosure obligations and the constitutional right to a fair trial.
Hassan, a member of Lewiston’s Somali community, faced 15 counts of welfare fraud in a prosecution brought by the Maine Attorney General’s Office. The case involved extensive documentary evidence and allegations concerning the administration of public assistance programs.
As Hassan’s defense attorney, I challenged the prosecution’s handling of discovery and raised questions about the authenticity of documents the State intended to introduce at trial. In particular, our motion identified concerns that state health and human services employees may have improperly signed documents offered as evidence.
On the eve of trial, Superior Court Justice Susan Oram dismissed 14 of the 15 charges against Hassan, concluding that the State’s failure to disclose pertinent information had come too late to permit adequate defense preparation.
The ruling represented a major victory for the defense and demonstrated that prosecutors have an obligation not merely to assemble evidence against an accused person, but to disclose information necessary to ensure a fair trial.
The Hassan case illustrates a principle that has remained central to my legal practice: constitutional protections and discovery obligations must be enforced even when doing so results in the dismissal of serious criminal charges.
Read Maine Public’s coverage of the Abdi Hassan case
The Steven Downs Murder Trial — Alaska Public Radio Coverage
KUAC Public Radio | Fairbanks, Alaska
One of the most challenging and nationally publicized cases of my legal career was the defense of Steven Downs, a Maine man charged with the 1993 murder of Sophie Sergie at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
The prosecution, brought nearly three decades after the crime, involved complex questions of DNA evidence, forensic science, genetic genealogy, and the reliability of a decades-old investigation.
As a member of the defense team, I participated in a lengthy jury trial in Fairbanks that attracted extensive media coverage. Throughout the proceedings, the defense challenged the prosecution’s interpretation of the scientific evidence and presented alternative theories concerning the identity of the perpetrator.
KUAC Public Radio provided detailed reporting throughout the trial and subsequent proceedings. Its collection includes numerous news stories and audio reports examining the testimony, forensic evidence, defense arguments, jury verdict, and post-trial litigation.
The collection offers a substantial contemporary record of one of the most demanding cases of my courtroom career.
Explore KUAC’s complete collection of Steven Downs trial coverage
Anatomy of a Cold Case — The Steven Downs Murder Trial
Sun Journal | February 20, 2022
Anatomy of a Cold Case: A Breakdown of the Steven Downs Murder Trial
One of the most complex, demanding, and emotionally difficult cases of my criminal defense career was the 2022 trial of Steven Downs in Fairbanks, Alaska, for the 1993 murder and sexual assault of Sophie Sergie, a young Alaska Native woman.
The case attracted national attention because of its use of investigative genetic genealogy, an emerging forensic technique that had helped investigators identify Downs as a suspect more than 25 years after the crime.
As lead defense counsel, I spent years preparing for a monthlong trial involving more than 8,300 pages of investigative records, extensive forensic evidence, dozens of witnesses, and complicated questions about DNA interpretation, eyewitness identification, and alternative suspects.
The defense challenged the prosecution’s contention that the DNA evidence established Downs’ responsibility for the murder. We also presented evidence concerning alternative suspects, discrepancies in eyewitness descriptions, and weaknesses in the original investigation.
Following approximately 20 hours of deliberations over four days, the jury convicted Downs of murder and sexual assault.
Although the verdict was deeply disappointing, the case remains one of the most significant experiences of my professional life. It reinforced my conviction that scientific evidence must be subjected to rigorous scrutiny and that the presumption of innocence is especially important in emotionally charged prosecutions.
This extensive Sun Journal feature reconstructs the investigation and trial, examining the prosecution’s evidence, the defense’s arguments, and the extraordinary challenges of litigating a homicide nearly three decades after the crime.
It is among the most comprehensive accounts of a case that occupied several years of my professional life.
Read the Sun Journal’s full investigation: Anatomy of a Cold Case
Public Defense Advocacy
Defense Attorneys Say Indigent Work Remains a Heavy Lift, Despite Pay Increase
Maine Public | July 24, 2024
Jim Howaniec discusses the challenges facing Maine’s indigent defense system, including the shortage of qualified court-appointed attorneys, heavy criminal caseloads, and the need to strengthen legal representation for people who cannot afford an attorney.
Read the full article: https://www.mainepublic.org/news/2024-07-24/defense-attorney-say-indigent-work-remains-a-heavy-lift-despite-pay-increase
Advocating for Maine’s Indigent Defense System
Maine Public | May 16, 2017 | Susan Sharon
Lawyers for Maine’s Poor Face Months With No Pay as State Fund Dries Up
For much of my legal career, I have advocated for adequate funding of Maine’s indigent defense system and the constitutional right of people who cannot afford an attorney to receive effective legal representation.
In May 2017, Maine Public examined a recurring problem in Maine’s criminal justice system: the exhaustion of state funding for court-appointed lawyers before the end of the fiscal year, leaving attorneys working for months without compensation.
Reporter Susan Sharon interviewed me as I prepared for the complex Abdi Hassan welfare fraud prosecution, involving thousands of pages of documents, dozens of witnesses, and substantial preparation and trial expenses. At the same time, I continued representing other indigent clients, including individuals facing serious felony charges.
The article highlighted a fundamental inequity: while judges, prosecutors, and other court personnel continued receiving their regular salaries, court-appointed defense attorneys were expected to continue their work without timely payment.
My principal concern, however, extended beyond attorney compensation. An inadequately funded defense system ultimately threatens the constitutional rights of the people it is supposed to serve.
The Sixth Amendment’s guarantee of effective assistance of counsel cannot be separated from the resources necessary to provide that representation.
This Maine Public report documents an important chapter in my continuing advocacy for a fairer and more adequately funded public defense system in Maine.
Read and listen to the original Maine Public report
DNA Evidence and Criminal Defense
Down East Magazine — DNA Evidence
A feature examining DNA evidence and its role in criminal investigations and the justice system.
Read the original article in Down East Magazine
The Malik Hollis Case — Racial Discrimination and the Right to an Impartial Jury
Sun Journal | April 7, 2021
Federal Appeals Court Hears Lewiston Man’s Case
The defense of Malik Hollis was one of the most important constitutional challenges of my legal career, raising fundamental questions about racial discrimination, jury selection, and equal protection under the law.
Hollis, a young Black man from Lewiston, was convicted in 2017 of reckless conduct with a firearm and criminal threatening with a dangerous weapon following a confrontation in which he maintained that he had acted in self-defense.
During jury selection, the prosecution exercised a peremptory challenge to remove the only Black prospective juror from a jury pool otherwise composed entirely of white citizens. I objected under Batson v. Kentucky, the landmark United States Supreme Court decision prohibiting racially discriminatory jury selection.
After the Maine Supreme Judicial Court upheld the conviction, we continued the constitutional challenge in federal court. In April 2021, I argued the case before a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston.
The hearing produced a remarkable exchange concerning the prosecution’s stated justification for excluding the prospective juror—his having completed eleven rather than twelve years of education—and the trial court’s failure to apply the proper constitutional standard during jury selection.
Several members of the appellate panel expressed serious concerns about the handling of the jury-selection issue, including whether the distinction based on educational attainment provided a credible justification for excluding the only Black juror.
The Hollis case was about far more than one criminal conviction. It raised questions about racial fairness in Maine’s criminal justice system and whether the constitutional protections established by Batson were being meaningfully enforced.
For me, the case reflected a central principle of my work as a criminal defense attorney: the right to a fair trial must include a jury-selection process free from racial discrimination, and constitutional protections must be defended even when doing so requires years of appellate litigation.
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage of the First Circuit oral argument
The Kristina Lowe Case — The Toughest Case of My Career
Sun Journal | October 1, 2014
Kristina Lowe Sentenced to 18 Months in Prison
Of the many difficult criminal cases I have handled over more than four decades of practicing law, few have affected me as profoundly as the prosecution of Kristina Lowe in Oxford County Superior Court.
The case arose from a devastating January 2012 automobile accident that claimed the lives of two young passengers, Rebecca Mason and Logan Dam. Lowe, who was driving the vehicle, was subsequently convicted of two counts of manslaughter and leaving the scene of the accident.
The tragedy left two families grieving the loss of their children and placed an enormous responsibility on the defense team. Our task was not to diminish the suffering of the victims’ families, but to ensure that the sentencing court considered all the circumstances of the case, including our client’s youth, her injuries, her personal history, and her prospects for rehabilitation.
The sentencing hearing was among the most emotionally wrenching courtroom experiences of my career. Family members delivered heartbreaking statements about their losses and their anger toward Lowe. At one point, I asked the court not to interpret my client’s public silence as a lack of remorse, explaining that I had advised her not to make statements outside the courtroom.
The prosecution recommended a sentence of ten years, with all but five years suspended. The defense advocated a suspended sentence emphasizing rehabilitation and community service.
On October 1, 2014, Justice Robert Clifford imposed a sentence requiring 18 months of incarceration, substantially less than the five years sought by the prosecution. That sentence became the final disposition of the case. After approximately five months at the Maine Correctional Center, Lowe began receiving furloughs and opportunities to work outside the facility.
The result could not undo the tragedy or ease the suffering of the families who had lost Rebecca and Logan. Nor did it erase the consequences of the accident for Kristina Lowe.
For me, the case illustrated one of the most difficult responsibilities of criminal defense counsel: advocating for a client with compassion and determination while recognizing the profound human suffering that brought everyone into the courtroom.
The Lowe case remains one of the defining experiences of my legal career. More than any other case I have handled, it demonstrated the emotional weight of representing a client in a double-fatality prosecution, particularly during sentencing, and the deeply human dimension of criminal defense that the public rarely gets to see.
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage of the Kristina Lowe sentencing
The Seth Carey Case — Dismissal of Serious Felony Charges
Maine Public | July 7, 2023
Sexual Assault and Other Charges Dismissed Against Former Rumford Attorney
In July 2023, I represented Seth Carey, a former Rumford attorney and candidate for district attorney, in the final resolution of a highly publicized criminal prosecution that had lasted more than two years following his arrest.
Carey had been indicted on multiple charges, including attempted gross sexual assault and attempted aggravated sex trafficking. The allegations had serious consequences for his personal and professional life, including his ability to practice law.
The prosecution ultimately dismissed all five charges in the indictment. Carey pleaded guilty to a separate misdemeanor assault charge and received a $300 fine.
Following the dismissal, I publicly criticized the Maine State Police investigation and called for an independent examination of the circumstances surrounding Carey’s arrest and prosecution. I questioned the three-year delay between the original allegations and the indictment, as well as the decision to arrest Carey in Florida in an operation involving armed federal marshals.
Maine Public reporter Susan Sharon interviewed me about the case, including my concerns about the exercise of government power and the damage that criminal allegations can cause long before a case reaches trial.
The prosecutor explained that many of the charges would have been difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt and also cited concerns about the impact of further proceedings on the complainant. The Maine State Police defended their investigation.
For me, the case raised important questions about proportionality in law enforcement, prosecutorial discretion, and the lasting consequences of criminal accusations. It reinforced my belief that the government’s extraordinary power to investigate, arrest, and prosecute individuals must always be exercised with restraint and accountability.
Read and listen to the Maine Public interview
Read the Sun Journal’s coverage
Face Time: Jim Howaniec — On Poverty, His First Novel and Honor (Your Honor, That Is)
Sun Journal | April 3, 2011
In April 2011, the Sun Journal featured me in its popular Face Time interview series, focusing on the publication of my first novel, Lisbon Street, and the experiences that inspired me to write it.
By then, I had practiced criminal law for approximately 25 years, served four years as mayor of Lewiston, and worked on both sides of the criminal justice system, first as a prosecutor and later as a defense attorney.
Lisbon Street was my attempt to combine those experiences in a realistic legal thriller set in Lewiston during the year following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The novel follows a fictional criminal defense lawyer navigating murder, personal relationships, and the struggles of people living on the margins of society.
But the book was about more than crime and courtroom drama.
As I explained in the interview, I wanted to accomplish two things: write a legal novel that portrayed the criminal justice system realistically, and tell a story about the devastating effects of poverty in Lewiston and central Maine.
After a quarter-century practicing law, I had become increasingly troubled by the structural and generational poverty I encountered in local courts. I wanted to portray the lives of people who were largely invisible to the more prosperous segments of American society.
The interview also explored my writing process. I spent roughly eighteen months completing the manuscript, frequently writing between five and eight in the morning before beginning my workday as a criminal defense attorney.
And, in typical Face Time fashion, the conversation ended on a lighter note, with some joking about whether my status as a former mayor and newly published novelist might finally persuade local judges to address me as “Your Honor.”
Looking back, this interview captures an important moment in my life, when my experiences in politics, criminal law, and the streets of Lewiston began finding expression in fiction. The themes that inspired Lisbon Street—poverty, justice, flawed human beings, and the struggles of ordinary people—remain central to my writing today.
Read the original Sun Journal interview
Music & Creative Projects
Jim Howaniec, Two Other Musician Lawyers Release Debut Album
Lewiston Sun Journal | July 22, 2015
By Kathryn Skelton
In this feature, the Sun Journal profiles the release of Andreita, an album of original songs created by Jim Howaniec in collaboration with fellow attorneys and musicians Steve Brochu and Stephen Dassatti.
The article explores the inspiration behind songs including “Andreita,” “Me and the Moon,” and “Batman in Pacific Palisades,” and describes how the three musicians balanced their legal careers with songwriting, recording, and their shared enthusiasm for music.
Read the original Sun Journal article: