Argued: September 12, 2018
S. Manthorne, Esq. (orally), Roach, Hewitt, Ruprecht, Sanchez
& Bischoff, Portland, for appellant Anthony Lord
T. Mills, Attorney General, Donald W. Macomber, Asst. Atty.
Gen. (orally), and Abaigeal M. Ridge, Stud. Atty., Office of
the Attorney General, Augusta, for appellee State of Maine
SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, HJELM, and
In July 2015, Anthony Lord went on a multi-hour, violent
rampage through Aroostook and Penobscot Counties. By the time
the police arrested him, Lord had killed two people and
severely injured several others. He eventually pleaded guilty
to two murders, see 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(A)
(2018), and a dozen other crimes. At sentencing, the court
(Penobscot and Aroostook Counties, A Murray, J.)
imposed a life sentence for each of the two murders and
concurrent sentences of various terms of years for the other
crimes. The Sentence Review Panel accepted Lord's
petition to appeal from the life sentences, bringing this
matter before us. State v. Lord, No. SRP-17-364 (Me.
Sent. Rev. Panel Nov. 8, 2017); see 15 M.R.S.
§§ 2151-53 (2018); M.R. App. P. 19.
Lord argues that the court erred in entering the two life
sentences because, in setting the basic sentences, the court
improperly considered the other crimes that he committed
during those fateful hours. Lord also argues that the court
improperly "double-counted" his criminal history by
considering it both (1) in determining the basic sentence and
(2) as an aggravating factor when determining his maximum
sentence. We affirm the sentences entered by the court.
The following facts are drawn from the State's summary of
the evidence that it would have presented had Lord not
pleaded guilty and had the matter gone to trial. See
M.R.U. Crim. P. 11(b)(3), (e). Although Lord disputed or
corrected certain of the details in the State's
representations, he does not dispute the evidentiary support
for any of the following facts.
In July 2015, Anthony Lord was thirty-five years old. Two
months prior to the events in issue, his six-month-old son
had died as a result of what Lord considered to be the
intentional act of another man. Also prior to the events in
issue, Lord's former girlfriend had reported criminal
conduct by Lord toward her.
Sometime before 8:30 p.m. on July 16, 2015, Lord set fire to
a barn on property owned by that young woman's mother in
Aroostook County. The mother, who suffers from multiple
sclerosis, was alerted to the fire by a neighbor, after which
the mother called her daughter. As the fire was raging, the
young woman arrived with the man she was then dating, and
they stayed with her mother after the fire department left.
The fire burned intensely, eventually leveling the barn.
Hours later, at approximately 4:00 a.m., Lord knocked on the
door of a friend's uncle, who lived in Aroostook County.
He told the uncle that the car he was driving was out of gas
and had broken down. When the uncle came outside, Lord hit
him in the head with a hammer, ordered him inside, took two
guns-a shotgun and a .22 caliber revolver-and ammunition, and
barricaded the uncle in the basement of the house. Lord next
drove to the residence of his own brother and fired through
the window with the revolver. His brother was at home but was
Lord then went back to the property of the young woman's
mother. Arriving at the home after all of the fire responders
had left, Lord used the revolver he had stolen to shoot
through the door of the mother's home, wounding his
former girlfriend in the arm. He then entered the home and
shot eight bullets into the neck, chest, and pelvis of her
boyfriend, who, after attempting to talk with his own mother
by phone one last time, later died of his wounds. The young
woman ran to the bathroom where her mother helped her escape
through the window. Lord shot her mother in the shoulder, the
young woman successfully escaped, and Lord reloaded his gun
and exited the house.
As the young woman fled, jumping into the bed of a passing
truck, Lord came after her and jumped into the truck bed with
her. When the driver responded to their unexpected presence
in the truck bed and pulled into a nearby driveway, Lord shot
him three times in the neck and upper back using the
revolver. Both the young woman and Lord leapt out of the
truck at that point. The driver survived his injuries.
In a pickup truck stolen from his friend's uncle, Lord
drove toward the Penobscot area with the young woman in the
truck. Police found and pursued the truck, and Lord shot at
oncoming traffic and at law enforcement officers. Lord
eventually drove to a woodlot where he encountered two men
who had just dropped off a load of wood. He did not know
either of those men. Lord asked for a cigarette and a phone
and then aimed the revolver at one of the men, who said,
"No, no, no man." The man tried to run away, but
Lord shot directly at him and killed him. As the other man
turned to run, Lord fired and hit the man once; he survived.
With the young woman still with him, Lord returned to
Aroostook County in a truck owned by one of the men he had
shot; broke into a number of different camps and residences;
and stole a four-wheeler, another firearm, and other items.
He was finally arrested after meeting with a family member.
The procedural history is not in dispute. In July 2015, the
State filed two complaints charging Anthony Lord with murder,
17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(A), and kidnapping (Class B), 17-A
M.R.S. § 301(1)(B)(1) (2018), in Aroostook County and
murder, 17-A M.R.S. § 201(1)(A), in Penobscot County. In
August and September, Lord was charged by indictments filed
in each county with those crimes and multiple
Lord initially pleaded not guilty to all charges. In late
2016, he moved to suppress evidence obtained during a police
interview of him. In June 2017, after finding Lord competent
to stand trial, the court held an evidentiary hearing on
Lord's motion to suppress, receiving in evidence a
recording of the police interview.
Before the court could rule on the motion to suppress, Lord
decided to plead guilty to the two murder charges and twelve
of the other charged crimes,  and the State agreed to dismiss
the three remaining charges.
C. The Guilty Pleas
The court held a hearing in July 2017 at which it accepted
Lord's guilty pleas. The court heard the State's
summary of the factual basis for the charges, and it
thoroughly and carefully followed the requirements of M.R.U.
Crim. P. 11 to ensure that the plea was made knowingly and
voluntarily. See M.R.U. Crim. P. ll(b)-(e).
[¶15] After the State presented its summary of the
available evidence, the court afforded Lord the opportunity
to correct the facts, and he corrected or clarified certain
details but did not dispute that he had committed any of the
crimes described. He did agree that there was a factual basis
for each charge. See M.R.U. Crim. P. 11(b)(3), (e).
The court then reviewed the details of the major crimes with
Lord and allowed him finally to clarify any discrepancies.
There is no question from the record that Lord understood all
of the State's evidence against him and that, once
clarified, he agreed with the State's recitation. It was
ultimately clear that Lord chose of his own volition to enter
the guilty pleas. He does not challenge that process or the
court's acceptance of his pleas of guilty.
The court held a sentencing hearing two weeks later. Lord and
the State agreed that the court could consider the video
recording of the July 17, 2015, police interview of Lord that
had earlier been admitted at the suppression hearing. The
State summarized the facts of the horrifying and lethal
criminal activity in which Lord had engaged and argued for a
basic and maximum sentence of life imprisonment for each of
the murders. In support of its recommendation of basic
sentences of life imprisonment, the State argued that Lord
had in fact premeditated at least one of the killings; had
intentionally caused multiple deaths; had used a firearm,
which, as a felon, he was prohibited from possessing; had
killed the first murder victim in what should have been the
safety of a residence; and had killed the second murder
victim as a random act of violence. The State further argued
for the maximum sentence of life imprisonment because,
despite the mitigating factor of Lord accepting
responsibility for the murders, his actions had a devastating
impact on the victims and their families; he had not been
under the influence of any substance and was aware of what he
was doing; he had multiple prior convictions, including
assault and unlawful sexual contact; and he had violated the
terms of his probation by possessing a firearm.
The State presented victim impact statements from the young
woman who was the object of Lord's pursuit, her mother,
the driver whom Lord shot from the truck bed, and family
members of those killed or injured by Lord.
Lord addressed the court, the victims, and their families and
apologized for his actions. Lord, his mother, and a number of
Lord's relatives each testified that he suffered from
mental illness and that he had been losing control since his
six-month-old son died. Lord acknowledged that his sentence
should exceed the minimum sentence but asked that there be
some "daylight at the end." Lord reasoned that a
term of forty years would be a just sentence under the
circumstances because he went ...