Moody v. Cunningham
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
1Opinion of the CourtKing, C.J.
In these cases, consolidated on appeal, we must decide whether use of an untried indictment as the sole evidence in a hearing for revocation of parole or imposition of a suspended sentence violates the due process standards established in Stapleford v. Perrin, 122 N.H. 1083, 453 A.2d 1304 (1982). We hold that evidence of an untried indictment by itself is insufficient to satisfy the State’s burden of proof and that due process requires the State to present some evidence of the underlying violation through testimony of a witness who can be cross-examined, unless the hearing officer…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- People ex rel. McGee v. WaltersNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Stapleford v. PerrinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982
- Stone v. SheaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1973
- Royer v. State Department of Employment SecuritySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- State v. CaneloSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
- Ojo v. LorenzoSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2013
- State v. WeeksSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1996
- State v. BarkaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004
- Knox Leasing v. TurnerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1989
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.