Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Vanderheyden

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided December 28, 1989No. 88-367Published

1DissentSouter, J.

The court holds that an indictment must be quashed or dismissed without regard to the defendant’s prejudice when any of the testimony underlying the charge was given before a grand jury while attended by a person whose presence was unauthorized, in violation of Supreme Court Rule 52(4). Because the court relies entirely on Rule 52, which neither addresses the question of the proper remedy for its violation nor modifies existing precedent at odds with the court’s holding, I respectfully dissent.

In State v. Canatella, 96 N.H. 202, 72 A.2d 507 (1950), this court held that the unauthorized…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bank of Nova Scotia v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. United States v. MechanikSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. State v. CanatellaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1950
  4. State v. PurringtonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API