State v. Kelly

The defendant, James Kelly, appeals his conviction for violating a protective order, see RSA 173-B:9 (Supp. 2009), arguing that the Superior Court (Nicolosi, J.) erred in its answers to jury questions and by excluding evidence of a witness’s allegedly false statements to police. We reverse and remand.

The jury could have found the following facts. The defendant and Elizabeth Kelly were engaged and cohabited until their relationship ended in February 2006. Their separation produced an ongoing custody dispute and prompted Elizabeth to seek a protective order against the defendant. *193On February…