Legal Opinion

State v. Fuller

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided November 20, 2001No. 99-679PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNadeau, J.

The defendant, Frederick J. Fuller, appeals his conviction on two counts of criminal threatening. See RSA 631:4 (Supp. 2000). He argues that: (1) the Trial Court (.Fitzgerald, J.) did not properly define “with purpose to terrorize” in its jury instructions; (2) the State did not present sufficient evidence that he threatened the victim with a purpose to terrorize him; (3) the trial court erroneously admitted a witness’s written statement to the police as a prior consistent statement; and (4) the defendant was not properly identified at trial. We reverse and remand.

The following facts are…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State v. SchweppeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  2. Musgrove v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Alabama · 1986
  3. State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1988
  4. State v. KirschSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
  5. State v. LaudarowiczSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1997

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State of New Hampshire v. Justin L. RoySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2015
  2. State v. DiNapoliSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2003
  3. State v. HorakSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
  4. State of New Hampshire v. Tariq ZubhuzaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2014
  5. State v. Michael HanesSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2018

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API