Legal Opinion

State v. Tucker

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided January 24, 2001No. 98-385PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HORTON, J.,

retired, specially assigned under RSA 490:8. The defendant, Paul Tucker, was convicted of bribery, see RSA 640:2 (1996), after the Superior Court (Mohl, J.) denied the defendant’s *724motion to suppress a custodial statement. The issue on appeal is whether a custodial statement, made during questioning without the benefit of Miranda warnings, offering a bribe to a police officer is admissible to support a bribery conviction. We affirm.

The following facts were adduced at the suppression hearing. The defendant, with a blood alcohol level of .30, was taken into protective custody after…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Pennsylvania v. MunizSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. State v. BallSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
  4. Vincent Coppola v. Ronald L. Powell, Etc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
  5. United States v. Oscar Castro, Charles David Fraga, Peter Diaz, and Thomas AcostaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1984

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. AyerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2003
  2. Matter of GendronSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
  3. State v. SpragueSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001
  4. In re B.C.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2015
  5. In re Guardianship of K.B.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API