Legal Opinion
State v. Higgins
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided April 7, 2003No. 2000-234PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBroderick, J.
The defendant, Jack Z. Higgins, appeals his convictions for aggravated felonious sexual assault, see RSA 632-A:2 (1996) (amended 1997,1998,1999), criminal restraint, see RSA 633:2 (1996), and two counts of felony criminal threatening, see RSA 631:4 (1996 & Supp. 1996) (amended 2002). He argues that the Trial Court (Groff, J.) erred by: (1) ruling that he voluntarily waived his Miranda rights prior to making incriminating statements to the police; (2) precluding him from questioning the victim regarding her prior consensual sexual activity; (3) imposing enhanced sentences on his convictions…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- State v. BallSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
- Vogel v. VogelSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1993
- State v. LambertSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2001
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- State v. CubiasWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. CubiasWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- Porter v. City of ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2004
- State v. KahapeaHawaii Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. RussellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2009
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.