Legal Opinion · Dissent

State of New Hampshire v. Jeffrey Maxfield

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided May 19, 2015No. 2014-0200Published

1DissentConboy, J.

Because I conclude that the trial court did not err by interpreting RSA 625:8, V (2007) to require an inquiry into the reasonableness of the delay in executing an arrest warrant, I respectfully dissent.

“The interpretation of a statute is a question of law, which we review de novo.” State v. Breest, 167 N.H. 210, 212 (2014) (quotation omitted). ‘When construing the meaning of a statute, we first examine the language found in the statute, and where possible, we ascribe the plain and ordinary meanings to words used.” State v. Warren, 147 N.H. 567, 568 (2002) *683(quotation omitted). “We interpret a…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Asmussen v. Commissioner, New Hampshire Department of SafetySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2000
  3. State v. PhilibotteSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
  4. State v. KnickerbockerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2005
  5. State v. WarrenSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002

5 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