Legal Opinion
State v. Doucet
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided March 31, 1965No. 5311PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKenison, C.J.
The defendant correctly argues that the State must both allege and prove two convictions if the defendant is to be found guilty of driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, second offense. RSA 262:19 (supp); RSA 262-A:62 (supp). Cedergren v. Clarke, 99 N. H. 421. When greater penalties are prescribed for a second offense or a subsequent offense, they cannot be imposed without allegation and proof of a prior conviction. State v. Adams, 64 N. H. 440, 441. While there are several alternative methods of proving the previous conviction (State v. Blais, 104 N. H.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Salinger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Nathaniel Vincent v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1964
- Tillman Overstreet v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
- Commonwealth v. BarneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. ConklinSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1975
- State v. LeBaronSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2002
- State v. ThompsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2012
- State v. LantaigneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977