Legal Opinion
State v. Constant
Supreme Court of New Hampshire
Decided February 28, 1992No. 90-610PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrock, C.J.
The defendant, Leonard Constant, arguing double jeopardy violations under both the United States and New Hampshire Constitutions, appeals his conviction in the Superior Court (Murphy, J.) of possession of a controlled drug stemming from the same incident which led to a previous conviction of “transportation” of a controlled drug. We reverse.
On March 15,1990, the defendant was charged with possession of a controlled drug in violation of RSA 265:80 (“transportation”), and convicted on April 18, 1990. At the time of his arrest, he was also charged with possession of a controlled drug in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Grady v. CorbinSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- State v. BallSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Phillips v. Verax Corp.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 1994
- State v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1993
- State v. MacLeodSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1996
- State v. LuciusSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
- State v. FarrSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2010
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.