Legal Opinion

State v. Johnson

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided July 26, 1991No. 90-404PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThayer, J.

In this interlocutory transfer without ruling, the Superior Court (McHugh, J.) transferred, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 9, the following question of law: Does the doctrine of collateral estoppel allow the State to introduce a specific finding of fact, made by a jury in a prior criminal trial against the defendant, as a conclusive fact which cannot be relitigated by the defendant in a subsequent perjury prosecution? For the following reasons, we hold that collateral estoppel is inapplicable in this case.

We take the facts as they are presented to us in the interlocutory transfer. On December…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Standefer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. State v. IngenitoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  4. Francisco Pena-Cabanillas v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
  5. Daigle v. City of PortsmouthSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. ScarbroughTennessee Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. CassadySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1995
  3. People v. GossMichigan Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Trovato v. DeveauSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1999
  5. State v. HewinsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 2014

9 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