Legal Opinion

State v. Delisle

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided August 25, 1993No. 92-073PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtThayer, J.

The defendant, Ronald H. Delisle, appeals his convictions on the ground that he was denied the right to confer with *550counsel before a blood sample was taken from him. Because we hold that the defendant had no right to confer with counsel prior to the taking of the blood sample, we affirm.

On April 3, 1990, the defendant was arraigned and charged with kidnapping and aggravated felonious sexual assault. Counsel was appointed for the defendant on the same day. On April 26, the State police obtained a search warrant to seize body hairs and a blood sample from the defendant. After the warrant was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. State v. BallSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1983
  3. State v. PetkusSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1970
  4. State v. BruneauSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1988
  5. State v. GreeneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1986

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State of Iowa v. John Arthur Senn Jr.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2016
  2. Mogard v. City of LaramieWyoming Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. ParkerSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2007
  4. State v. BlyeTennessee Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. PoitraNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010

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