State v. Michael Hanes

The defendant, Michael Hanes, appeals his conviction, following a jury trial in Superior Court ( McNamara , J.), for improper influence. See RSA 640:3 (2016). He argues that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the verdict, that the speech underlying his conviction enjoys constitutional protection, and that the trial court committed plain error in failing to sua sponte strike part of a witness's testimony. We affirm.

I

The relevant facts follow. The defendant lived in Pembroke, in an "older part of the town," on an "extremely narrow" street. His house was "very close to the street," and…