State of New Hampshire v. Jessica Sanville

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2018-0642, State of New Hampshire v. Jessica
Sanville, the court on July 11, 2019, issued the following order:

Having considered the brief, memorandum of law, and limited record
submitted on appeal, we conclude that oral argument is unnecessary in this
case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). We affirm.

The defendant, Jessica Sanville, appeals the decision of the Circuit Court
(Vetanze, J.), following a bench trial, finding her guilty of using a hand-held
mobile electronic device while driving, first offense, a violation. See RSA
265:79-c (Supp. 2018). We construe her brief to argue that the evidence was
insufficient to prove that she used her cellular telephone while she was driving
a motor vehicle or temporarily halted in traffic on a way. See id.

The defendant, as the appealing party, has the burden to provide this
court with a sufficient record to decide her issues on appeal and to
demonstrate that she raised the issues in the trial court. State v. Winward, 161 N.H. 533, 542 (2011); see also Sup. Ct. R. 15(3) (“If the moving party
intends to argue in the supreme court that a finding or conclusion is
unsupported by the evidence or is contrary to the evidence, he shall include in
the record a transcript of all evidence relevant to such finding or conclusion.”);
Town of Nottingham v. Newman, 147 N.H. 131, 137 (2001) (rules of appellate
practice not relaxed for self-represented litigants).

The defendant failed to provide a transcript of the trial. Absent a
transcript, we must assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the
trial court’s findings. See Atwood v. Owens, 142 N.H. 396, 396 (1997).
Accordingly, we assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the court’s
finding that she used her cellular telephone while she was driving a motor
vehicle or temporarily halted in traffic on a way. See id.

Affirmed.

Lynn, C.J., and Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ.,
concurred.

Eileen Fox,
Clerk