State of New Hampshire v. Brent R. Donley

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

In Case No. 2021-0272, State of New Hampshire v. Brent R.
Donley, the court on January 7, 2022, issued the following
order:

Having considered the briefs and record submitted on appeal, we conclude
that oral argument is unnecessary in this case. See Sup. Ct. R. 18(1). The
defendant, Brent R. Donley, appeals his conviction, following a trial in the Circuit
Court (Mace, J.), on one misdemeanor count of conduct after an accident. See
RSA 264:25, I (Supp. 2021). We affirm.

The defendant advances several arguments on appeal that turn upon his
characterization of the facts underlying his conviction. However, “[i]t is a long-
standing rule that parties may not have judicial review of matters not raised in
the forum of trial.” Bean v. Red Oak Prop. Mgmt., 151 N.H. 248, 250 (2004). “It
is the burden of the appealing party . . . to provide this court with a record
sufficient to decide [his] issues on appeal, as well as to demonstrate that [he]
raised [his] issues before the trial court.” Id. “[A]bsent a transcript of the
hearing, we must assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the result
reached by the trial court.” Id. These rules are not relaxed for self-represented
parties. See In the Matter of Birmingham & Birmingham, 154 N.H. 51, 56-57
(2006).

In this case, the defendant has not provided us with a transcript of the
trial in the circuit court. Nor has he provided any pleadings in which he
articulated his arguments to the trial court, or rulings from the trial court
demonstrating that he raised the arguments. Under these circumstances, the
defendant has failed to demonstrate that he preserved his arguments for our
review, and we must assume that the evidence was sufficient to support the
result reached by the trial court. See Bean, 151 N.H. at 250.

Affirmed.

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

Timothy A. Gudas,
Clerk