Cited by
Opinions in New Hampshire that cite State v. Fleury, 282 A.2d 873.
-
State v. Cigic
639 A.2d 251
N.H. 1994
This court, in the past, has utilized the Anders procedure to order counsel to file a brief on behalf of the defendant referring to matters in the record that might arguably support the defendant’s appeal.
-
State v. Dennehy
503 A.2d 769
N.H. 1985
His decision not to introduce the checks was not unreasonable, but rather was “‘within the range of competence required of attorneys representing defendants in criminal cases.’” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971) (quoting Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 797-98 (1970)).
-
State v. Glidden
499 A.2d 1349
N.H. 1985
Further, “success in criminal trials and perfection in trial tactics are not guaranteed by the Constitution.” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971).
-
State v. Labonville
492 A.2d 1376
N.H. 1985
We have consistently held that the State Constitution does not guarantee either perfection in trial tactics, or success by the defendant.
-
State v. Guaraldi
467 A.2d 233
N.H. 1983
“[S]uccess in criminal trials and perfection in trial tactics are not guaranteed by the Constitution,” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971), and “[w]e will not second-guess the tactical decisions of defense counsel,” State v. Perron, 122 N.H. at 947, 454 A.2d at 425.
-
State v. Perron
454 A.2d 422
N.H. 1982
“[S]uccess in criminal trials and perfection in trial tactics are not guaranteed by the Constitution.” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971).
-
State v. Staples
437 A.2d 266
N.H. 1981
To be effective, defense counsel must perform “within the range of competence required of attorneys representing defendants in criminal cases.” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971) (quoting Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 797-98 (1979)) (reaffirmed in State v. Osborne, 119 N.H. 427, 436, 402 A.2d 493, 499 (1979)).
-
State v. Osborne
402 A.2d 493
N.H. 1979
’ ” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971), quoting Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 797-98 (1970).
-
State v. West
373 A.2d 348
N.H. 1977
The record in this case does not compel a finding that trial counsel did not come “within the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases.” McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771 (1970); State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971); Heath v. Vitek, 115 N.H. 200, 337 A.2d 345 (1975).
-
Nichols v. Helgemoe
369 A.2d 614
N.H. 1977
Heath v. Vitek, 115 N.H. 200, 337 A.2d 345 (1975); State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 282 A.2d 873 (1971); Petition of Graham, 106 N.H. 545, 215 A.2d 697 (1965).
-
State v. Ober
359 A.2d 624
N.H. 1976
State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 300, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971); State v. Caplan, 353 A.2d 172 (Me. 1976).
-
Heath v. Vitek
337 A.2d 345
N.H. 1975
His advice that the plaintiff should plead to a lesser offense than first-degree murder did not establish a failure to act with a skill “within ants in criminal cases.” State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 *203 A.2d 873, 877 (1971); State v. McCarthy, 112 N.H. 437, 440, 298 A.2d 740, 742 (1972); Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 797-98 (1970); see North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970).
-
State v. McCarthy
298 A.2d 740
N.H. 1972
State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 299, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971); Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 797-98, 25 L. Ed. 2d 785, 792, 90 S. Ct. 1458, 1462 (1970); see McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 771, 25 L. Ed. 2d 763, 773, 90 S. Ct. 1441, 1449 (1970).
-
State v. Carmody
291 A.2d 610
N.H. 1972
State v. Fleury, 111 N.H. 294, 300, 282 A.2d 873, 877 (1971); United States v. Marson, 408 F.2d 644 (4th Cir. 1968); United States v. Famulari, 447 F.2d 1377, 1380 (2d Cir. 1971); Allen v. Moore, 453 F.2d 970 (1st Cir. 1972).