DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite State v. Burke, 448 A.2d 962.

14 citing documents.

  • State v. Duran 960 A.2d 697 N.H. 2008
    Anthony, 151 N.H. at 493-95; see State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 570 (1982); State v. Goodwin, 118 N.H. 862, 866 (1978).
  • State v. Gordon 809 A.2d 748 N.H. 2002
    We will not address whether the trial court’s decision to deny the defendant’s motion was in error because he was not convicted on that charge.
  • State v. French 776 A.2d 1253 N.H. 2001
    motions for directed verdicts, the evidence must be construed most favorably to the State, and the defendant must show that the evidence in its entirety was insufficient to prove he was guilty of the crime charged.” State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 569 (1982).
  • State v. Herrick 582 A.2d 613 N.H. 1990
    State v. Smith, 127 N.H. 433, 436, 503 A.2d 774, 776 (1985); State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 569, 448 A.2d 962, 964 (1982).
  • State v. Therrien 533 A.2d 346 N.H. 1987
    In State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 569, 448 A.2d 962, 964 (1982), the defendant was charged as an accomplice to armed robbery by threatening the victims with immediate use of force “by means of a gun which he claimed to have concealed in his pocket.
  • State v. Wright 509 A.2d 1253 N.H. 1986
    The burden of demonstrating insufficient proof of guilt rests upon the defendant.
  • State v. Place 513 A.2d 321 N.H. 1986
    The standard of review is the same for both motions.
  • State v. Shackford 506 A.2d 315 N.H. 1986
    The defendant has the burden of showing that the evidence was insufficient to prove guilt.
  • State v. Smith 503 A.2d 774 N.H. 1985
    State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 569, 448 A.2d 962, 964 (1982) (citing State v. Dupuy, 118 N.H. 848, 850, 395 A.2d 851, 852 (1978)).
  • State v. Batchelder 496 A.2d 346 N.H. 1985
    *702 The defendant’s second claim is that the court improperly gave an instruction on evaluating eyewitness testimony, see State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 571, 448 A.2d 962, 966 (1982), and that this instruction reinforced the prejudice created by the prosecutor’s argument.
  • State v. Shannon 484 A.2d 1164 N.H. 1984
    State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 569, 448 A.2d 962, 964 (1982) (“To be guilty of armed robbery, a defendant must be actu *665 ally armed with a deadly weapon, RSA 636:1 111(a), reasonably appear to be armed with a deadly weapon, RSA 636:1 111(b), or inflict or attempt to inflict death or serious bodily injury to another, RSA 636:1 III(c).”).
  • State v. Etzweiler 480 A.2d 870 N.H. 1984
    This encompasses the requirement that the accomplice’s acts were designed to aid the primary actor in committing the offense, see State v. Burke, *64 122 N.H. 565, 570, 448 A.2d 962, 965 (1982), and that the accomplice had the purpose to “make the crime succeed,” State v. Goodwin, 118 N.H. 862, 866, 395 A.2d 1234, 1236 (1978) (quoting 1 F. Wharton, Criminal Law § 114, at 60 (Supp. 1978)).
  • State v. Glidden 459 A.2d 1136 N.H. 1983
    Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979); see State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 572, 448 A.2d 962, 966 (1982).
  • State v. McAvenia 448 A.2d 967 N.H. 1982
    State v. Burke, 122 N.H. 565, 571, 448 A.2d 962, 964 (1982); State v. Gilbert, 121 N.H. 305, 313, 429 A.2d 323, 329 (1981); see Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979).