Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite State v. Ball, 471 A.2d 347.

698 citing documents.

State v. Nieves 999 A.2d 389 N.H. 2010
Arizona v. Hicks, 480 U.S. 321, 326 (1987); State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 234-35 (1983) (requiring probable cause under state constitutional analysis).
In Re Opinion of Justices 2 A.3d 1102 N.H. 2010
We first address this question under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions only for guidance.
State v. Neeper 160 N.H. 11 N.H. 2010
We first address the defendant’s claims under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. LABARRE 992 A.2d 733 N.H. 2010
We first address the defendant’s claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, citing federal cases only to aid in our analysis.
Appeal of Pennichuck Water Works, Inc. 992 A.2d 740 N.H. 2010
Although the Utilities have raised these arguments under both the State and Federal Constitutions, we first *36 address them under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Tuttle v. MED. MAL. JOINT UNDERWRITING 992 A.2d 624 N.H. 2010
We address the petitioners' claims first under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
Huard v. Town of Pelham 986 A.2d 460 N.H. 2009
We first address Huard’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Hill-Grant Living Trust v. Kearsarge Lighting Precinct 986 A.2d 662 N.H. 2009
Where the plaintiff has raised both state and federal constitutional claims, we address the plaintiff’s state constitutional claim first, see State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, see id.
State v. Joyce 986 A.2d 642 N.H. 2009
ollowing a hearing, the trial court denied the motion, ruling that the officers had reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant when they approached the car, and that the police did not seize the defendant until they obtained his license and “held him at the car for further inquiry.” We first address the defendant’s claims under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Kousounadis 986 A.2d 603 N.H. 2009
voluntary.” We first address the defendant’s arguments under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Howe 986 A.2d 631 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Flood 986 A.2d 626 N.H. 2009
We first address this argument under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Hynes 978 A.2d 264 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s arguments *203 under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Bell-Rogers 977 A.2d 1017 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Shepherd 977 A.2d 1029 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Miller 977 A.2d 561 N.H. 2009
We first address the *130 defendant’s arguments under the State Constitution and reference federal cases only to aid in our analysis.
State v. Johnson 977 A.2d 548 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Breed 977 A.2d 463 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claims under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Rogers 977 A.2d 493 N.H. 2009
Because the defendant does not argue that the denial violated his federal constitutional rights, we address his claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Robinson 973 A.2d 277 N.H. 2009
We initially address the defendant’s claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Daoud 973 A.2d 294 N.H. 2009
the Court finds that Officer Tyler did not seize the defendant until the time of his arrest.” We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Howell 973 A.2d 926 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Steeves 972 A.2d 1033 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s arguments under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Veale 972 A.2d 1009 N.H. 2009
We first address this argument under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. BILC 972 A.2d 1029 N.H. 2009
We first address this claim under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Wamala 972 A.2d 1071 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
In Re Concord Teachers (Nh Ret. System) 969 A.2d 403 N.H. 2009
We first address this claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
In Re Alex C. 969 A.2d 399 N.H. 2009
We first address the state constitutional claims, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
In Re Kotey M. 965 A.2d 1146 N.H. 2009
We first address the juvenile’s argument under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Fletcher 965 A.2d 1000 N.H. 2009
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal authority for guidance only.
State v. Theriault 960 A.2d 687 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s argument under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Silva 960 A.2d 715 N.H. 2008
We begin our analysis under the State Constitution.
State v. Kincaid 960 A.2d 711 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s claims under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231-33 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Chrisicos 960 A.2d 345 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. McGurk 958 A.2d 1005 N.H. 2008
We first address his claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Legere 958 A.2d 969 N.H. 2008
We deal first with the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution.
State v. Matthews 951 A.2d 155 N.H. 2008
Because the defendant does not argue that the application of the amended statute violates her federal constitutional rights, we will *418 address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 232 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Theriault 949 A.2d 678 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal authority for guidance only.
State v. Sullivan 949 A.2d 140 N.H. 2008
We first address his arguments under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), using federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Rodriguez 945 A.2d 676 N.H. 2008
We first address his claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Cosme 943 A.2d 810 N.H. 2008
We first address state constitutional claims, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal cases for guidance only, id.
State v. Solomon 943 A.2d 819 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231-32 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Kornbrekke 943 A.2d 797 N.H. 2008
We first address his claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Hutchinson 942 A.2d 1289 N.H. 2008
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
State v. Zidel 940 A.2d 255 N.H. 2008
Our settled rule is to first address the defendant’s claims under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Petition of Kilton 939 A.2d 198 N.H. 2007
We first address the petitioner’s claims under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Offen 938 A.2d 879 N.H. 2007
Having determined that the thirty-day reporting period is an essential element of the charged offense, we examine Offen’s due process claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. King 934 A.2d 556 N.H. 2007
We first address the defendant’s claims under our State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
In Re Stapleford 931 A.2d 1199 N.H. 2007
*264 We address the children’s argument under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
In Re Juvenile 2006-406 931 A.2d 1229 N.H. 2007
We first address the *236 defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.