Cited by

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

698 citing documents.

State v. Sodoyer 931 A.2d 548 N.H. 2007
We first address the defendant’s claim under *86 the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Jennings 929 A.2d 982 N.H. 2007
We first address the issue under the New Hampshire Constitution, referring to federal opinions for guidance only.
Bleiler v. Chief, Dover Police Department 927 A.2d 1216 N.H. 2007
We first analyze the petitioner’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), citing federal authority for guidance only, id.
State v. Dupont 931 A.2d 583 N.H. 2007
We first 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. Sharkey 927 A.2d 519 N.H. 2007
We first address the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Haas 927 A.2d 1209 N.H. 2007
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. Lavoie 924 A.2d 370 N.H. 2007
We first address the defendant’s claims under our State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Pepin 920 A.2d 1209 N.H. 2007
We first address the issues under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Miller 921 A.2d 942 N.H. 2007
We first consider his arguments under the State Constitution, referring to federal decisions only for guidance.
State v. Smoke Signals Pipe & Tobacco Shop, LLC 922 A.2d 634 N.H. 2007
We first address Smoke Signals’ claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
In Re Christopher K. 923 A.2d 187 N.H. 2007
We first address his claims under our State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Giddens 922 A.2d 650 N.H. 2007
*182 We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Brown 930 A.2d 410 N.H. 2007
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.
State v. Steimel 921 A.2d 378 N.H. 2007
We first consider the arguments under the State Constitution, using federal cases only to aid in our analysis.
State v. Parker 921 A.2d 366 N.H. 2007
We therefore do not engage in a separate federal analysis, State v. Rothe, 142 N.H. 483, 484 (1997); State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 232 (1983), and do not address the defendant’s due process argument.
Community Resources for Justice, Inc. v. City of Manchester 917 A.2d 707 N.H. 2007
We first address CR J’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only, id.
Duquette v. Warden, New Hampshire State Prison 919 A.2d 767 N.H. 2007
We first address the petitioner’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. Ayer 917 A.2d 214 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Licks 914 A.2d 1246 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s claim under RSA 594:2 and the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 232 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Miller v. Blackden 913 A.2d 742 N.H. 2006
We first analyze the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), citing federal authority for guidance only, id.
State v. Brown 910 A.2d 1203 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s assertion under the State Constitution, see State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), citing federal authority for guidance only, id.
State v. MacElman 910 A.2d 1267 N.H. 2006
We 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.
State v. Goupil 908 A.2d 1256 N.H. 2006
We first address the issues under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226,231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Pseudae 908 A.2d 809 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, relying on federal case law only for guidance.
Starr v. Governor 910 A.2d 1247 N.H. 2006
New Hampshire be advised of what laws would be changed or enacted in special session.” We first address this issue under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 281 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Petition of Evans 908 A.2d 796 N.H. 2006
*147 We will first address the petitioner’s ex post facto claim under the New Hampshire Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 281 (1986), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Smith 908 A.2d 786 N.H. 2006
We first examine this claim under the State Constitution, relying upon federal case law only for guidance.
State v. McGill 903 A.2d 1016 N.H. 2006
We first address it under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1983), and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Murray 917 A.2d 203 N.H. 2006
We consider this argument under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Abram 903 A.2d 1042 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s claim that the trial court’s exclusion of such evidence violated his due process and confrontation rights under the State Constitution, State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 231 (1986), and cite federal *631 opinions for guidance only.
Boulders at Strafford, LLC v. Town of Strafford 903 A.2d 1021 N.H. 2006
We therefore limit our discussion to the substantive due process protections of the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Fichera 903 A.2d 1030 N.H. 2006
Consistent with State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 232 (1983), we first consider the defendant’s arguments under Part I, Article 15 of the State Constitution.
State v. Livingston 897 A.2d 977 N.H. 2006
We first address the issues under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Horner 893 A.2d 683 N.H. 2006
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Matey 891 A.2d 592 N.H. 2006
Having addressed the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution, we must now address his claim under the Federal Constitution.
In re Jeffrey G. 892 A.2d 1234 N.H. 2006
We first address this issue under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
Associated Press v. State 888 A.2d 1236 N.H. 2005
We first address the petitioners’ claim under the State Constitution and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Pierce 887 A.2d 132 N.H. 2005
We first address Pierce’s claims under the State Constitution, citing federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Barkus 888 A.2d 398 N.H. 2005
When a defendant invokes the protections of the New Hampshire Constitution, we must first address those claims, relying upon federal law only to aid in our analysis.
In re Berg 886 A.2d 980 N.H. 2005
We first address the father’s claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Sanchez 883 A.2d 292 N.H. 2005
We first examine the defendant’s claim under the New Hampshire Constitution.
State v. Knickerbocker 880 A.2d 419 N.H. 2005
We first address the defendant’s claims under our State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Champagne 879 A.2d 1147 N.H. 2005
We will consider the State’s arguments first under the State Constitution, citing to federal authority for guidance only.
State v. Littlefield 876 A.2d 712 N.H. 2005
We first address his claim under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. LeCouffe 872 A.2d 773 N.H. 2005
We first address these claims under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Beauchesne 868 A.2d 972 N.H. 2005
Since State v. Ball, 124 N.H. 226, 232 (1983), we have consistently followed the “primacy” approach to adjudication of constitutional issues.
State v. Hannon 867 A.2d 426 N.H. 2005
We first address his arguments under the State Constitution, and cite federal opinions for guidance only.
State v. Sweeney 867 A.2d 441 N.H. 2005
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State *670 Constitution, relying upon federal decisions for guidance only.
State v. Brobst 857 A.2d 1253 N.H. 2004
644:4, I(a) regulates not only-harassment, but these, and other, legitimate communications.” The State argues that RSA 644:4, I(a) is not overbroad because it “does not infringe upon a right to free speech, but rather, regulates conduct and protects the recipient’s right to be left alone.” We first address the State’s claim under the State Constitution and cite federal authority for guidance only.
State v. Flynn 855 A.2d 1254 N.H. 2004
We first address the defendant’s claim under the State Constitution and cite federal authority for guidance only.