Cited by

Hernandez, 162 N.H. at 706; see also Jacques, 744 F.3d at 811; cf. State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 864 (1998); State v. Carroll, 138 N.H. 687, 692-93 (1994).

Rule 404(b) typically applies when the State seeks to introduce evidence of other bad acts of a defendant.

We addressed a related issue in State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857 (1998), cert.

Motive has been defined as supplying the reason that nudges the will and prods the mind to indulge in criminal intent.

“To be considered voluntary, a confession must be the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice and not be extracted by threats, violence, direct or implied promises of any sort, or by the exertion of any improper influence.” State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 864 (1998) (quotation and brackets omitted), cert.

“To be voluntary, a confession must be the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice and not be extracted by threats, violence, direct or implied promises of any sort, or by the exertion of any improper *403 influence” or coercion.

The court should look at the factual circumstances surrounding the confession, the psychological impact on the defendant, and the legal significance of how the defendant reacted, in- order to determine whether the police exerted such an influence on the defendant that his will was overborne.

This court has recognized that where there has been an express written waiver and an intervening polygraph test, the defendant’s subsequent statements are admissible because “there is no per se requirement to remind him of his rights continually.” State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 868 (1998), cert.

Therefore, they are deemed waived.

This does not, however, rule out the possibility that such comment is a violation of [the defendant’s] Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.”) Because the defendant did not object to any *578 Fifth Amendment violation at trial and did not brief the issue, that issue was not properly preserved and we deem it waived.

Accordingly, we do not address the intervenors’ specific claim of error.

As a threshold issue, when a defendant seeks to introduce prior bad acts of another to impugn the State’s case, the defendant must demonstrate such “evidence of other bad acts is relevant for a purpose other than to prove the [witness’s] character or disposition.” State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 871 (1998).

Other issues raised by the defendant are without merit, see Vogel v. Vogel, 137 N.H. 321, 322 (1993), or are deemed waived because they were not briefed.

Issues raised in the notice of appeal but not briefed are deemed waived.

We affirmed his conviction in State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857 (1998), cert.

As a result, this last argument was waived by the defendant.

*446 “Those issues raised in the defendant’s notice of appeal but not addressed in [her] brief are waived.” State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 873, 711 A.2d 878, 889 (1998).

The defendant’s remaining arguments raised in his notice of appeal were not briefed and are deemed waived.

“In determining the voluntariness of the confession, the trial court must examine the totality of the surrounding circumstances.” State v. Monroe, 142 N.H. 857, 864, 711 A.2d 878, 883 (1998).