State ex rel. Bokowsky v. Rudman, 6132

• Citation: 274 A.2d 785,111 N.H. 57
• Decision Date: 26 February 1971
• Docket Number: No. 6132,O,6132
• Parties: STATE ex rel. BOKOWSKY v. Warren B. RUDMAN, Attorney General et al. riginal.
• Court: Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Page 785

274 A.2d 785

111 N.H. 57

STATE ex rel. BOKOWSKY v. Warren B. RUDMAN, Attorney General et al.

No. 6132, Original.

Supreme Court of New Hampshire.

Feb. 26, 1971.

Southern N. H. Legal Services Assn., Inc. by Gerald D. McGonigle and Helen White, for Bette Bokowsky.

Warren B. Rudman, Atty. Gen. pro se and W. Michael Dunn, Asst. Atty. Gen.

Louis M. Janelle, Nashua, for Vincent Cadieux.

PER CURIAM.

Petition for a writ of certiorari filed as an original petition in this court under the provisions of RSA 490:4. Bette Bokowsky complains against Warren B. Rudman, Attorney General, Thomas B. Wingate, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Connor, County Attorney, and Vincent Cadieux, and prays that a nolle prosequi entered in superior court on a burglary indictment returned against Cadieux be stricken from the record and the case remanded for trial. The defendants moved for dismissal of the petition.

Bette Bokowsky was a tenant in a building in Nashua owned by Cadieux. She filed a private complaint charging that Cadieux at some time between 11 a.m. and 2 p.m. on December 6, 1969 entered the second floor apartment rented to her with intent to commit larceny and 'feloniously did steal, take and carry away' items of the total value of $591. RSA 583-A:2. After hearing in the Nashua District Court probable cause was found and Cadieux was bound over to the superior court. On January 6, 1970, the grand jury returned a burglary indictment. Trial thereon was set for May 13, 1970 at which time a nolle prosequi was entered by Thomas B. Wingate, Assistant Attorney General.

Plaintiff complains that she was not notified of the impending trial until the previous day; that she was not interviewed by the office of the Attorney General; that police officers who testified at the probable cause hearing and whose testimony would have been material at the trial were not summoned as witnesses; that her attorney was out of the country at that time; and that there is sufficient evidence to warrant a prosecution for burglary.

A statement of Thomas B. Wingate, the Assistant Attorney General assigned to the case, was filed as part of an answer and motion for dismissal. He states therein, in part, that he read and studied the transcript of the probable cause hearing and the reports of the Nashua Police Department; that he conferred at length with the officers involved and learned that they did not initiate prosecution due to their belief that no crime had been committed; that he made a determination that all of the elements of burglary could not be proved by the State. As a result he entered a nolle prosequi.

The powers of the Attorney General are broad and numerous. Some grow out of the common law, and many are specified by statute. He is specifically charged with enforcement of the criminal laws of the state, and with supervision of criminal causes pending before the supreme and superior courts. RSA 7:6.' State v. Swift, 101 N.H. 340, 342-343, 143 A.2d 114, 116 (1958). His authority to enter a nolle prosequi is clear. State ex rel. Brown v. Knowlton, 102 N.H. 221, 223, 152 A.2d 624, 625 (1959); Wyman v. Danais, 101 N.H. 487, 147 A.2d 116 (1958). This authority is not...