State v. Black, 7499
| Citation | 368 A.2d 1177,116 N.H. 836 |
| Decision Date | 30 December 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 7499,7499 |
| Parties | STATE of New Hampshire v. Lawrence BLACK. |
| Court | Supreme Court of New Hampshire |
David H. Souter, Atty. Gen., and Edward A. Haffer, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
McSwiney, Jones & Semple, Concord (Carroll F. Jones, Concord, orally), for defendant.
Defendant was convicted in a trial by jury of theft of less than $100 and of tampering with a witness in violation of RSA 641:5 I(b). Defendant's exceptions were reserved and transferred by the Trial Court (Keller, C.J.).
The defendant testified in his own defense during the trial and the State was permitted to introduce three prior convictions as bearing on his credibility. Defendant urges in support of his exception to the trial court's ruling on the introduction of these convictions the age of the convictions and defendant's own age at the time of the convictions.
It appears that in 1966, slightly less than ten years before the trial in this case, when the defendant was seventeen years of age, he pleaded guilty to three felony indictments. The defendant was represented by counsel at that time and under the law in effect in 1966 he was not a juvenile. Laws 1965, 256:1, :7, :8. The trial court considered the admissibility of the convictions in advance of trial and gave proper limiting instructions both at the time of their admission and in its charge. We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's conclusion that the value of the convictions as bearing on defendant's credibility outweighed any prejudice to his case. State v. Cote, 108 N.H. 290, 235 A.2d 111 (1967); State v. Blake, 113 N.H. 115, 305 A.2d 300 (1973); see United States v. Belt, 169 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 514 F.2d 837, 849 (1975).
The defendant excepted to the trial court's charge on reasonable doubt and particularly to the trial court's apparent reference to reasonable doubt as 'such a strong and abiding conviction as still remains after a careful consideration of all the facts and arguments advanced against it. . . .' Defendant relies upon United States v. Flannery, 451 F.2d 880, 882-83 (1st Cir. 1971) where the court criticized similar language in a charge and said: 'We believe that in charging the jury, with respect to reasonable doubt, that 'a reasonable doubt can be defined as a strong and abiding conviction that still remains after careful consideration of all the evidence,' the court must have misspoken itself.' The criticism of this type of language in Flannery was by way of dictum after a new trial had been ordered on another issue. However valid the criticism, the opinion did not consider the entire charge of the court on the issue of reasonable doubt or determine that the charge on this issue was prejudicial to the defendant.
'(A) single instruction to a jury may...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lansdowne v. State
...(1976); Whorton v. Commonwealth, 570 S.W.2d 627, 631 (Ky.1978); State v. Palumbe, 327 A.2d 613, 616 (Me.1974); State v. Black, 116 N.H. 836, 837-38, 368 A.2d 1177, 1178-79 (1976); Strawderman v. Commonwealth, 200 Va. 855, 858, 108 S.E.2d 376, 379 (1959).6 Courts in other jurisdictions which......
-
Breest v. Perrin, s. 80-1635
...by that opinion and denied in Martineau v. Perrin, 119 N.H. 529, 530, 404 A.2d 1100, 1101 (1979) ("The issue in (State v. ) Black, (116 N.H. 836, 368 A.2d 1177 (1976)) and Belkner was properly before us by motion or exception taken at trial."). In Belkner the jury instruction issue was pres......
-
State v. Kelley
...court and the curative effect of limiting instructions. State v. Lavallee, 119 N.H. ---, 400 A.2d at 484 (1979); State v. Black, 116 N.H. 836, 837, 368 A.2d 1177, 1178 (1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 906, 97 S.Ct. 1702, 52 L.Ed.2d 391 (1977). Instructing the jury to disregard a prior record ......
-
State v. Wentworth
...no matter who produced it. In December of last year, the State of New Hampshire Supreme Court decided a case called State v. Black (116 N.H. 836, 368 A.2d 1177 (1976)), and that case probably has as good a definition of what reasonable doubt is as any I've seen. In that case, our Supreme Co......