State v. Crossen
336 A.2d 239, 115 N.H. 137, 1975 N.H. LEXIS 243
Opinion
Memorandum Opinion
Defendant was convicted in a jury trial in which he was represented by counsel of two counts of selling a controlled drug. Defendant’s exceptions were reserved and transferred by Cann, J-
A review of the transcript does not support the claim of the defendant that he did not receive a fair trial. The claim that newly discovered evidence warrants a new trial should be addressed to the superior court. RSA 491:7 (Supp. 1973); State v. Long, 90 N.H. 103, 107, 4 A.2d 865, 868 (1939).
Exceptions overruled.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. Crossen, 336 A.2d 239, 115 N.H. 137, 1975 N.H. LEXIS 243 (N.H. 1975).
336 A.2d 239 (State v. Crossen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Riccardi v. Garabedian
384 A.2d 788 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1978)