State v. Jacobson

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

State v. Jacobson

495 A.2d 1245, 125 N.H. 838, 1984 N.H. LEXIS 315

CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire

DecidedDecember 31, 1984

DocketNo. 84-287

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 495 A.2d 1245 (State v. Jacobson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Jacobson, 495 A.2d 1245, 125 N.H. 838, 1984 N.H. LEXIS 315 (N.H. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion

The New London District Court (McSwiney, J.) transferred to us the question whether the defendant’s prior uncounseled conviction for driving while intoxicated, first offense, may constitutionally be used to expose him to a sentence of imprisonment in his trial for DWI, second offense, as is authorized by RSA 265:82-b, 1(b) (Supp. 1983). The defendant argues that, absent a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel, the use of an uncounseled conviction to convert the sentence of a subsequent offense into a term of imprisonment violates the New Hampshire and federal constitutional guarantees of the right to counsel. N.H. Const, pt. I, art. 15; U.S. Const. amend. VI. After this question was transferred, we decided State v. Cook, 125 N.H. 452, 481 A.2d 823 (1984). In light of Cook, we find the defendant’s claim to be without merit.

Cook held that uncounseled motor vehicle violation convictions could constitutionally support a decree of habitual offender status even though imprisonment resulted from violation of the decree. Id. at 458, 481 A.2d at 828; see RSA 262:23. Although Cook concerned a civil disability status, and not sentence enhancement, we believe that our opinion in Cook adequately addressed the State and federal constitutional issues before us in the present case. We therefore find it dispositive of the defendant’s claim.

Remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Memorandum Opinion

The New London District Court (McSwiney, J.) transferred to us the question whether the defendant’s prior uncounseled conviction for driving while intoxicated, first offense, may constitutionally be used to expose him to a sentence of imprisonment in his trial for DWI, second offense, as is authorized by RSA 265:82-b, 1(b) (Supp. 1983). The defendant argues that, absent a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel, the use of an uncounseled conviction to convert the sentence of a subsequent offense into a term of imprisonment violates the New Hampshire and federal constitutional guarantees of the right to counsel. N.H. Const, pt. I, art. 15; U.S. Const. amend. VI. After this question was transferred, we decided State v. Cook, 125 N.H. 452, 481 A.2d 823 (1984). In light of Cook, we find the defendant’s claim to be without merit.

Cook held that uncounseled motor vehicle violation convictions could constitutionally support a decree of habitual offender status even though imprisonment resulted from violation of the decree. Id. at 458, 481 A.2d at 828; see RSA 262:23. Although Cook concerned a civil disability status, and not sentence enhancement, we believe that our opinion in Cook adequately addressed the State and federal constitutional issues before us in the present case. We therefore find it dispositive of the defendant’s claim.

Remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

495 A.2d 1245, 125 N.H. 838, 1984 N.H. LEXIS 315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jacobson-nh-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack