State v. Perreault

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

State v. Perreault

311 A.2d 303, 113 N.H. 588, 1973 N.H. LEXIS 326

CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire

DecidedOctober 31, 1973

Docket6629

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 311 A.2d 303 (State v. Perreault) 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. Perreault, 311 A.2d 303, 113 N.H. 588, 1973 N.H. LEXIS 326 (N.H. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Per curiam.

This is an action to have the defendant declared to be an habitual offender under RSA ch. 262-B (Supp. 1972). During the course of the show cause hear *589 ing, the defendant moved to dismiss on the grounds that the State had not filed the information within one year of the most recent conviction relied upon by the State. This motion was reserved and transferred by Dunfey, J.

The defendant argues that the show cause hearing provided by RSA 262-B:5 (Supp. 1972) is in fact a criminal proceeding rather than civil, since the habitual offender is not allowed to operate a motor vehicle for four years, and that such a severe restriction constitutes punishment similar to the sanctions which may be imposed upon one who commits a misdemeanor. Accordingly the defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the State had not filed the habitual offender information within one year of the defendant’s final conviction relying upon RSA 603:1 (Supp. 1972), which requires that misdemeanor prosecutions be brought within one year.

This case is governed by State v. Bowles, 113 N.H. 571, 311 A.2d 300 (1973), decided this day, holding that proceedings pursuant to RSA ch. 262-B (Supp. 1972) are civil in nature and are not criminal prosecutions. Hence the statute of limitations relied upon in this case is not applicable.

Motion denied; remanded.

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

Per curiam.

This is an action to have the defendant declared to be an habitual offender under RSA ch. 262-B (Supp. 1972). During the course of the show cause hear *589 ing, the defendant moved to dismiss on the grounds that the State had not filed the information within one year of the most recent conviction relied upon by the State. This motion was reserved and transferred by Dunfey, J.

The defendant argues that the show cause hearing provided by RSA 262-B:5 (Supp. 1972) is in fact a criminal proceeding rather than civil, since the habitual offender is not allowed to operate a motor vehicle for four years, and that such a severe restriction constitutes punishment similar to the sanctions which may be imposed upon one who commits a misdemeanor. Accordingly the defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the State had not filed the habitual offender information within one year of the defendant’s final conviction relying upon RSA 603:1 (Supp. 1972), which requires that misdemeanor prosecutions be brought within one year.

This case is governed by State v. Bowles, 113 N.H. 571, 311 A.2d 300 (1973), decided this day, holding that proceedings pursuant to RSA ch. 262-B (Supp. 1972) are civil in nature and are not criminal prosecutions. Hence the statute of limitations relied upon in this case is not applicable.

Motion denied; remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

311 A.2d 303, 113 N.H. 588, 1973 N.H. LEXIS 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-perreault-nh-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack