State v. Varney

370 A.2d 289, 117 N.H. 163, 1977 N.H. LEXIS 293
CourtSupreme Court of New Hampshire
DecidedFebruary 28, 1977
Docket7565
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 370 A.2d 289 (State v. Varney) 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. Varney, 370 A.2d 289, 117 N.H. 163, 1977 N.H. LEXIS 293 (N.H. 1977).

Opinion

Memorandum Opinion

Defendant was charged with the offense of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of ESA 262-A.-62 (Supp. 1975). Defendant moved to suppress the results of a blood *164 test sample of 0.17 percent alcohol by weight because of a twelve-day delay from the date the sample was taken to the date the sample was analyzed by the state police laboratory. This delay is asserted to violate RSA 262-A: 69-i (Supp. 1975).

The chemist who performed the analysis of the sample testified that any deterioration would have worked to the defendant’s favor, not the state’s. Because the timing of delivery of the blood sample to the state laboratory for analysis is “not part of the procedure for conducting the chemical test,” the defendant may not take advantage of the provision for exclusion of evidence pursuant to RSA 262-A: 69-i (Supp. 1975). State v. Paul, 116 N.H. 252, 356 A.2d 661 (1976); State v. Groulx, 109 N.H. 281, 249 A.2d 690 (1969). To the extent the twelve-day delay has any effect on the evidence it would relate to its weight and not its admissibility. State v. Gallant, 108 N.H. 72, 73-75, 227 A.2d 597, 598-99 (1967); State v. LaFountain, 108 N.H. 219, 231 A.2d 635 (1967).

This case raises no new or important question for this court. See State v. Miller, 117 N.H. 67, 369 A.2d 197 (1977). The transferring of questions such as herein raised by district and municipal courts pursuant to RSA 502-A:17-a (Supp. 1975) on interlocutory matters should not be encouraged. See, e.g., RSA 491: App. R. 88 (Supp. 1975).

Denial of defendants motion affirmed; remanded.

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

Related

Hudson v. DIRECTOR, DIV. OF MOTOR VEHICLES
921 A.2d 939 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 2007)
State v. Goff
393 A.2d 562 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1978)
State v. Van Wie
382 A.2d 372 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1978)
State v. Mitchell
381 A.2d 1198 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1978)
State v. Doyle
378 A.2d 1379 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
370 A.2d 289, 117 N.H. 163, 1977 N.H. LEXIS 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-varney-nh-1977.