State of New Hampshire v. Timothy R. Verrill

In Case No. 2021-0093, State of New Hampshire v. Timothy R. Verrill, the court on October 3, 2022, issued the following order: The second full paragraph of page 10 of the opinion issued in this case on September 14, 2022, currently reads as follows: The defendant challenges the trial court’s decision to credit the testimony of the prosecuting attorneys. However, we defer to the trial court’s credibility determinations unless no reasonable person could come to the same conclusion. State v. Livingston, 153 N.H. 399, 402 (2006). Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that a reasonable person could have found the prosecutors’ testimony to be credible, and, thus, we will not substitute our own credibility determination for that of the trial court. Our review of the record also reveals support for the trial court’s finding that the State did not intentionally goad the defendant into moving for a mistrial.

This paragraph is modified to read as follows: The defendant challenges the trial court’s decision to credit certain statements made on the record by one of the prosecutors.

Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that a reasonable person could have credited the prosecutor’s statements.

Our review of the record also reveals support for the trial court’s finding that the State did not intentionally goad the defendant into moving for a mistrial.

Hicks, Bassett, Hantz Marconi, and Donovan, JJ., concurred.

Slip opinion modified.

Timothy A. Gudas, Clerk