State v. Bundy

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “Under the facts of this case, the trial court’s supplemental charge could not possibly have invaded the jury’s exclusive fact-finding province.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Etienne
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 2011-12-21· cited 47×
• State v. Seymour
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1996-03-19· cited 29×
• State v. Dixon
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1999-11-02· cited 22×
• State v. Ross
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1996-11-07· cited 15×
• State v. Parker
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1997-09-26· cited 15×
• State v. Prisby
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1988-10-31· cited 6×
• People v. Nere
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2017-10-06· cited 3×
• State v. Letendre
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1990-08-24· cited 3×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Frederick
  Washington Supreme Court· 1983-12-08· cited 31×
• State v. Brown
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1986-10-03· cited 25×
• Poulin v. Provost
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1974-04-30· cited 23×
• State v. Jones
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1984-09-27· cited 17×
• State v. Frederick
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1982-07-26· cited 14×
• State v. Jordan
  Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 1987-11-05· cited 7×