Supreme Court of New Hampshire· 4/7/2003
State v. Higgins
Citations
- 149 N.H. 290
- 821 A.2d 964
- 2003 N.H. LEXIS 41
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- declining to address merger argument as either cursory in nature or wholly lacking in merit
- “Each decision to consent is a new act, a choice made on the circumstances prevailing in the present, not governed by the past.” (quotation simplified)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 476 (2000), requires that “any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum, other than the fact of a prior conviction, must be submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brock, Broderick, Dalianis, Nadeau
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
17 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. CubiasWashington Supreme Court· 2005-10-06· cited 75×
- State v. KahapeaHawaii Supreme Court· 2006-08-09· cited 59×
- Porter v. City of ManchesterSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-05-14· cited 57×
- State v. RussellSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2009-12-16· cited 37×
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2007-04-18· cited 24×
- State v. YoungSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2009-10-30· cited 17×
- State v. KeeneSupreme Judicial Court of Maine· 2007-07-10· cited 14×
- State v. HoflandSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-08-27· cited 12×
- LeTarte v. West Side Development Group, LLCSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-07-23· cited 11×
- State v. Nunez-VazquezCourt of Appeals of Utah· 2020-06-25· cited 8×
- Town of Lyndeborough v. Boisvert Properties, LLCSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2004-04-21· cited 4×
- People of Guam v. Emmanuel Manny ReselapSupreme Court of Guam· 2022-03-23· cited 3×
- State v. Seth MazzagliaSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2016-12-13· cited 2×
- Johnson v. BLACKETTERCourt of Appeals of Oregon· 2008-07-30
- Commonwealth v. Rogers, E., Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2021-05-18
- State of New Hampshire v. Justin M. LamontagneSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2023-04-26
- Dereritt v. Warden, NHSPD. New Hampshire· 2004-12-23
Cites
28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court· 2000-06-26· cited 28,372×
- State v. BallSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1983-12-12· cited 762×
- Vogel v. VogelSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1993-06-30· cited 443×
- State v. BlackmerSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2003-01-10· cited 342×
- State v. LambertSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2001-12-17· cited 325×
- United States v. Samuel O. White, Luis Noel Cruz, AKA Danny CruzSecond Circuit· 2001-02-14· cited 146×
- Commonwealth v. JoyceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1981-01-06· cited 136×
- Timothy A. Brown v. Ronald Powell, Commissioner, New Hampshire Department of CorrectionsFirst Circuit· 1992-07-15· cited 123×
- State v. HowardSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1981-02-23· cited 119×
- People v. SandovalIllinois Supreme Court· 1990-01-17· cited 117×
- United States v. Abraham McLeodSecond Circuit· 2001-05-21· cited 66×
- State v. PatnaudeSupreme Court of Vermont· 1981-11-03· cited 58×
- United States v. McWaineFifth Circuit· 2002-04-24· cited 51×
- Harris v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia· 1987-11-24· cited 39×
- Brewer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1989-05-31· cited 33×
- State v. BerrySupreme Court of New Hampshire· 2002-07-23· cited 23×
- Commonwealth v. HoustonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2000-01-21· cited 16×
- State v. DeanSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1987-10-09· cited 16×
- State v. PlanteSupreme Court of New Hampshire· 1990-07-18· cited 14×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.