Skip to main content

State v. Kelley

Citations

  • 986 A.2d 620
  • 159 N.H. 449

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that, in DUI 3 prosecution, officer’s direct observations of defendant’s behavior and statements constitute direct evidence of impairment
  • distinguishing circumstantial from direct evidence of impairment within the context of driving while intoxicated
  • finding evidence sufficient to support DUI conviction when, after officer stopped defendant for crossing double yellow line, defendant exhibited signs of impairment, failed field sobriety tests, and admitted to having consumed alcohol
  • direct evidence, if accepted as true, directly proves the fact for which it is offered, without need for fact finder to draw any inferences
  • “Direct evidence is evidence which, if accepted as true, directly proves the fact for which it is offered, without the need for the factfinder to draw any inferences.” (Quotation omitted.)
  • distinguishing direct from circumstantial evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dalianis, Broderick, Duggan, Hicks, Conboy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.