Skip to main content

State v. LeClair

Citations

  • 118 N.H. 214
  • 385 A.2d 831
  • 1978 N.H. LEXIS 383

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that the accuracy of the victim’s description was diminished by his failure to mention the defendant’s moustache, “of which there was strong evidence”
  • explaining that the out-of-court identification was based on a single photograph and amounted to a one-man show-up
  • explaining that the identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive, in part because the police, by various means, indicated to the witness that the defendant was the one they wanted him to identify
  • implying that the fact that the witness was “scared” and acted “like he was in shock” at the time of the robbery would have lessened the degree of attention he paid to the features of the suspect
  • following undue police suggestiveness, out-of-court identification inadmissible without proof of independent basis by clear and convincing evidence as “[a] matter of State law;” same burden as to in-court identification, id. at 221, 385 A.2d at 835
  • defendant could not be sentenced for commission of crime while armed with a gun without being indicted for that offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Grimes, Lampron, Bois, Douglas

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

34 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.