purposes of the plain error (New Hampshire) · Go Syfert
← New Hampshire issues

purposes of the plain error in New Hampshire

12 New Hampshire opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2024 4 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Hampshire courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Panarellogreen
nh · 2008 · cited in 4 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2011–2022
2 sentences

2022“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” State v. Panarello, 157 N.H. 204, 209 (2008) (quotation omitted).

2022“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” State v. Panarello, 157 N.H. 204, 209 (2008) (quotation omitted).

44
State v. Ortizgreen
nh · 2011 · cited in 3 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2012–2015
2 sentences

2015“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” Id. at 591 (quotation omitted). ‘When the law is not clear at the time of trial and remains unsettled at the time of appeal, a decision by the trial court cannot be plain error.” Id. (quotation omitted). “‘Plain’ as used in the plain error rule is synonymous with clear or, equivalently, obvious.” Id. (quotation omitted).

2015“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” Id. at 591 (quotation omitted). ‘When the law is not clear at the time of trial and remains unsettled at the time of appeal, a decision by the trial court cannot be plain error.” Id. (quotation omitted). “‘Plain’ as used in the plain error rule is synonymous with clear or, equivalently, obvious.” Id. (quotation omitted).

33
Aranosian Oil Co., Inc. & a. v. State of New Hampshiregreen
nh · 2015 · cited in 2 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022Ordinarily, “the plain error rule is not met when the case presents a question of first impression.” Aranosian Oil Co. v. State of N.H., 168 N.H. 322, 331 (2015).

2022Ordinarily, “the plain error rule is not met when the case presents a question of first impression.” Aranosian Oil Co. v. State of N.H., 168 N.H. 322, 331 (2015).

22
State v. Lopezgreen
nh · 2007 · cited in 1 New Hampshire opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008We next address the second criterion: whether the trial court’s error was “plain.” For the purposes of the plain error rule, “an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” Lopez, 156 N.H. at 424 (quotations and ellipsis omitted).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Hampshire. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Samuel Pennock green
nh · 2015
2 sentences

2024Pennock, 168 N.H. at 310 .

2018“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” Id. (quotation omitted).

32018–2024
State v. Felix Ruiz green
nh · 2018
1 sentence

2022“For the purposes of the plain error rule, an error is plain if it was or should have been obvious in the sense that the governing law was clearly settled to the contrary.” Id. (quotation omitted).

12022–2022

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NH § N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 651:2 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

NH 12 (2008–2024) IL 4 (1990–2020) OR 2 (2010–2010)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check