New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 627:4 (2026)
Physical Force in Defense of a Person
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
627:4 Physical Force in Defense of a Person. –
I. A person is justified in using non-deadly force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, non-deadly force by such other person, and he may use a degree of such force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose. However, such force is not justifiable if:
(a) With a purpose to cause physical harm to another person, he provoked the use of unlawful, non-deadly force by such other person; or
(b) He was the initial aggressor, unless after such aggression he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so, but the latter notwithstanding continues the use or threat of unlawful, non-deadly force; or
(c) The force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not authorized by law.
II. A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person:
(a) Is about to use unlawful, deadly force against the actor or a third person;
(b) Is likely to use any unlawful force against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;
(c) Is committing or about to commit kidnapping or a forcible sex offense; or
(d) Is likely to use any unlawful force in the commission of a felony against the actor within such actor's dwelling or its curtilage.
II-a. A person who responds to a threat which would be considered by a reasonable person as likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to the person or to another by displaying a firearm or other means of self-defense with the intent to warn away the person making the threat shall not have committed a criminal act.
III. A person is not justified in using deadly force on another to defend himself or herself or a third person from deadly force by the other if he or she knows that he or she and the third person can, with complete safety:
(a) Retreat from the encounter, except that he or she is not required to retreat if he or she is within his or her dwelling, its curtilage, or anywhere he or she has a right to be, and was not the initial aggressor; or
(b) Surrender property to a person asserting a claim of right thereto; or
(c) Comply with a demand that he or she abstain from performing an act which he or she is not obliged to perform; nor is the use of deadly force justifiable when, with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily harm, the person has provoked the use of force against himself or herself in the same encounter; or
(d) If he or she is a law enforcement officer or a private person assisting the officer at the officer's direction and was acting pursuant to RSA 627:5, the person need not retreat.
I. A person is justified in using non-deadly force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the imminent use of unlawful, non-deadly force by such other person, and he may use a degree of such force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose. However, such force is not justifiable if:
(a) With a purpose to cause physical harm to another person, he provoked the use of unlawful, non-deadly force by such other person; or
(b) He was the initial aggressor, unless after such aggression he withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to such other person his intent to do so, but the latter notwithstanding continues the use or threat of unlawful, non-deadly force; or
(c) The force involved was the product of a combat by agreement not authorized by law.
II. A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person:
(a) Is about to use unlawful, deadly force against the actor or a third person;
(b) Is likely to use any unlawful force against a person present while committing or attempting to commit a burglary;
(c) Is committing or about to commit kidnapping or a forcible sex offense; or
(d) Is likely to use any unlawful force in the commission of a felony against the actor within such actor's dwelling or its curtilage.
II-a. A person who responds to a threat which would be considered by a reasonable person as likely to cause serious bodily injury or death to the person or to another by displaying a firearm or other means of self-defense with the intent to warn away the person making the threat shall not have committed a criminal act.
III. A person is not justified in using deadly force on another to defend himself or herself or a third person from deadly force by the other if he or she knows that he or she and the third person can, with complete safety:
(a) Retreat from the encounter, except that he or she is not required to retreat if he or she is within his or her dwelling, its curtilage, or anywhere he or she has a right to be, and was not the initial aggressor; or
(b) Surrender property to a person asserting a claim of right thereto; or
(c) Comply with a demand that he or she abstain from performing an act which he or she is not obliged to perform; nor is the use of deadly force justifiable when, with the purpose of causing death or serious bodily harm, the person has provoked the use of force against himself or herself in the same encounter; or
(d) If he or she is a law enforcement officer or a private person assisting the officer at the officer's direction and was acting pursuant to RSA 627:5, the person need not retreat.
Source. 1971, 518:1. 1981, 347:1, 2. 2010, 361:1. 2011, 268:1, eff. Nov. 13, 2011.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 65
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case: State v. Etienne, 35 A.3d 523 (N.H. 2011).
State v. Etienne, 35 A.3d 523 (N.H. 2011). “*71 The defendant argues that this instruction was erroneous because “nothing in the language of RSA 627:4, II,... requires that the actor’s use of deadly force be necessary, in the sense that no lesser, non-deadly force would suffice to prevent harm from the attacker’s use of…”
State v. Warren, 794 A.2d 790 (N.H. 2002). “See RSA 627:4,11(d) (1996). We affirm. The defendant, his wife and their daughter lived in an apartment with the defendant’s sister-in-law and her two children.”
State v. Furgal, 58 A.3d 648 (N.H. 2012). “” The State repeated its contention that neither RSA 627:4, 11(a) nor case law supported such an instruction.”
State v. Noucas, 70 A.3d 476 (N.H. 2013). “On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred when it: (1) found that sufficient evidence supported his conviction; (2) failed to instruct the jury on defense of another under RSA 627:4 (Supp. 2012); and (3) sustained a hearsay objection made by the State.”
State v. Ayer, 552 U.S. 834 (2006). “Lesser Offenses and Proposed Defenses Next, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser offenses of reckless manslaughter under RSA 630:2, 1(b) (1996), and provocation manslaughter under RSA 630:2, 1(a) (1996), and on the…”
State v. Mayo, 113 A.3d 250 (N.H. 2015). “The State responds that such “reasonable belief’ language regarding the third person’s status as the initial aggressor or provoker is inconsistent with the plain language of the defense-of-others statute, see RSA 627:4 (Supp. 2014), and the common law “alter-ego rule,” under…”
State v. Pugliese, 422 A.2d 1319 (N.H. 1980). “" RSA 627:4 III(a) (emphasis added). In support of its claim, the State points to uncontroverted evidence that the fatal struggle between the defendant and the decedent took place on the defendant's beach at some distance from his cottage.”
State v. McDonald, 35 A.3d 605 (N.H. 2011). “The self-defense statute, RSA 627:4,11(c), provides in relevant part: “A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person .”
Leeds v. BAE Sys., 80 A.3d 366 (N.H. 2013). “” Here, Leeds relies upon RSA 627:4, which provides that self-defense is a justification for certain actions *380 that would otherwise be criminal.”
State v. Kyree Rice, 159 A.3d 1250 (N.H. 2017). “See RSA 627:4, II(a) (2016). A person is justified in using deadly force against another person when he reasonably believes that the other person is about to use unlawful deadly force against himself or a third person and he reasonably believes that the amount of force he uses…”
State v. Vassar, 910 A.2d 1193 (N.H. 2006). “” RSA 627:4, II (1996). RSA 627:4, II provides in part: A person is justified in using deadly force upon another person when he reasonably believes that such other person: *374 (a) Is about to use unlawful, deadly force against the actor or a third person.”
State v. Samuel Pennock, 127 A.3d 672 (N.H. 2015). “” Under RSA 627:4, I (2007), “[a] person is justified in using non-deadly force upon another person in order to defend himself.”
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 627:4(11): 1 case
United States v. Bolanos-Hernandez, 492 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. 2007).
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 627:4(II)(c): 1 case
State v. Lavoie, 880 A.2d 432 (N.H. 2005).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.