New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 633:4 (2026)
Interference With Custody
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
633:4 Interference With Custody. –
I. A person is guilty of a class B felony if such person knowingly takes from this state or entices away from this state any child under the age of 18, or causes any such child to be taken from this state or enticed away from this state, with the intent to detain or conceal such child from:
(a) A parent, guardian or other person having lawful parental rights and responsibilities as described in RSA 461-A; or
(b) An agency that has protective supervision or legal custody of the child under RSA 169-C or guardianship of the child under RSA 463.
II. A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if such person knowingly takes, entices away, detains or conceals any child under the age of 18, or causes any such child to be taken, enticed away, detained or concealed, with the intent to detain or conceal such child from:
(a) A parent, guardian or other person having lawful parental rights and responsibilities as described in RSA 461-A; or
(b) An agency that has protective supervision or legal custody of the child under RSA 169-C or guardianship of the child under RSA 463.
III. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge under paragraph I or II that the person so charged was acting in good faith to protect the child from real and imminent physical danger. Evidence of good faith shall include but shall not be limited to the filing of a nonfrivolous petition documenting such danger and seeking to modify the custody decree in a court of competent jurisdiction within this state. Such petition must be filed within 72 hours of termination of visitation rights.
IV. The affirmative defense set forth in paragraph III shall not be available if the person charged with the offense has left this state with the child.
I. A person is guilty of a class B felony if such person knowingly takes from this state or entices away from this state any child under the age of 18, or causes any such child to be taken from this state or enticed away from this state, with the intent to detain or conceal such child from:
(a) A parent, guardian or other person having lawful parental rights and responsibilities as described in RSA 461-A; or
(b) An agency that has protective supervision or legal custody of the child under RSA 169-C or guardianship of the child under RSA 463.
II. A person is guilty of a misdemeanor if such person knowingly takes, entices away, detains or conceals any child under the age of 18, or causes any such child to be taken, enticed away, detained or concealed, with the intent to detain or conceal such child from:
(a) A parent, guardian or other person having lawful parental rights and responsibilities as described in RSA 461-A; or
(b) An agency that has protective supervision or legal custody of the child under RSA 169-C or guardianship of the child under RSA 463.
III. It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge under paragraph I or II that the person so charged was acting in good faith to protect the child from real and imminent physical danger. Evidence of good faith shall include but shall not be limited to the filing of a nonfrivolous petition documenting such danger and seeking to modify the custody decree in a court of competent jurisdiction within this state. Such petition must be filed within 72 hours of termination of visitation rights.
IV. The affirmative defense set forth in paragraph III shall not be available if the person charged with the offense has left this state with the child.
Source. 1983, 390:1. 1998, 292:2. 2005, 273:16. 2014, 95:1, eff. Jan. 1, 2015.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1999–2025 · leading case: Katz v. McVeigh, 931 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D.N.H. 2013).
Katz v. McVeigh, 931 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D.N.H. 2013). “See N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 633:4. Instead, according to that court’s records, Parsons filed an application for arrest warrants for the plaintiffs based on that offense, and the warrants issued, on May 30, 2008.”
State v. Munoz, 2006 NMSC 5 (N.M. 2006). “080(2)(a) (2004) (requiring a reasonable belief); W. Va.Code § 61-2-14(d)(c) (2005) (requiring a reasonable belief); Wis.”
State v. Petruccelli, 743 A.2d 1062 (Vt. 1999). “, N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 633:4 (1996); Del.”
Katz, et al. v. McVeigh, et al., 2013 DNH 037 (D.N.H. 2013). “N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 633:4 , I . In relevant part, Parsons’s affidavit states that (a) on November 3 0 , 2007, the Superior Court issued an order granting legal custody of Eleonora to DCYF, (b) to take her into custody on behalf of DCYF, Parsons and McVeigh visited the…”
Wilson v. Brock, 2003 DNH 046 (D.N.H. 2003). “Blonigen prepared an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant and a criminal complaint against Wilson, charging Wilson with the misdemeanor of interference with custody in violation of 2 RSA 633:4. The arrest warrant issued on March 18, 1999, after being reviewed and signed by…”
State of New Hampshire v. Michael Messina (N.H. 2016). “2015); (2) common nuisance for allowing his property to be used by drug-dependent persons for the purpose of using drugs, see RSA 318-B:16 (2011); (3) endangering the welfare of a child, see RSA 639:3 (2007); and (4) interfering with custody, see RSA 633:4 (Supp. 2015). He…”
In re D.J. (N.H. 2023). “oy or alarm another; or (c) Insults, taunts, or challenges another in a manner likely to provoke a violent or disorderly response; or (d) Knowingly communicates any matter of a character tending to incite murder, assault, or arson; or 2 (e) With the purpose to annoy or alarm…”
State v. Rodriguez, 2025 N.H. 43 (N.H. 2025). “2024); one count of prohibited sales, see RSA 179:5, I (2022); and one count of interference with custody, see RSA 633:4, II (2016). On appeal, he argues that the Superior Court (St.”
Vendouri v. Gaylord, et a l. (D.N.H. 2010). “" But, the non custodial parent "shall not be deemed to have a right of primary physical custody under RSA 633:4 [declaring interference with custody to be a crime]" (emphasis supplied).”
Archibald v. Timmons, 2005 DNH 129 (D.N.H. 2005). “Lawson first told Dumont that the situation appeared to be a violation of RSA 633:4 pertaining to interference with custody that would require further investigation.”
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.