Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1986

The court held that the defendant’s pre-warning response to the police officer’s use of his alleged nickname resulted from custodial interrogation and should have been excluded. It nevertheless held that the defendant’s later warned statement was voluntary and not tainted by the earlier Miranda violation, and that…

The court held that a person arrested for driving while intoxicated has no statutory or constitutional right to consult counsel before deciding whether to submit to an implied-consent breath test.

The New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court improperly apportioned damages between two defendants after the plaintiff settled with one co‑defendant, and that the comparative negligence statute does not apply when the plaintiff is not negligent.