State v. Dor
165 N.H. 198
N.H.2013Background
- Interlocutory transfer from the 9th Circuit asks whether RSA 159:4's definition of 'loaded pistol or revolver' includes a firearm with no cartridge in the chamber or magazine, but with a loaded magazine nearby.
- May 8, 2012, police found a .40 cal semi-automatic pistol adjacent to a loaded magazine in the glove compartment of the vehicle; no cartridge in the chamber and no magazine in the well.
- State charged the defendant with a class A misdemeanor for knowingly carrying a loaded pistol in a vehicle without a valid license.
- Defendant moved to dismiss arguing the firearm was not loaded and no crime occurred; the trial court deemed RSA 159:4 potentially ambiguous and transferred the question here.
- The court interprets the statute de novo, aiming to ascertain the legislature’s intent from the text and entire statutory scheme.
- The court ultimately remands, holding 'loaded' requires a cartridge in the chamber or a magazine/cylinder/clip inserted or adjoined so the firearm can be discharged.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RSA 159:4 'loaded' means near ammunition as defendant argues | Lathrop: defend broadly that 'loaded' includes near ammunition | Lynn: adopt narrow/common meaning that only chamber/mounted magazine counts | Adopt narrow/common meaning; near-ammunition reading rejected |
| Proper interpretation of 'with' in 'loaded pistol or revolver' | State urges broad reading of 'with' to include near a loaded magazine | Defendant advocates that 'with' should be understood as included cartridge in chamber or attached magazine | Dictionary-based, ordinary-meaning reading adopted; 'with' does not extend to near ammunition alone |
| Whether broader reading would render RSA 159:4 vague | State contends broader reading enhances safety | Defendant argues broader reading would create vagueness | Reject broader reading; avoid vagueness by requiring cartridge in chamber or attached magazine |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lathrop, 164 N.H. 468 (2012) (statutory interpretation de novo; legislative intent and plain meaning)
- Bleiler v. Chief, Dover Police Dep’t, 155 N.H. 693 (2007) (judicial narrowing to avoid vagueness in related statute)
- Evans v. J Four Realty, 164 N.H. 570 (2013) (prohibition against adding language not enacted by legislature)
- State v. Pratte, 158 N.H. 45 (2008) (avoidance of vagueness in statutory construction)
- Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600 (1994) (common understanding of 'loaded' in context of rights)
- Rodriguez v. United States, 480 U.S. 522 (1987) (avoid simplistic 'nearness' readings of firearm terms; legislative intent matters)
- Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (1995) (limits broad readings of 'use' to 'active employment')
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (Second Amendment scope and regulation of weapons)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) (Second Amendment incorporation and limits on firearm regulation)