State v. EULIANO
161 N.H. 601
N.H.2011Background
- In the early hours of November 12, 2007, Euliano drove onto the sidewalk on Cross Street in Nashua and struck Juan Pech, injuring him, and also struck Miguel Baez and Jose Baez.
- Euliano did not stop after the incidents; officers later arrested him at his home and he was interviewed by detectives.
- At trial, Euliano testified he swerved onto the sidewalk to avoid a crowd and claimed self-defense, stating a van and armed individuals were pursuing him.
- The State presented witnesses Pech, Baez, and Bisono, who a car drove onto the sidewalk and hit Pech; all identified Euliano as the driver and noted he did not stop at the scene.
- Euliano's videotaped interview with detectives was played at trial, and his statements differed from trial testimony.
- The jury convicted Euliano on one count of second degree assault, one count of conduct after an accident, and two counts of reckless conduct; he appealed challenging trial court comments and the reckless conduct indictments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court comments amounted to plain error prejudicing the defendant | Euliano | Euliano | No plain error; comments did not affect outcome. |
| Whether the reckless conduct indictments were fatally defective for failing to allege a deadly weapon | State | Euliano | Indictments 충분히 alleged misdemeanor reckless conduct; felony-level issue treated as harmless error. |
| Whether the jury needed a specific deadly weapon instruction for felony reckless conduct | State | Euliano | Argument not reviewed due to failure to raise in trial court. |
| Whether the trial court should have disqualified the judge for bias under state or federal constitution | Euliano | Euliano | Not adequately developed for appellate review. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Russell, 159 N.H. 475 (N.H. 2009) (plain-error standard for forfeited trial errors)
- State v. Panarello, 157 N.H. 204 (N.H. 2008) (criteria for plain-error review; substantial rights must be affected)
- State v. Cosme, 157 N.H. 40 (N.H. 2008) (improper but curable trial conduct; jurors presumed to follow instructions)
- State v. Lamarche, 157 N.H. 337 (N.H. 2008) (indictment sufficiency and grand jury considerations under federal analysis)
- Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (U.S. Supreme Court, 1974) (indictment sufficiency; elements and fair notice)
- United States v. Dentler, 492 F.3d 306 (5th Cir. 2007) (harmless error in indictment element omission)
- United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292 (1st Cir. 2000) (harmless error review applies to indictment omissions)
- State v. Fichera, 160 N.H. 660 (N.H. 2010) (harmless error review for omission of element)