State v. Martin, 164 N.H. 687

Defendant Ryan Martin pleaded guilty to theft by unauthorized taking, a class B felony.
He also pleaded true to violating probation for attempting to steal groceries in Oct. 2011.
Trial court sentenced him to 1–3 years imprisonment and 2 years of probation on release.
Martin objected, arguing it is illegal to impose probation alongside a stand-committed prison term.
Appellate issue concerns whether a court may impose both a stand-committed term and probation on the same charge.
Court held that RSA 651:2 allows combined imprisonment and probation and that separation-of-powers concerns are not violated; affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Authority to impose both sentences	Martin contends no statutory authority for stand-committed prison plus probation.	Martin asserts sentences cannot be both imprisonment and probation on same charge.	Statutory authority exists; combination permitted.
Separation of Powers	Martin argues SPL duty is encroached by dual supervision (parole vs. probation).	Martin claims branches interfere with each other by overlapping terms.	No constitutional violation; branches may cooperate in sentencing.

State v. Evans, 127 N.H. 501 (N.H. 1985) (broad discretion to assign sentences and probation)
State v. Burroughs, 113 N.H. 21 (N.H. 1973) (need for flexible sentencing options)
State v. Perkins, 121 N.H. 713 (N.H. 1981) (maximum term plus probation permitted)
State v. Hancock, 156 N.H. 301 (N.H. 2007) (probation permitted if portion of max remains unimposed)
State v. White, 131 N.H. 555 (N.H. 1989) (probation supervision as part of original sentencing; upholds subsequent violation penalties)
State v. Merrill, 160 N.H. 467 (N.H. 2010) (separation of powers considerations in sentencing)