State v. Rivera
162 N.H. 182
| N.H. | 2011Background
- In August 2007, Rivera and three others discussed robbing a drug dealer and decided on a plan involving Gagne’s gun.
- On August 12, 2007, Rivera drove the group to Violette’s home, entering with Gagne and Webster while Whipple and Mead waited outside.
- Violette resisted; Gagne shot him after learning Violette had a gun; Rivera and Webster were present in the home during the confrontation.
- Rivera was indicted on reckless second-degree murder as an accomplice in conduct, plus burglary and conspiracy; he was convicted on all counts at trial.
- Rivera moved to dismiss the murder indictment pretrial, arguing it failed to allege a purpose to promote the actus reus, and sought a jury instruction reflecting such a purpose; both were denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of indictment | Rivera argues the indictment fails to allege a purpose to promote the actus reus. | Rivera contends the indictment tracks the accompanying theory of liability and is legally defective. | Indictment sufficient; no error in the charge. |
| Jury instructions on mens rea | Rivera argues the court erred by not instructing that he must intend to promote the specific actus reus (shooting). | Rivera asserts the instruction should have required purpose to promote the underlying conduct. | Court did not err; instructions aligned with RSA 626:8 IV and underlying murder statute. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Dodds, 159 N.H. 239 (2009) (statutory interpretation standard; plain meaning; legislative intent)
- State v. Anthony, 151 N.H. 492 (2004) (accomplice liability requires intent to promote or facilitate the result, with mens rea for the offense)
- State v. Lamy, 158 N.H. 511 (2009) (interpretation of RSA 626:8; guidance from MPC comments)
- State v. Hynes, 159 N.H. 187 (2009) (statutory interpretation; context within the statutory scheme)
- State v. Locke, 144 N.H. 348 (1999) (earlier readings of RSA 626:8; rejected in light of 2001 amendments)
- State v. Etzweiler, 125 N.H. 57 (1984) (interpretation of accomplice liability prior version of RSA 626:8)